Hertz continues to suffer from their foray into EVs. Bigly.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2024/11/16/hertz-accelerates-tesla-selloff-as-ev-fleet-depreciation-slams-rental-giant/

GAC06 said:

---

Going EV heavy for rental cars was a galactically stupid idea

---

That was the dumbest decision. Unless you have a Tesla, no one will want to rent an electric car. The learning curve is too great. No one would want to rent a Non tesla unless you have one because trying to learn to drive another electric car takes time to figure out.

Hertz essentially limited their rental population to less than 10%.

I rented a Tesla on Turo on my last business trip. It was so easy. I left baggage, the guy had the car at passenger pick up. He gave me key access on my phone. Went in, drove off. Returned it to the parking garage, walked into terminal.

Was so easy and the Tesla tech made it so much easier.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

If you're trapped inside a burning vehicle what are the odds you'd live long enough for a firefighter to arrive with an axe? Probably about as likely as a zombie apocalypse.

Would be a nice deterrent for thieves though.

---

Sure, but if he's already arrived to the scene when it combusts and you're another 12 axe swings from safety, your vehicle is going to be your cremation oven when it didn't have to be.

I wouldnt be surprised to learn the cybertruck construction style is still safer overall, but thats a horrifying way to go.

---

Without a doubt it would be horrible but I hope you aren't naive enough to think this is an EV only issue. Many die because they are trapped in the wreckage and can't be freed or the fire surrounds the vehicle and no one can get to the victim.

And example of a woman who survived the accident and died in the fuel fire that followed.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32868624/coroner-says-woman-burned-death-crash-involving-henry-ruggs-iii

MaxPower said:

---

Always drive around with your window open if that's a personal concern. Problem solved

---

What effect would rolling down the windows in my Sierra have on my curiosity for getting extricated from CT? Could you articulate the correlation a little better? I don't see it.

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

---

Actually a lot of owners have this issue. Anyone that has put in bullet proof glass/armored their car has the same type of glass or even tougher.

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

---

Actually a lot of owners have this issue. Anyone that has put in bullet proof glass/armored their car has the same type of glass or even tougher.

---

LOL. I will edit my previous statement then.

I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any stock vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

Obviously anyone going out of their way to modify their vehicle to add this glass isn't part of my question.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

---

Actually a lot of owners have this issue. Anyone that has put in bullet proof glass/armored their car has the same type of glass or even tougher.

---

LOL. I will edit my previous statement then.

I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any stock vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

Obviously anyone going out of their way to modify their vehicle to add this glass isn't part of my question.

---

So with the Cykertruk you get stock what others pay big $$$ to install to make their vehicles SAFER. So again where is the real concern here?

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

---

Actually a lot of owners have this issue. Anyone that has put in bullet proof glass/armored their car has the same type of glass or even tougher.

---

LOL. I will edit my previous statement then.

I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any stock vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

Obviously anyone going out of their way to modify their vehicle to add this glass isn't part of my question.

---

So with the Cykertruk you get stock what others pay big $$$ to install to make their vehicles SAFER. So again where is the real concern here?

---

You're grasping at straws now. My question was about getting extricated from the CT. Not just the bullet proof glass. I will repeat that you're naively bringing up other vehicles, which isn't necessary because the CT's construction is one of a kind. If you're unaware, the skin of the vehicle is the structure

The idea of a cheaper EV has been abandoned so it looks like they are returning to the space they always should have been on a normal adoption cycle. Luxury, more expensive options that are niche. So, the idea of mandating these by Democrats is absurd and punishes consumers.

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/the-withering-dream-of-a-cheap-american-electric-car-ad7e1113?st=why4cd&reflink=article_copyURL_share

Quote:

---

Elon Musk has abandoned it. President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to help. And the current economics of the U.S. auto industry don't support it.

"I think having a regular $25,000 model is pointless," Musk said a few weeks ago. "It would be silly."

"That market sucks," Peter Rawlinson, chief executive of Lucid Motors, told me and my colleague Christopher Mims for our new podcast, called "Bold Names."

---

Most sobering thing in this article:

Quote:

---

The average transaction price for a new vehicle sold in the U.S. last month was $48,623, according to Kelley Blue Book, roughly $10,000 higher than in 2019, before the pandemic.

A decade ago, about 40% of the new-vehicle transactions in the U.S. were less than $25,000, including incentives and discounts, according to the researcher J.D. Power. This year, that figure is 9%.

---

Quote:

---

What happened? The pandemic. Prices shot upfirst in the midst of supply shortages [AND ASTRONOMICAL MONEY PRINTING/SHIFTING], and then they stayed high as automakers adjusted their lineup to cut out low-profit vehicles.

"As automakers were profit maximizing during the supply chain crisis era, you are going to prioritize the bigger vehicles, the more expensive vehicles with their higher margins," Tyson Jominy, vice president of data and analytics at J.D. Power, told me. "Now we just don't have" these cheaper models.

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

GM lays off 1000 thanks to EVs.

https://apnews.com/article/general-motors-layoffs-cost-cutting-5e2cc6f8a3210ea364d670a1902a7c65

---

That's not what the article says at all. It was 1,000 white collar overhead jobs out of 130,000. And never said it was due to EV's.

I see we are still in the throwing **** against the wall phase this morning.

---

It's like the claims that ICE have gone up because of losses in EVs. I would love to hear why automakers wouldn't try to get the maximum combination of price and volume from any vehicle independent of losses in another part of the business.

This is like the Dems saying price gouging is the cause of inflations because company leaders woke up one day and said let's start gouging which means at other times they say let's stop gouging and drop prices because we want to be nice people.

---

The issue here is governmental mandates to replace an increasing percentage of fleet ICs with EVs. It means that if EV margins are lower (or at a loss), then your margin on ICs has to be larger to maintain a certain overall profit margin (or even a profit at all).

I don't reall have a dog in this hunt (EV vs IC) but do agree with those that find government mandates the wrong way to approach thisand against my underlying beliefs on both markets as well as the role of government.

"The EV mandates are part of CARB's Advanced Clean Cars regulations that require 100% of new vehicle sales in the state of California to be zero-emission models by 2035. J.D. Power said no states are in accordance with the EV mandate as of this year".

Kansas Kid said:

---

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

GM lays off 1000 thanks to EVs.

https://apnews.com/article/general-motors-layoffs-cost-cutting-5e2cc6f8a3210ea364d670a1902a7c65

---

That's not what the article says at all. It was 1,000 white collar overhead jobs out of 130,000. And never said it was due to EV's.

I see we are still in the throwing **** against the wall phase this morning.

---

It's like the claims that ICE have gone up because of losses in EVs. I would love to hear why automakers wouldn't try to get the maximum combination of price and volume from any vehicle independent of losses in another part of the business.

This is like the Dems saying price gouging is the cause of inflations because company leaders woke up one day and said let's start gouging which means at other times they say let's stop gouging and drop prices because we want to be nice people.

---

Having a loss leader is hardly a new idea in the business world. Fun fact, in the grocery retail business sliced bread is often their loss leader.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

And I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

---

Actually a lot of owners have this issue. Anyone that has put in bullet proof glass/armored their car has the same type of glass or even tougher.

---

LOL. I will edit my previous statement then.

I hope you're not naive enough to think it's a question for any stock vehicle other than CT. That trucks construction is one of a kind.

Obviously anyone going out of their way to modify their vehicle to add this glass isn't part of my question.

---

So with the Cykertruk you get stock what others pay big $$$ to install to make their vehicles SAFER. So again where is the real concern here?

---

You're grasping at straws now. My question was about getting extricated from the CT. Not just the bullet proof glass. I will repeat that you're naively bringing up other vehicles, which isn't necessary because the CT's construction is one of a kind. If you're unaware, the skin of the vehicle is the structure

---

Talk about grasping at straws. For this to be an issue as described in the demo with the firefighters the following have to happen
1) you have to be in an accident
2) the vehicle has to catch fire
3) the door mechanisms and window mechanisms both have to fail
4) the windows have to remained unbroken in the accident and
5) the firefighters have to arrive in time before the vehicle is fully engulfed

Now all of a sudden you say it is the vehicle structure that matters and not the glass itself. If this entrapment is an issue, go find an example of someone trapped in the vehicle and killed because the glass couldn't be broken. Good luck.

There are a lot of reasons to not buy a Cybertruk but this one is not one of them. This is making a mountain out of thin air.

The issue is companies can't drive margins higher to offset losses in a different part of the business unless every competitor is suffering similar size losses and all try the same strategy of raising prices. Examples, do you think Exxon can raise oil prices to offset losses in their chemical business when they happen? Was Pontiac able to offset losses from the Aztek in their other models?

Are prices higher due to things like Carb standards and other regulations, absolutely but those have been an issue for 40 years.

GAC06 said:

---

Going EV heavy for rental cars was a galactically stupid idea

---

Couldn't agree more. That was jumping the gun in epic proportions.

GAC06 said:

---

Going EV heavy for rental cars was a galactically stupid idea

---

Yeah.

I was just up in the Santa Clara, CA area.

Went to pick out a vehicle (National) and saw a nice Jeep Rubicon. Since that's what I drive (albeit a stick shift and 2 door) it was a nice choice.

Got everything loaded up, turned the key and...DAMN that's quiet....wait? wut?

Yep, it was the 4xe electric version.

Last thing I wanted to have to do was try to figure out where I was going to charge it. I don't own an EV so I don't have the apps on my phone that tell me where they are (and don't feel like downloading them).

And I know that in NorCal they're probably all over, but still...not something I want to have to deal with. I KNOW I can find a gas station.

Ended up with a Durango GT. Not too bad. Pretty sporty. And took GAS.

Maybe it would have been fine, but again, I've got enough crap to deal with on a business trip.

Kansas Kid said:

---

The issue is companies can't drive margins higher to offset losses in a different part of the business unless every competitor is suffering similar size losses and all try the same strategy of raising prices.

---

I guess we agree - because ALL of the traditional auto companies (American) are in the same boat.

High cost labor, inexperience with design and manufacture of EVs, and being told that their bread and butter will be outlawed by the government. I guess that is redundant? :-)

They all have to immediately start producing EVs, on a curve that is much steeper than that supported by the "native" demand of consumers.

Are their exceptions?

TESLA -- to some degree.
China EV manufacturers -- to an even greater degree.

The whole point of the China EV tariffs are to increase the cost to American consumers because in a global sense our auto companies are not competitive with EVs. So yes, they are all doing the same strategy.

Every manufacturer flailing with incredibly high prices is also all in on EVs... interesting coincidence I'm sure.

Tesla hasn't abandoned cheaper models. They reiterated their intention to release cheaper models less than a month ago. Musk says they won't be making a drivable robotaxi/$25,000 vehicle, but I'm not 100% convinced he's not doing a head fake to keep people buying current vehicles.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Every manufacturer flailing with incredibly high prices is also all in on EVs... interesting coincidence I'm sure.

---

Toyota isn't all in on EV's and their prices are high as well. Prices are high because people are paying them.

Worth watching.

Key points:
High price, lower volume is the preferred strategy to maximize profits.
Market share of SUVs has risen dramatically, increasing costs.
Chinese EVs have a 30% cost advantage absent subsidies in both markets.
Chinese EVs companies take 1.6 years to go from planning to production for a vehicle, legacy auto takes ~3x as long.
Battery prices are expected to drop a further 40% by the end of the decade.


Tariffs and protectionism isn't going to keep Chinese EVs out of the U.S. market, especially if they pursue a build in Mexico, saturate South America strategy.

Toyoto is interesting.

They blew a lot of money and effort championing hydrogen. Didn't go well for them.

So now they are playing catch up. The easiest way to do this hybrids, and that is their focus now. In the meantime, Toyoda (family scion and CEO) is railing against a tyranny of true EVs.

For instance, https://www.thestreet.com/electric-vehicles/toyota-chairman-warning-ev-owners

Pre - Tesla, I would rate Toyota as the strongest auto company. Now they have to make up for the time and money lost on hydrogen (due to US (Cali) mandates), build out true EVs in the near future. And design and build their near-term gap (hybrids).

So, yeah, expensive cars. Again, saving their butts (in the US) is tariffs on Chinese EVs, which is more palitable
to government bailouts of US automakers. A rose by any name...

Ag with kids said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Going EV heavy for rental cars was a galactically stupid idea

---

Yeah.

I was just up in the Santa Clara, CA area.

Went to pick out a vehicle (National) and saw a nice Jeep Rubicon. Since that's what I drive (albeit a stick shift and 2 door) it was a nice choice.

Got everything loaded up, turned the key and...DAMN that's quiet....wait? wut?

Yep, it was the 4xe electric version.

Last thing I wanted to have to do was try to figure out where I was going to charge it. I don't own an EV so I don't have the apps on my phone that tell me where they are (and don't feel like downloading them).

And I know that in NorCal they're probably all over, but still...not something I want to have to deal with. I KNOW I can find a gas station.

Ended up with a Durango GT. Not too bad. Pretty sporty. And took GAS.

Maybe it would have been fine, but again, I've got enough crap to deal with on a business trip.

---

Why would you have to find a place to charge it?

hph6203 said:

---

Tesla hasn't abandoned cheaper models. They reiterated their intention to release cheaper models less than a month ago. Musk says they won't be making a drivable robotaxi/$25,000 vehicle, but I'm not 100% convinced he's not doing a head fake to keep people buying current vehicles.

---

From the article written today and quote I already shared:

Quote:

---

Elon Musk has abandoned it. President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to help. And the current economics of the U.S. auto industry don't support it.

"I think having a regular $25,000 model is pointless," Musk said a few weeks ago. "It would be silly."

---

A blatant lie would be quite the head fake. I'm not saying he can't/won't do it but later in that article he talks about how incredibly hard it would be.

Teslag said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Every manufacturer flailing with incredibly high prices is also all in on EVs... interesting coincidence I'm sure.

---

Toyota isn't all in on EV's and their prices are high as well. Prices are high because people are paying them.

---

Goes both ways on this one. Prices are also high because car makers have culled their cheaper models. Ford killed all of their sedans except for the Mustang.

For most people, a car is a required expense so when the overall average price climbs $10k in less than 5 years partly due to fewer options it's not like you can just walk away and not buy. Most people gotta get something.

Also, you are now seeing absurd loans to try and counteract the high prices just to keep the monthly payments within reach.

which one of you is this??? driving down University on Friday....

YouBet said:

---

The idea of a cheaper EV has been abandoned

---

This is what I was primarily responding to, the $25,000 vehicle is a matter of degree, but Tesla is absolutely still pursuing reducing the cost of their vehicles as well as introducing new vehicles to reduce price. They were reiterated as being on the road map in their investor deck and during their earnings call released less than a month ago. It is possible they have canceled pursuing a vehicle as cheap as $25,000, but the plan for cheaper vehicles remains.

My skepticism that they have actually canceled plans for the $25,000 vehicle is based on the fact they're already building a Robotaxi vehicle that has an estimated BOM of ~$17,000 and would easily be sold in the $25-30,000 range with the addition of pedals and a steering wheel. On top of that when the initial news about them canceling the $25,000 vehicle was released Franz von Holzhausen (lead designer) said not to believe every news story.

I'm not saying they're 100% doing it, but just saying that Musk saying they aren't isn't an indication that something substantially lower cost isn't still coming. He likes to play semantics in his commentary, so while it might not be <$25,000 it could be <$30,000 and he technically did not lie.

Quote:

---

Plans for new vehicles, including more affordable models, remain on track for start of production in the first half of 2025. These vehicles will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

This approach will result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times. This should help us fully utilize our current expected maximum capacity of close to three million vehicles, enabling more than 50% growth over 2023 production before investing in new manufacturing lines.

---

Page 10

Their previous expectation was that the new manufacturing process would reduce cost by half.

chap said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Going EV heavy for rental cars was a galactically stupid idea

---

Yeah.

I was just up in the Santa Clara, CA area.

Went to pick out a vehicle (National) and saw a nice Jeep Rubicon. Since that's what I drive (albeit a stick shift and 2 door) it was a nice choice.

Got everything loaded up, turned the key and...DAMN that's quiet....wait? wut?

Yep, it was the 4xe electric version.

Last thing I wanted to have to do was try to figure out where I was going to charge it. I don't own an EV so I don't have the apps on my phone that tell me where they are (and don't feel like downloading them).

And I know that in NorCal they're probably all over, but still...not something I want to have to deal with. I KNOW I can find a gas station.

Ended up with a Durango GT. Not too bad. Pretty sporty. And took GAS.

Maybe it would have been fine, but again, I've got enough crap to deal with on a business trip.

---

Why would you have to find a place to charge it?

---

Because it might need a charge?

National requires the car to be returned with the same level of charge as when you picked it up. Unless you know of some EVs that have magic batteries, I'd have to charge it to return it that way...

This should calm things down…the V8 will be around for another generation (or at least long enough for me to put one in a Miata or a Godzilla in a Fox Body restoration)

tk for tu juan said:

---

---

I need to watch an instructional video for a rental car?

**** that noise.

Especially when he mentions that it really works best when you have a place to plug it in at night.

There MAY have been plugs at the hotel, but I didn't see them...Santa Clara Marriott for any of y'all that have been there (nice place btw).

That was a very predictable response. Since you are a Wrangler person, figured you already knew about the 4xe

tk for tu juan said:

---

That was a very predictable response. Since you are a Wrangler person, figured you already knew about the 4xe

---

I haven't really looked into it. I've got 2 Wranglers and a Gladiator. All gas.

I've seen it, but really don't know much about it and haven't bothered to look since I'm not in the market for one.

But, I wasn't the only one with the view they didn't want an EV that day. There was another lady that saw me pulling my stuff out and asked why and I told her. She said she didn't want one either.

I told her to avoid the several Wranglers then...

But, I was agreeing with GAC06's point that going all out on EVs for rentals was galactically stupid. I'm an example of that. I didn't want to get into something that I didn't know all about for a rental on a business trip.

Could I look everything up and figure it all out? Of course. But, I can figure out every single gas car in about 4 min including having my phone connected and CarPlay on. Without watching a tutorial video or downloading apps to find charging plugs.

Actual EV's for rentals is dumb. You would have been fine in a plug in hybrid, although I think they're dumb too.