I know this is going to suck for many people but you can't argue with the logic behind it. Whether we'd like to admit it or not, EVs are the future. Investing in EVs over internal combustion vehicles is a sound business move. It'll not pay dividends in the next year or two but over time, it will. I wish they could find a way to transition people from one segment to another rather than getting rid of them, though. That would help lessen the blow drastically.
16 replies (most recent on top)
I'm tired of the constant Tesla, Tesla, Tesla we keep hearing from Jimmy. We aren't Tesla. Tesla builds junk anyway. Just ask Consumer Reports who doesn't recommend three of the four vehicles Tesla builds. Why? Because they aren't reliable!!!
@OP Keep drinking the Kool Aid. I don't think EVs are the future, but they are going to be the pollution we'll have to clean.
@1mho+1hSsQOID FMC should fire a lot of slackers, starting with management, all the Ford family and JF. However, we know how it will play: good employees are going to get the boot while all the deadwood will get salary increases.
Should FMC sell BEVs? Maybe a handful of models under the Lincoln brand.
Should FMC bet it all on BEVs? Definitely not.
The country's infrastructure and the electrical grid are not ready for massive BEVs adoption. BEVs are heavier which means roads, bridges are going to need repairs more often, while the vehicles need sturdier frames and brakes. BEV adoption is being pushed politically, not by the market forces or by people's choice, so it should fail miserably. BEVs is a niche market.
Should FMC electrify its fleet? Yes. FMC should offer more hybrids than BEVs, while keeping and improving ICE. Also FMC should be exploring H2 cells.
I am afraid betting the farm on BEVs will destroy the company.
All I know is that I see so many Tesla's then I had seen last year in my neighborhood. And the funny think is that's I'm not so much into cars. But I can recognize a Tesla very easily compared to other branded cars due to it's unique raised back end and it's curvy front. It makes sense put more investment in EV if Ford wants to stay in business. Sure, there are considerable layoffs, but rather cuts today for a certain percentage of employees within the company instead of the ENTIRE company going bankrupt. The labor market is still good, with companies still hiring. Many big corps are freezing hiring, but there are many mid to small companies still hiring due to labor shortages in USA. Good Luck!
Ticking timebombs on the ocean as well - remember the Felicity Ace?
EV's of today are EV's of today, and not EV's of the future. Lol, plain and simple.
And as long as you cant tell me where the resources are gathered, who will control semiconductors and materials, and where kaputt batteries will go, I will not even listen to your music.
Yes EVs all of them spontaneously combust. Ticking time bo--s on wheels what a future
I will NEVER drive an EV.
So the future is after I die, apparently.
How much money/support is company from Government for EV?
How much future support will come from China?
EV the future forced by Government as always!!!!
Although I agree there will come a time when society migrates to another propulsion system for transportation. But what gets me is Why is Russia & China not going this route? They have the same scientist we do in the west. Chian continues to build refineries all the time.
The charging infrastructure must be ample and widespread throughout the country before the demand for EV's is significant.
My 4-year old ICE truck has 40K miles. If I continue my current driving habits, in 8 years, my truck will only have 120k miles-- with still another 40k+ miles left on it! So, in 12 years, I'm hoping the infrastructure will be present and the cost of EV's significantly lower such to whet my appetite.
One-world government tyrants love EVs.
My qualm with EV's is that after lock-downs and the madness we saw right next door in Canada in the response to the truckers protest it's clear that gov't can & will over-react to things. All EV's enable those same entities to lock various populations into place by merely shutting of to "problematic" areas or regions.
you buy an ev and you polute the environment, and loose your freedom. welcome to communist usa where your friendly gov dictates what you buy. such stupidity shone by the ev promotors. what the he-l you gonna do when 1/3 to 1/2 people are needed to produce and service evs. you are all asholes.
@eag+1hSsQOID
That ship has sailed. There has been too much money invested in this technology by automakers worldwide to change course at this point. On top of that governments around the world are backing this move with money, laws and regulations.
Battery technology is getting better every year. Mercedes has the EQS which claims a range up to 485 miles per full charge. it will be just a matter of time before all vehicles will be at that level.
Nothing to be tired of at this point. It will happen.
I'm so tired of hearing this red hearing argument, that you "cannot argue... it's the future". We certainly can and will argue it. EVs might make sense for some people, especially those doing small trips & limited commuting, but as soon as you add a little longer than "typical" trip, or towing/hauling, or too cold of weather, or too hot of weather, that's when cr-p hits the fan. The MachE has a range as low as 224-247 miles in ideal conditions, so that's roughly 4 hours of driving, At most, before you have to charge. So now something that could typically be a short, quick trip to and from, only 2-3 hours away, is prolonged with trying to charge. Which, is a pain depending where you can charge: 240V/48A is 10.9hours, or go 10-80% in 45 minutes with their fast charging, if you can find it, lower than 10% or more than 80% takes longer. So now in 45 mins you could have a range of 180-190 miles, still possibly not enough to get you where you're headed and will require another charge that will take however long and planning. People do not want to wait around for hours while the dang thing charges when they're taking trips. Again, if towing or hauling more weight, or going up through mountains, you can forget about your range. I get that it can be done, but most don't want to add that amount of time.
Ford wants to be Tesla so badly that every time there is a meeting, that's all they bring up.... "Tesla, Tesla Tesla". It's embarrassing. Hybrids make sense, hydrogen makes sense, regular ICE vehicles make sense, electric fits a niche right now until the tech improves.
Uh, yes we can argue the logic behind going to EV’s at light speed. I hope you realize The stark unwavering ego of you EV heads insinuating at every turn that “you can’t argue the logic behind it” turns more people further against even thinking of buying an EV. Not only does the math not make sense just on an individual purchase perspective (even with huge government incentives), convenience of charging location and speed of charging doesn’t make sense for the majority of folks either. Not to mention the environmental impact mining resources needed for batteries and the risk we take sourcing those minerals from countries who will not have any hesitation to hold us hostage if we become too reliant on them for those resources. A more logical view would be to offer a variety of power sources (ICE, hybrid, EV, hydrogen, etc.) that we continue to improve the efficiency and environmental impact and then let the consumer choose what best fits their needs - without any government incentives needed.
Yes we can argue the logic behind it.