Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Forbes: 5 new years resolutions for green cars

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

Trnsl8r

S85 2012-2018, X90 since 2016, 3 since 2018
Aug 20, 2011
1,757
145
San Jose, CA
5 New Year's Resolutions For Green Cars - Forbes

I thought this was a decent overview and opinion. One slight criticism from the author that I have to agree with:

"Let’s face it, battery cars are expensive, and it doesn’t make them any cheaper to use smoke and mirrors to hide the prices. Automakers do this by including the $7,500 federal income tax rebate in the boldface type it shows consumers."

What do you think?
 
I think the automakers should include three prices. The retail price, the price after federal rebate and the lifetime 150,000 or 100,000 mile total cost of ownership. At first the Tesla might not be that great, but it would be much more competitive depending on the price of gas and mpg of other cars.
 
An awful lot of manufacturers post numbers that assume all sorts of rebates and incentives. Tesla (Fisker and Nissan) are doing the same thing, it just happens that the rebate comes from the Feds instead of the manufacturer.
 
I am not going to feel bad about the $7500 tax rebate until gas stations start showing how much each gallon of fuel is subsidized by the government (direct to the oil companies and indirectly via wars and other policies used to secure oil)...
 
In CA you pay sales tax on the price of the vehicle before the $7500 rebate. That's over $600 in some counties.

So, there is a difference, and Tesla is wrong to market it the way they do.

It's a bit like how Best Buy (used to?) advertise prices with an asterisk of "after mail-in rebates" where you had to mail in a bunch of forms and sign up for useless newsletters in order to get a check a couple of months later. I don't mind them flaunting the fed tax credit, but plugging the car as "sub $50k car" is a bit off. It could definitely be advertised more clearly.
 
Why would you feel bad about it?

I thought the issue the Forbes article was trying to make was that there shouldn't be tax rebates on electric cars. (I got that from the cryptic "To jump start this fragile market, let’s forget the games and work on actually reducing the price of these cars. Everybody is saying that lithium-ion battery costs are coming down; OK, so let’s reflect that in the hit to consumers." sentences). It looks like people are actually more concerned about how the price is shown post-rebate but you need to come up with the pre-rebate amount up front. I agree that it would be a lot easier if the rebate where an instant rebate that the manufacturers could give you and then get reimbursed by the Feds. I am not sure why it doesn't actually work that way but the conspiry theorist in me suspects it was designed that way specifically to make it more of a pain to buy an EV. However, given that the rebate is so substantial and can definitely make or break someone being able to afford (or willing to spend the money) an EV, I think it is fair that it be marketed as such.
 
Wow!

I think the automakers should include three prices. The retail price, the price after federal rebate and the lifetime 150,000 or 100,000 mile total cost of ownership. At first the Tesla might not be that great, but it would be much more competitive depending on the price of gas and mpg of other cars.



Absolutely agree. I have never thought of how useful it would be to compare total cost of ownership side by side with initial cost and cost minus government subsidies. Really great thinking.
 
Absolutely agree. I have never thought of how useful it would be to compare total cost of ownership side by side with initial cost and cost minus government subsidies. Really great thinking.
Personally I think it's a lot closer to the truth to advertise the post-credit price. It's impossible and misleading to compare the cost of gas/diesel cars to EVs. It's also misleading to compare total cost of ownership unless you factor in the buyer's cost of capital, how much they drive, electric rates and other factors.

I find it annoying and surprising that most people look at the sticker price and not much else.
 
They could also qualify their statement for total cost of ownership on the sticker assuming 12,000 miles per year, gas a X amount, electricity at 10 cents/kWh...etc then set up a website where you can enter more accurate information in your particular case.
 
They could ... set up a website where you can enter more accurate information in your particular case.
If you follow a link on the Tesla Rumors page, it loads the US DoE calculator that lets you do exactly that. Make sure that you enter the (approximately) correct values for the kW/100-m (I used 28 for city, 32 for highway); when I first read it quickly as W/m and entered 280/320, it showed my fuel costs higher than an ICE!
 
They could also qualify their statement for total cost of ownership on the sticker assuming 12,000 miles per year, gas a X amount, electricity at 10 cents/kWh...etc then set up a website where you can enter more accurate information in your particular case.

Good idea. Similar to the energy star stickers that estimate your annual fuel cost for an appliance. This would allow buyers to compare the real price to gas powered cars and other EVs.