4 ms·
This is actually sounding like some sort of accounting gimmick, that combines a lease (power) with a purchase (shell). It may have the effect of some cost benef
by 001sky 13y ago
This is actually sounding like some sort of accounting gimmick, that combines a lease (power) with a purchase (shell). It may have the effect of some cost benefit to the end user. They are trying to sub the "rental" for the "gas payment" ($8/gallon==lots) to not make the stupidly uncompetitive on price. The main risk of this strategy, then would be if people "carjacked" the battery and a black market of non-traceble inter-operable parts emerged. Also, a grey market or secondary market that limited the "ticket sale" to only the commodity shell. This has the also obvious abuse potential (forced maintenence $$, engineered obsolecense, etc). Also, the value of the residual car? Going to take a huge hit. Athough this last point would be mitigated somewhat if the rental was not much worse than petrol costs (op-ex, otherwise incurred).