GM Amps Up Volt Production

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Well except the US government owns GM, so you must buy one of the government auto-mobiles on their voodoo magic technology.

 

[barfo]

Well except the US government owns GM, so you must buy one of the government auto-mobiles on their voodoo magic technology.

You'd think if the government was mandating purchase, that sales would be higher, no?

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

So don't buy one. No one is asking you to. Well, GM might be, but they can be resisted just as most of us have resisted their dubious charms for the past 40 years.

Compared to the Bugatti Veyron, however, the Volt is quite inexpensive.

barfo

I wasn't planning on it. You don't think the price tag is a little ridiculous?

 

[Denny Crane]

Your idea, you go first. You know the address to send the check.

barfo

If I do, I never want to be forced to pay taxes again. And your guy ain't done yet.

 

[barfo]

I wasn't planning on it. You don't think the price tag is a little ridiculous?

I haven't bought one, and have no plans to do so.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I haven't bought one, and have no plans to do so.

barfo

GM doesn't need your money anyways. Oh wait, yes it does.

 

[mook]

Interesting (and not entirely glowing) review of the Volt can be found here:
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/may2011/bw2011052_182710.htm

I really found some of the comments on the article interesting though:

adam
May 8, 2011 1:56 PM GMT
The problem with analyzing the car in terms of how fast it pays back the gas cost is that the car is at this point a luxury item. Nobody aks whether the V6 engine on a Mercedes E350 is "worth" the 50K price tag, because that is not why people buy such cars.The Volt will be sucessfull if enough people are willing and able to pay 35K to make the personal statement that the volt represents. Nissan really understands this dynamic. Their Leaf advertising basically consists of a slideshow of images having positive natural and environmental connotations. Nissan is working hard to define the personal statement that consumers who purchase their car will be making. I have yet to see Chevy make a similar statement. ment.
...
apeweek
May 5, 2011 6:32 PM GMT
The Volt is not especially expensive, if you look at the lease price instead of the sales price.It can be leased for $350/mo, and if you consider the $150-$200 savings in fuel realized by an average driver (15,000 mi/yr), net cost is equivalent to leasing a gas auto for under $200/mo. That's a great price for a car with as many luxury features as the Volt has.Plus, leasing over buying just makes sense with a cutting-edge product like the Volt.
....
Charged Up
May 4, 2011 10:09 PM GMT
Thane. If I go on Edmund's and equip a 2011 Prius with the same equipment as the Volt I come up with a price on the Prius that is over $38k. Do you think it is appropriate to compare a stripped down Prius to a fully loaded Volt?I think if you are going to compare it to a stripped down Prius you should make it very clear that the cars are NOT equipped in a way that is comparable.And it would seem appropriate to point out that if you equip them comparably the Prius appears to be more expensive.
...
Bill Destler
May 4, 2011 1:18 PM GMT
The Volt is an astonishing achievement. I have driven mine almost 2,000 miles and have used only slightly more than 2 gallons of gas. Taking into account the cost of electricity to charge it, I estimate my overall equivalent fuel efficiency to be over 110 mpg! I also own two Prii (plural of Prius?) and really like them, but the Volt is twice as efficient for most users and performs and handles much better. In fact, in order to get the Volt mpge down to that of a Prius, I calculate that, charging only once per day, you would have to drive the Volt more than 200 miles a day. Who does that?
...
SeminarcallerVA
May 4, 2011 9:07 AM GMT
Nice article. As a Volt owner I'm a little biased and so take this little bit of criticism with a grain of salt.Whenever I see articles like this they usually state (like you did) that the price of the Volt is so much more than that of other cars, specifically the Prius. However, when you start considering what is in the base model of Volt and what options you would need to add to the Prius, the cost differential is vastly reduced. Then it actually does make economic sense to buy the Volt vs a similarly optioned Prius AND it drives SO MUCH better than the Prius and looks so much better.To be sure, the Volt is still pricey and buying a used car will almost always be a better financial decision. However, for me personally I have a 50 mile round trip commute and I get to charge at work. I'm off gas for the most part (.7 gallons the first month at about 1,662 MPG) and it is the funnest car (instant torque) I have ever owned and/or driven.Anyway, glad you enjoyed your week with the Volt. It really is a nice achievement by GM.
...
Slapshot28
May 3, 2011 9:39 PM GMT
Volt #541 is absolutley the best car I've ever owned. It handles as well as my prior 5-Series BMW, it jumps off the line with instant torque, it has unbelievable creature comforts, and it casts a mean, low, prowling look. Best of all, while I can drive to NH and back (at 40+ mpg), most days I never burn a drop of gasoline. Simply stated, in my opinion, the Volt is the finest luxury sports sedan available today. One thing is for sure: I'm never going back to conventional car technology. This is too good!

A lot of those are people who own them, so there's some confirmation bias going on there. If you drop $40k on something, you're probably going to want to like it, especially in the first 6 months. But I thought there were some compelling points in there even so. It's amazing to think that one dude has effectively driven 1662 miles per gallon.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

The line judge is blind, and not in a justice-is-blind sort of way.

barfo

Ah, line judges are always blind. Just ask McEnroe.

 

[PapaG]

Interesting (and not entirely glowing) review of the Volt can be found here:
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/may2011/bw2011052_182710.htm

I really found some of the comments on the article interesting though:



A lot of those are people who own them, so there's some confirmation bias going on there. If you drop $40k on something, you're probably going to want to like it, especially in the first 6 months. But I thought there were some compelling points in there even so. It's amazing to think that one dude has effectively driven 1662 miles per gallon.

I don't think there is any question that there is a solid market for the Volt, and I'm certainly not against this vehicle. The primary problem is that the ideal consumer, who has a mid-to-low level income and lives close to their work, is priced out of the Volt. So, instead of being an affordable option, like, say, a Ford Focus, it is being marketed and priced as a luxury item.

 

[Denny Crane]

If you have $40K to blow for the fun of it, or are willing to pay $hundreds for a lease payment, you can afford the gasoline prices for a big Cadillac SUV type vehicle.

And surely the Cadillacs are selling way more than a few thousand a year.

 

[mook]

I don't think there is any question that there is a solid market for the Volt, and I'm certainly not against this vehicle. The primary problem is that the ideal consumer, who has a mid-to-low level income and lives close to their work, is priced out of the Volt. So, instead of being an affordable option, like, say, a Ford Focus, it is being marketed and priced as a luxury item.

In 1990, the ideal customer for a top-of-the-line PC was probably somebody like Sergey Brin. But he was priced out of the market and so had to make do a much inferior product. He somehow helped found Google anyway.

Most new technologies sold to early adopters tend to be stupidly overpriced luxury items that miss the less wealthy market that could really benefit from it. The proof of whether the Volt (and/or other plugins) are worth it will be 5-10 years from now when it scales up enough.

 

[maxiep]

In 1990, the ideal customer for a top-of-the-line PC was probably somebody like Sergey Brin. But he was priced out of the market and so had to make do a much inferior product. He somehow helped found Google anyway.

Most new technologies sold to early adopters tend to be stupidly overpriced luxury items that miss the less wealthy market that could really benefit from it. The proof of whether the Volt (and/or other plugins) are worth it will be 5-10 years from now when it scales up enough.

The problem with the Volt vs. the Prius and the Leaf is that they're early adopting with our money. If GM were not held by the government I wouldn't care, but the Volt is a political product.

 

[mook]

The problem with the Volt vs. the Prius and the Leaf is that they're early adopting with our money. If GM were not held by the government I wouldn't care, but the Volt is a political product.

I agree. But arguing over the initial decision is kind of moot at this point. It is what it is. I liked the move, you hated it, but there's nothing that's going to change about something that happened a couple years ago.

More relevant: Do you think they should take the $11b hit and sell now and let us recoup 80% or so of our investment? Or hang on to it for another few years to see if we can get it all back (and maybe then some)?

I don't think there's a clear-cut answer to that based on libertarian or conservative or progressive ideology. My guess is Obama would like to sell it soon to get it off the map during the re-election. I'm personally willing to sell just to de-politicize future moves by GM. But there's a good argument for just holding on to a rising investment. Why should tax payers lose money on this if they don't have to?

 

[Natebishop3]

I haven't bought one, and have no plans to do so.

barfo

Then I don't see the point of you being in this thread.

 

[maxiep]

I agree. But arguing over the initial decision is kind of moot at this point. It is what it is. I liked the move, you hated it, but there's nothing that's going to change about something that happened a couple years ago.

More relevant: Do you think they should take the $11b hit and sell now and let us recoup 80% or so of our investment? Or hang on to it for another few years to see if we can get it all back (and maybe then some)?

I don't think there's a clear-cut answer to that based on libertarian or conservative or progressive ideology. My guess is Obama would like to sell it soon to get it off the map during the re-election. I'm personally willing to sell just to de-politicize future moves by GM. But there's a good argument for just holding on to a rising investment. Why should tax payers lose money on this if they don't have to?

What makes you think GM is a "rising investment"? There have been some massaging of profits by GM, but once again it's a political tactic, not a business one. The Federal Government is not, nor should it ever be, in an equity position with a US company that doesn't comprise a national interest (e.g., a defense contractor that makes a critical component for our defense).

We should dump the company at the earliest possible moment without regard for what happens to it. The longer we hold the investment, the more money we lose.

 

[Denny Crane]

I agree. But arguing over the initial decision is kind of moot at this point. It is what it is. I liked the move, you hated it, but there's nothing that's going to change about something that happened a couple years ago.

More relevant: Do you think they should take the $11b hit and sell now and let us recoup 80% or so of our investment? Or hang on to it for another few years to see if we can get it all back (and maybe then some)?

I don't think there's a clear-cut answer to that based on libertarian or conservative or progressive ideology. My guess is Obama would like to sell it soon to get it off the map during the re-election. I'm personally willing to sell just to de-politicize future moves by GM. But there's a good argument for just holding on to a rising investment. Why should tax payers lose money on this if they don't have to?

The government has no reason to own a single share of a publicly traded company. Period.

Maxie beat me to it.

The govt. Shouldn't be influencing private markets at all. Period.

 

[Klinky]

...the Volt is a political product.

Yet it was unveiled in 2007 & in development well before that... Much earlier than any sort of bailout...

Then I don't see the point of you being in this thread.

The same could be said of you, unless you want to show us the pictures of your new Chevy Volt.

The govt. Shouldn't be influencing private markets at all. Period.

I am sure large conglomerates can be trusted much more than the evil Gubermint!

 

[maxiep]

Yet it was unveiled in 2007 & in development well before that... Much earlier than any sort of bailout...

And the question is given the demand for the product, what would its role be in a non-government controlled enterprise? My guess is much smaller than it currently is, because politics rather than profit is the primary driver of GM.

I am sure large conglomerates can be trusted much more than the evil Gubermint!

You can trust large conglomerates more because their motivations are much more transparent. They care about profit. And in their amorality you can easily predict how they will behave.

 

[Klinky]

And the question is given the demand for the product, what would its role be in a non-government controlled enterprise? My guess is much smaller than it currently is, because politics rather than profit is the primary driver of GM.

So the Nissan Leaf, Toyota Prius, Honda Insight/Civic Hybrid were also introduced for political reasons?

You can trust large conglomerates more because their motivations are much more transparent. They care about profit. And in their amorality you can easily predict how they will behave.

Spend millions/billions on sweet sweet misleading advertising & a nice PR spin machine. Then hide behind layers of subsidiaries so that if the shit hits the fan it only tarnishes one of your corporate tentacles. Also since the Government shouldn't involve themselves in anything, say whatever you want in your advertisements & do whatever you want to your employees & the surrounding communities because no one is going to police you on it. Maybe "the people" will sue, but that's why you have high priced lawyers/goons on retainer that can beat down any significant threat by intimidation or legal wrangling.

 

[Denny Crane]

GM was one of the largest manufacturers of ethanol vehicles. Seems like "investing" the corporation's money on green ventures was a path to bankruptcy.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

And the question is given the demand for the product, what would its role be in a non-government controlled enterprise? My guess is much smaller than it currently is, because politics rather than profit is the primary driver of GM.

GM sold more cars in China than they did in the USA last year. I know that exporting things made in this country isn't very American anymore but I still believe bailing out GM and preventing the Chinese from buying it was the correct move.

 

[maxiep]

So the Nissan Leaf, Toyota Prius, Honda Insight/Civic Hybrid were also introduced for political reasons?

Those products are not the focus of Nissan, Toyota or Honda. The Volt is being produced as the future of GM. If GM weren't government controlled, the Volt would be a sideline.

Spend millions/billions on sweet sweet misleading advertising & a nice PR spin machine. Then hide behind layers of subsidiaries so that if the shit hits the fan it only tarnishes one of your corporate tentacles. Also since the Government shouldn't involve themselves in anything, say whatever you want in your advertisements & do whatever you want to your employees & the surrounding communities because no one is going to police you on it. Maybe "the people" will sue, but that's why you have high priced lawyers/goons on retainer that can beat down any significant threat by intimidation or legal wrangling.

You missed the point. Try again.

 

[maxiep]

GM sold more cars in China than they did in the USA last year. I know that exporting things made in this country isn't very American anymore but I still believe bailing out GM and preventing the Chinese from buying it was the correct move.

Why? Was it un-American to allow Chrysler to be sold to the Italians? All these car companies own each other anyway. If China wishes to purchase a company that's a money loser, then it's a financial benefit to us, just like selling Rockefeller Center to the Japanese.

 

[Natebishop3]

Yet it was unveiled in 2007 & in development well before that... Much earlier than any sort of bailout...



The same could be said of you, unless you want to show us the pictures of your new Chevy Volt.



I am sure large conglomerates can be trusted much more than the evil Gubermint!

Ah, but I said that I would be interested in buying a hybrid if they were more affordable. I think it's pertinent to discuss the price of the Volt. All barfo is adding that "I dont' have to buy one" and "he doesn't have any plans to buy one". Thanks for those gems.

 

[Klinky]

I think it's pertinent to discuss the price of the Volt. All barfo is adding that "I dont' have to buy one" and "he doesn't have any plans to buy one".

...and you don't have one & you don't plan to buy one either(due to cost). So... Barfo's opinions are just as valid as yours & what you're quoting isn't all that barfo's said in this thread...

 

[PapaG]

GM sold more cars in China than they did in the USA last year. I know that exporting things made in this country isn't very American anymore but I still believe bailing out GM and preventing the Chinese from buying it was the correct move.

Do you know what GM is selling in China?

SUVs, and SUV sales in China are up 54% over last year through mid-April.

It's a bit ironic.

 

[Klinky]

Those products are not the focus of Nissan, Toyota or Honda. The Volt is being produced as the future of GM. If GM weren't government controlled, the Volt would be a sideline.

Oh, you're so right, that must be why GM has discontinued all their other product lines & is solely focusing on the Volt which will be their only product from now on. But perhaps reality suggests something different, that the volt is a new product line that will probably make up a minority of GM sales for the next couple of years. As far as it's viability, go look at how much the base price on a Lexus costs, they start at 33K for a base model. Hybrids are not for econo-boxes yet, but hybrid tech or electric tech is something a lot of car manufactures are banking on, not just GM.

http://www.toyota.com/about/environment/hybrids/

Hybrid is a core technology that we will use for all future powertrains to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions while delivering impressive driving performance. We expect to have a hybrid version available for every Toyota passenger model in the early 2020s.

 

[Denny Crane]

Fwiw, the environmentally friendly cars, like the Prius, aren't so friendly when you factor in the life of the car and the dirty energy used in manufacturing.

 

[maxiep]

Oh, you're so right, that must be why GM has discontinued all their other product lines & is solely focusing on the Volt which will be their only product from now on. But perhaps reality suggests something different, that the volt is a new product line that will probably make up a minority of GM sales for the next couple of years. As far as it's viability, go look at how much the base price on a Lexus costs, they start at 33K for a base model. Hybrids are not for econo-boxes yet, but hybrid tech or electric tech is something a lot of car manufactures are banking on, not just GM.

http://www.toyota.com/about/environment/hybrids/

Once again, you're missing the point. Those companies are using their electric motor programs as a current sideline to augment future production and demand. GM was following the same strategy when they weren't government controlled. After they were taken over by the government and the UAW they were turned into an instrument of government policy rather than financial reality. That means the Volt went from a sideshow and technological proving ground to a subsidized cornerstone of the new Government Motors. As I said before, if GM weren't in the hands of the Federal Government, it's unlikely they'd be ramping up production for the Volt when profits are higher on other vehicle lines.

 

[Klinky]

As I said before, if GM weren't in the hands of the Federal Government, it's unlikely they'd be ramping up production for the Volt when profits are higher on other vehicle lines.

According to GM's April figures, of the 232,538 vehicles delivered, 493 were Chevrolet Volts.

Even if they ramp up to 60K a year, that's only 5,000 per month, approximately 2% of GM's deliverables - if they hit those targets. I am still not seeing how the White House has decided to put the Volt front & center crowding out GM's other product lines. In your mind does 1 - 2% equal a majority?

http://www.toyota.com/about/news/corporate/2011/05/03-1-ReportsSales.html

TMS posted April sales of 16,327 hybrid vehicles, a decrease of 8.8 percent compared to
the same period last year. Toyota Division posted April sales of 13,967 hybrids, while Lexus
Division reported sales 2,360 hybrids for the month.

So possibly around 195,000+ sales yearly means hybrid tech is merely on the sidelines for Toyota?