Sales of the GM Volt.

[joshh]

Every car has a different development cost and a different break-even point. Some are not even expected to break even as they're used as development agents for technology that goes into other cars. Porsche lost $100k on every 959 they made, for example.

Very true. GM is losing their ass on the Volt right now (except that they got bailed out) but making it up in SUVs and other car sales. But if the Volt keeps with bad sales, they will eventually have to cut it. Or redesign so it's more affordable.

[rwh11385]

I think you over-estimate your opinions as facts arguments.

Whoever said the Volt was intended to sell as many cars as the Cruze?? (that's just you being ridiculous). And once again, making assumptions about everything and using it to try to 'prove a point' is not how real people discuss issues. Funny though you mentioned the Cruze since that is what the Volt is built upon...

With the Vauxhall overseas, it should be an effective Halo car that provides what they were looking for - proving they could make a technological, gas-efficient car. I would label it as a success, but I'm not gunning to mark it up as a failure like you.

Without such an effort, their other hybrids wouldn't have as much progress and wouldn't have a good example of an efficient car to stand with (or be attacked by Nissan which proves they are accepted as a viable competitor). Instead of just focusing on making their money on trucks and SUVs, they are being proactive and investing in the future since they need their fleet to meet upcoming regulations. If you think so narrowly as a product individually being 'worth it' based on its sales, then you'll be ignoring that the Volt is helping to make all of their products more viable.

Was the BMW M1 'worth it'? Was it a viable sales product on its own? Did it provide technology, a legacy, and opportunity for future products paved by its creation?

Sure, they need to bring down the price and increase sales... but I wouldn't call it a waste.

[joshh]

You can cut it and slice it any way you like. The Volt will be a loser in the end and the tax payer is fitting the bill still. And has continued to one way or another.
Specially for a company that required a bailout, putting out a car they know in the immediate future will fail to any degree at all is pure stupidity. So I doubt they just threw the car out there thinking it might fail. But who knows really, the government will be for them every time they fail. And it is GM after all.
Will this technology make them money in the future? Who the fuck knows. But that was never my point. Nor does it matter right now.
The Volt is going as predicted by many people. Not so well.

[rwh11385]

You can cut it and slice it any way you like. The Volt will be a loser in the end and the tax payer is fitting the bill still. And has continued to one way or another.
Specially for a company that required a bailout, putting out a car they know in the immediate future will fail to any degree at all is pure stupidity. So I doubt they just threw the car out there thinking it might fail. But who knows really, the government will be for them every time they fail. And it is GM after all.
Will this technology make them money in the future? Who the fuck knows. But that was never my point. Nor does it matter right now.
The Volt is going as predicted by many people. Not so well.

So you completely ignored the BMW M1 point? Was the R&D spent on it paid off with 450 models sold?? That had problem selling so it wasn't competitive by the time it sold enough to run? In the end, did the M division turn profitable for BMW? Become a beacon for the brand to build around? Could anyone see in initial production that all of that would come after? How are sure that you know the future that the Volt could never result in a similar albeit less drastic benefit to GM?

The Volt isn't a supercar but it does have new technology and the first production extended range EV on the market. It also can provide a new foundation of principles for people to look for, internal and external. Like the M1 engine lived to be passed onto future cars, so can the drivetrain and technology the Volt has can be passed onto other products. A lot of the portfolio is moving to electrification and these lessons from the Volt can help a lot, and the company would have been far behind its competition if it didn't take action. Is it really that expensive to take a Cruze and outrig it with future advanced drivetrain and have that be the test bed and drive demand through the desire for the latest technology?

What level of sales would you find acceptable as a business decision??!? What affect does a shared platform hold? What if the R&D was leveraged? What if it provides validity to the Cruze Eco and GM's new push for fuel economy after a legacy of poor efficiency.

GM's downfall was not about spending in R&D in order to provide a high-tech product that *people actually want* and connected with the trends in the industry. It was metrics that rewarded poor design and incentives used in place of attracting customers through great product, as well as missing the curve when the market shifts. "Bean Counters vs. Car Guys" is a great insight into those issues if you want to educate yourself.

They still have issues, many and some serious, but building a Halo car with technology on a shared platform (and nearly reaching their sales goals in a year including investigation in explosions) is not a losing move. The losing move would have trying to keep doing what they had always done and expecting a different outcome.

[joshh]

So you completely ignored the BMW M1 point? Was the R&D spent on it paid off with 450 models sold?? That had problem selling so it wasn't competitive by the time it sold enough to run? In the end, did the M division turn profitable for BMW? Become a beacon for the brand to build around? Could anyone see in initial production that all of that would come after? How are sure that you know the future that the Volt could never result in a similar albeit less drastic benefit to GM?

The Volt isn't a supercar but it does have new technology and the first production extended range EV on the market. It also can provide a new foundation of principles for people to look for, internal and external. Like the M1 engine lived to be passed onto future cars, so can the drivetrain and technology the Volt has can be passed onto other products. A lot of the portfolio is moving to electrification and these lessons from the Volt can help a lot, and the company would have been far behind its competition if it didn't take action. Is it really that expensive to take a Cruze and outrig it with future advanced drivetrain and have that be the test bed and drive demand through the desire for the latest technology?

What level of sales would you find acceptable as a business decision??!? What affect does a shared platform hold? What if the R&D was leveraged? What if it provides validity to the Cruze Eco and GM's new push for fuel economy after a legacy of poor efficiency.

GM's downfall was not about spending in R&D in order to provide a high-tech product that *people actually want* and connected with the trends in the industry. It was metrics that rewarded poor design and incentives used in place of attracting customers through great product, as well as missing the curve when the market shifts. "Bean Counters vs. Car Guys" is a great insight into those issues if you want to educate yourself.

They still have issues, many and some serious, but building a Halo car with technology on a shared platform (and nearly reaching their sales goals in a year including investigation in explosions) is not a losing move. The losing move would have trying to keep doing what they had always done and expecting a different outcome.

You're trying to compare a car made to sell as a dedicated street car as opposed to a car made for homologation. Apples to apples. Car companies don't get into racing for the fun of it.

There's nothing more I can add to this conversation that wouldn't just be repeating myself.

[rwh11385]

You're trying to compare a car made to sell as a dedicated street car as opposed to a car made for homologation. Apples to apples. Car companies don't get into racing for the fun of it.

There's nothing more I can add to this conversation that wouldn't just be repeating myself.

But it didn't even sell enough to make it able to race until it was too late. Some may say that was a failure, if they used your same method of measurement.

Apples to apples is a fun card game.

Car companies also don't make Halo cars for the heck of it. The same reasons they race - to market themselves and prove their abilities, can be said of spending on a R&D halo car. Is the ZR1 worth it based on sales alone -even at its high price? The LF-A?

[joshh]

You're still not comparing apples to apples.

Is GM selling the Volt as a promotional tool for their traditional history in hybrids or electrical vehicles? Such a high risk car right after they got bailed out.

Edit, The M1 did end up racing.

[rwh11385]

You're still not comparing apples to apples.

Is GM selling the Volt as a promotional tool for their traditional history in hybrids or electrical vehicles? Such a high risk car right after they got bailed out.

It absolutely is a promotional tool, and a foray into electrification - which without their hybrid products would never be taken seriously. The fact that it is selling and taken seriously by the competition and has another model abroad is a win as well.

That is not nearly as high risk as continuing to churn out cars with crappy interiors, three versions of the same car with different badging, and huge SUVs with bad fuel economy.

[joshh]

It absolutely is a promotional tool, and a foray into electrification - which without their hybrid products would never be taken seriously. The fact that it is selling and taken seriously by the competition and has another model abroad is a win as well.

That is not nearly as high risk as continuing to churn out cars with crappy interiors, three versions of the same car with different badging, and huge SUVs with bad fuel economy.

That's some seriously expensive advertising for a car that's being retooled and mass produced. In other words the Volt is not being produced as an advertising tool. If the Volt was intended as an advertising tool they would have a limited run of them. Which is not the case. Mass production of them means they intend to profit from the vehicle.
It's an endeavour into something they have never done before during a time when they are nearly out of business. That's high risk. And it really isn't selling. 1500 at most in a single month so far sucks for a car that's trying to be sold in large quantities.

The car they are competing with has shitty sales as well. Not saying much there. Specially when the vehicle that's competing with the Volt has a very limited range because it's all electric. Unlike he Volt.

The Volt is not the reason their SUVs and other cars are selling. It's not even the same technology. However they are getting some sales from people going in to look at the Volt and walk out with say a Cruze. But that just shows a failure of the Volt even if they do get a few sales because the Volt is over priced.
My wife got a ride in a Cruze and said she really liked the interior. The Cruze is selling because one way or another GM started designing cars Americans are liking more and more, not because they produced a $40k hybrid car that many Americans can't afford.

[rwh11385]

It's an endeavour into something they have never done before during a time when they are nearly out of business.

And not making endeavours like this in the past is WHY they went bankrupt. There was no risk - only absolute certainty - that there products like Cavalier/Cobalt and Grand Prix would be disliked by the public and sold by throwing away profit margin with incentives.

They had no traditional history in hybrids or EVs (outside of the killed one), so they needed to prove themselves. They could not be competitive for the future of the industry on their current lineup or design process. The interiors and differentiated shared platform cars were just part of the change that occurred.

With the Volt, Ampera, and lite hybrids and programs like EcoCar, GM is trying to remain relevant. Churning out profitable SUVs while fewer people were buying them wasn't going to work, hence the bankruptcy. This represents them attempting to stay on the pulse of the industry rather than flatlining.

[rwh11385]

Just look at the Prius. It sold just 5,562 in its first year in the US. And were sold at a huge loss. It sold under 1300/month in its second year in the US. 1676/month in its third. The Prius was met with backlash of not being able to re-coup costs of the added technology and mostly the pro-environment liberals picked them up.

Was it a failure with those big losses on each car sold and low volumes?

Did Toyota leverage its hybrid technology across its fleet? Did the R&D expenses for the Prius enable future development of other models? Does the Volt retain and bring in talent they would not have otherwise that after working on Volt could help design e-Assist and other hybrid systems in the rest of the fleet?

Being as narrow-minded as you hurts your ability to see the big picture. But that is not a shock.

Toyota's Plug-In Advanced costs $39,525 - more than the 2012 Volt pricing. If GM finds $10K in savings (mostly from drop in battery prices), then the Volt will be cheaper than the Plug-In Prius (albeit they could find savings too, depending on what price per kwh their car is based upon). And also competitive with the regular Prius 3 ($29 vs $25K that can't run on electric alone).

If the Volt is already determined by you to be a failure, then so was the Prius and M1.

[joshh]

The M1 did go racing and was made in very limited qualities. And was made strictly for advertising unlike your claim about the Volt. At least do your research on something you're making false claims about it.

Finally you compare apples to apples with the Prius. But what was the difference there? Toyota took a chance on a vehicle that was never mass produced before (new technology) while Toyota was raking in the cash) I.E. Less of a risk. As opposed to GM who is taking a huge risk on a car that costs 10k more than the Prius, has to have a government paid credit to sell it and they just got bailed out. So even with a $7k+ credit the Volt only sold 1500 units in December. And it's average customer's annual income is over $170,000.

Sorry but that has failure written all over it whether you can see it or not.

Wrong, GM was doing poorly because they were making shitty cars at a high cost vs quality and their competitors were making very good cars. Not because they failed in the past with taking risks. Now they're taking a chance on a car that already has huge competition against it. The Prius. And it's far cheaper. But now you're going to say the Volt isn't competing against the Prius. Which would be false. Tree hugger types will go with the Prius because it's cheaper and gets extremely good mileage. The full electric Leaf is a joke as a competitor because it's all electric. GM likes this because they know the Leaf will have limited buyers because it has a very limited range. Being that it's all electric. The only reason they promote the Leaf as the Volt competitor is the cost yet the Volt is more like the Prius than it is like the Leaf. Lucky them.

Now I'll flip this around so you have a better chance of waking up.
Toyota sales have fallen to other manufacturers including GM. Because what the American consumer wants is a good reliable, cheap boring car that gets good gas mileage. But they also like seeing new designs. This is why the Prius has been so successful. And why Toyota is expanding the Prius line. And this will eventually kill the Volt. Until GM makes this type of car (like the Volt) affordable to the average American the Volt will ultimately be a failure. GM does not need the Volt to get back in the game. They just needed to make a good reliable (reliability is still in question but GM is selling more cars) cheap car that gets good gas mileage. And they are now doing that in spite of the Volt.


So to sum it up for you once again....
-GM got a bailout to keep them in business....
-GM makes high risk car.....
-GM needs the government to supplement the high risk car so it can sell....
-High risk car costs $32k+(including government credit) while closest competitor costs $23k....
-Average income of the Volt buyer =$170,000 a year....
-GM enters a market that Toyota owns....
-Toyota is expanding it's line of Prius and this will effect the sales of the Volt....
-Investment is done when you have capital (Toyota's Prius) or a good reason to take the risk (not GM in this case)....
-The Volt is not intended to be advertising...

Chevy Volt=fail.

[joshh]

Another interesting figure here. (Dec)
992 Volts were sold to retail customers.
537 went to fleet sales.

How many Volts did the government buy from themselves?

[Wiglaf]

Well, the more miles you intend on driving, the smarter of a purchase this is. It's a great car for business use, especially in the city.

[Fusion]

I certainly wouldn't compare to BMW. BMW has its niche, an amazing business model and can afford to do unexpected things, manf. unexpected cars.
I bet even Toyota made the Prius at a time when they felt financially confident doing something outside the box.
GM was pushed into making something green at a time when it was just plain stupid to do so, and making it fast to "justify" the bailout.
If comparing GM and BMW, the Volt is like BMW making a heavy duty van.