• bhauertso@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Our strong ICE business that frankly has gotten stronger, and we still believe there’s growth there,” Barra said.

    This is all you really need to know about GM.

  • Jbro_82@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh you mean the subcompact car didn’t sell well? The 100k penis enlarger didn’t sell well. Guess it the powertrain!!!

  • kaisenls1@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The important takeaway:

    “Barra said that while EV growth has slowed, demand is still heading in the right direction, noting that US car buyers were on track to purchase 1 million EVs this year for the first time.

    “There’s really no reason that EV demand won’t be higher in the years ahead,” she said. “Consideration is rising, the policy environment is favorable. The public charging infrastructure is growing and customer choice is expanding.”

    • stealstea@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The more important takeaway for GM: “ Costs will be reined in, factories will be delayed, and stock buybacks will recirculate cash to shareholders”

      In other words, in the face of a struggling EV business, instead of increasing investment to actually get it moving, they are cutting investment and focussing on paying off shareholders instead of actually fixing what’s wrong

  • Recoil42@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And tellingly, Barra also managed to slip in some praise for the company’s internal combustion engine vehicles, which continue to generate profits for the company at a time when costs are rising across the board. “Our strong ICE business that frankly has gotten stronger, and we still believe there’s growth there,” Barra said.

    Sigh. If only GM had actually stuck with the Voltec hybrid powertrain and pushed it forward. 🤦‍♂️

    • Exurbain@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s truly is exasperating to think how much R&D went into perfecting that system only for GM to throw it all in the trash. The fact Toyota of all companies is doing a better job selling the concept of the Volt with the Prius and Rav4 Prime trims is just rubbing salt in the wound.

      • Exurbain@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That assumes people in charge of crunching numbers at GM are perfectly rational and have even studied the possibility. As far as I’m aware there wasn’t even so much as an off hand comment from an engineer at a trade show about looking into reusing the Voltec system on any other platform before killing off the whole line.

        It’s entirely possible they did look into recycling the tech elsewhere but GM has a track record of just writing off tech right as they iron out the kinks.

    • ZeroWashu@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      there are big rumors that hybrids may come back in some markets but not necessarily the US but that remains to be seen

    • wowzaa@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I still remember the GM AUTOnomy concept from 21 years ago. seemed like an incredible idea at the time then it just… went away

  • Inspirasion@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh yeah. Has nothing to do with all the dealers that tried to tack on a $10k market adjustment and thousands in BS fees on a BOLT, that made it cheaper to buy a Tesla.

    Or the fact when I had an issue that disabled fast charging on the car 200 miles away from home and I had to rent a Tesla to get home because it took them almost a week to fix because they only had “1 EV engineer” in a major city in California who did a 20 minute software reprogramming to resolve the issue, that any ICE tech could have done.

    My next car won’t be a GM product. The dealers are the problem and when I even complained to EV concierge they gave zero shits, didn’t call the dealer for updates like they said they would, I didn’t even get an apology for the inconvenience.

    • feurie@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      GM is the one who decides what’s required to make a tech allowed to work on their EVs.

      Also their low supply is what led to markups last year. Everyone has markups these days for low supply cars because OEMs aren’t making enough.

      • Specialist-Document3@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        These shortages ended a couple for months ago. Dealerships are going to need to move cars pretty fast in the short term if they don’t want to get left with too much debt and depreciation

    • dima1109@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      right, because tesla charging $70k for a stripper model y was totally not the same thing at all

      • DrXaos@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, it wasn’t. Tesla was moving their cars at high velocity and found the top price that keeps them moving.

        Dealers aren’t doing that to EVs, they are radically overpricing.

        Dealer markup only helps the dealer and hurts the manufacturer with high fixed costs. At least Tesla got some money which they can, and did, put back into capital improvements for future models.

        • dima1109@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tesla was moving their cars at high velocity and found the top price that keeps them moving

          the top price which apparently came down 40% in less than a year? besides, this matters to the consumer how exactly?

          Dealers aren’t doing that to EVs, they are radically overpricing.

          back when i was fruitlessly trying to buy a mackey, every dealer i called said they have nothing on the lot because all allocations and abandoned customer orders were getting bought up immediately. and the lowest markup i found was $5k

          At least Tesla got some money which they can, and did, put back into capital improvements for future models.

          aside from the fact that this is is incredibly naive, it generalizes beautifully to other manufacturers, like gm announcing they’re doing a $10b stock buyback.

          • DrXaos@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            > the top price which apparently came down 40% in less than a year?

            yes, they were very responsive to demand and immediately changed price and advertised so, entirely unlike the dealers.

            > besides, this matters to the consumer how exactly?

            It’s very easy to buy a Tesla at a low price now, and hard to buy a competing EV at a competitive price because of dealer greed and lack of desire, so people don’t.

    • User-no-relation@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How can anyone complain about a $10k dealer markup in 2022 when tesla had the exact same thing, just from them directly. They cranked up the price in 2022, and dropped it back down in 2023. It’s the same thing, just going in to a different pocket.

      • mcmonopolist@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree that in both cases, it is just the company rationally responding to supply and demand.

        But there is a huge difference in that Tesla is completely upfront and shows you the total price at all times, while dealerships will lie straight to your face, waste your time, and pull all kinds of bullshit moves to try and jack up the price. I was livid at how my Bolt purchase went at a Chevy dealer. No respect or integrity.

    • ZeroWashu@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      GM dealers simply had the benefit of a manufacturer not providing enough EVs for the consumers. If they can deliver in volume then dealers will have less of a window where they can mark up vehicles as there will be dealers who just want to move vehicles and recoup through manufacturer incentives and hold back.

    • petit_cochon@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe you, but I just want to note that I have had the exact opposite experience with my EV concierge. They have always been really responsive and on top of things. I am 100% with you about the dealerships. They are a huge pain in the ass and they are the reason you even need an EV concierge, which is ridiculous. You shouldn’t need some special party to interface with a fucking car dealership to repair anything.

    • NightOfTheLivingHam@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hope they do so I can sell my stock in that shitty company at a slightly less loss at this point. They are not going to survive the next 10 years.

  • kenypowa@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mary Barra did say multiple times in 2022 and this year that GM will overtake Tesla in EV sales by 2025.

    I want to have what she is having.

  • chronocapybara@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trying to turn their current crop of huge, heavy SUVs and trucks into EVs is a fool’s errand. The battery packs required to give these beasts the range that people expect of them will be prohibitively expensive, making the trucks themselves so expensive they will sell poorly, and GM won’t be making much of a profit on them anyway.

    No, GM would rather stick to making big, stinky, oversized trucks, and then they will lobby against all green regulations that could be seen to be an impediment to selling these things.

    • hobofats@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      honestly this is looking more like the truth. they thought they could pretend to be pivoting to EVs while trying to “prove” that they wouldn’t be feasible over ICE vehicles, then when Bolt sales took off they panicked and canceled it, only to bring it back when more federal money was thrown at it.

      • chr1spe@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, they invested 10s of billions of dollars in constructing factories to “pretend”… They canceled the Bolt because they expected Ultium to ramp faster. They couldn’t ramp Ultium as fast as they had wanted to because of a delay with a supplier for the equipment used to make modules and packs.

    • delebojr@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol, if this was a “smear campaign,” they wouldn’t have spent billions developing a modular EV platform and so many EV vehicles. They would have take the Ford route of slapping batteries in their gas platforms (Mach-E & Lightning), if anything at all.

      I have no doubt that they are serious about EVs (they’ve been trying every few decades since the early 1900s, but the tech just hasn’t been there until now), but it’s clear they’re facing some set backs that are definitely not part of their plan.

      I think we should spend more time judging companies who aren’t trying like Toyota, Stellantis, etc.

  • Impressive_Returns@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    GM is fucked. First it’s the all of the defective Volts with the Shift to Park defect which there is NO fix for. Then the Battery issue with the Bolts. GM is being sued buy customers and having to give customers FULL purchase price refunds plus attorney’s fees which is about $300k per car.

    • DrXaos@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re doing that. The Bolt 2.0 will use a CATL LFP pack.

      Note: not Ultium!

      I predict the Bolt will be much more popular than their Ultiums, which will be overly expensive and potentially unreliable.

      • in_allium@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Aha. Does that mean they will be ineligible for a rebate?

        I hope this thing comes out soon – it could be an ideal vehicle for me if it’s equally affordable and practical.

    • iqisoverrated@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Make it DCFC faster

      Do nothing else

      Profit

      Problem is that charging speed is dependent on battery size (and type). To make the Bolt charge faster you have to put in a way better (and more expensive) battery. Which negates the ‘Profit’ part unless you make it more expensive.

    • Deepthunkd@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m pretty sure the bolt was a compliance car, and they never actually made any money off of it.

      • yoyoyoyoyoyoymo@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I remember them pitching it as a Model 3 competitor. They were too EV naive to understand all the reasons that it didn’t really compete. DCFC was literally optional (why would people want to road trip EVs?).

        It didn’t help that most people that I showed it to thought it was ugly. I never minded the appearance, but it wasn’t a selling point.

    • trevize1138@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Why doesn’t the QB just throw a touchdown pass each time?”

      If it were that simple to profit they’d have done it.

      • Specialist-Document3@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is powerful circular logic. Literally something that hasn’t been done must not be profitable because they would have already done it in order to discover its profitability.

        But how do you think they would know that it’s profitable if they’ve never done it? Do you really think they’re that much smarter than you? Because they do “market research”, which is why GM has never made a bad car before?

        Maybe just recognize that they have no clue like the rest of us; they’re just the ones with control of the decisions being made.

      • manzana192tarantula@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the correct response to almost every poster in this sub. Armchair consultant, engineers, battery chemistry experts, manufacturing experts, powertrain design engineers, etc etc etc