Ford Cuts Mach-E prices by thousands

No one mentions the real reason hitting EV sales hard, sharply increased interest rates. People buy on payment not on price directly….also coupled is pent demand waned for new vehicles a scarcity a few years ago.
 
SammyChevelleTypeS3 said:
I have to wonder just what could possibly have influenced the likes of FORD & others to jump into the EV game with so much investment when they knew deep down it was a big mistake (just not quite ready for prime time yet). Several companies are telling the sad stories all over about the losses it has cost them thru investments and cars collecting dust at dealers across the land. It’s very hard to MAKE folks want a product they do not see makes sense for their individual situations even when it works for some others.
Click to expand...
Three letters - your EPA requirements are forcing EVs. Auto manufacturers have no choice.
But …
Due to the high cost and low public acceptance of EVs they are talking about delaying a 2030 requirement and pushing it back to 2035

This is just one link there is a ton of information on it if you just do a search on the subject.
It’s important to know the electric vehicle push was not from the manufacturers of automobiles, but it was the effort to comply with upcoming government regulations.
Not in this link but a recent story in the last few days has talked of the administration of pushing back the requirements because they’re not going to come close at this point due to the high prices and public resistance.

You don’t have to listen to the audio you can just click on the link and read the story.
Here is a quote from the story and it’s available from every source in the media not just this one.

“The new standards are so strict that, according to the EPA's estimates, up to 67% of new vehicles sold in 2032 may have to be electric in order for carmakers to be in compliance.”

 
Last edited:
alarmguy said:
Three letters - your EPA requirements are forcing EVs. Auto manufacturers have no choice.
But …
Due to the high cost and low public acceptance of EVs they are talking about delaying a 2030 requirement and pushing it back to 2035

This is just one link there is a ton of information on it if you just do a search on the subject.
It’s important to know the electric vehicle push was not from the manufacturers of automobiles, but it was the effort to comply with upcoming government regulations.
Not in this link but a recent story in the last few days has talked of the administration of pushing back the requirements because they’re not going to come close at this point due to the high prices and public resistance.

You don’t have to listen to the audio you can just click on the link and read the story.
Here is a quote from the story and it’s available from every source in the media not just this one.

“The new standards are so strict that, according to the EPA's estimates, up to 67% of new vehicles sold in 2032 may have to be electric in order for carmakers to be in compliance.”

Click to expand...

There's a chance things might change by the end of this year. In any event I could see 2035 easily being pushed to 2040 or even 2050 while they continue to figure out what to do with the grid.
 
alarmguy said:
Three letters - your EPA requirements are forcing EVs. Auto manufacturers have no choice.
But …
Due to the high cost and low public acceptance of EVs they are talking about delaying a 2030 requirement and pushing it back to 2035

This is just one link there is a ton of information on it if you just do a search on the subject.
It’s important to know the electric vehicle push was not from the manufacturers of automobiles, but it was the effort to comply with upcoming government regulations.
Not in this, but a recent story in the last few days has talked in the administration of pushing back the requirements because they’re not going to come close at this point due to the high prices and public resistance.

You don’t have to listen to the audio you can just click on the link and read the story.
Here is a quote from the story and it’s available from every source in the media not just this one.

“The new standards are so strict that, according to the EPA's estimates, up to 67% of new vehicles sold in 2032 may have to be electric in order for carmakers to be in compliance.”

Click to expand...

I'll play devils advocate. Please don't be offended.

If they were so in tune with the coming requirements - why did they design a vehicle that wouldn't meet the tax credit requirements - which GM and others did or are trying to do.

Also - EPA MPG estimates have been going up for decades. It doesn't have to be EV - others are doing it with hybrid or plug in hybrid.

My opinion is Jim Farley - who is banker raised and Georgetown educated - doesn't have a clue. He wanted to jump on the Tesla craze - which was fueled by pandemic money and decided to do it with a 4 door mustang - which few families would buy even if it were any good. Complete management failure. The dealers knew they wouldn't sell, which is why they were fighting it from the start.
 
Last edited:
SC Maintenance said:
I'll play devils advocate. Please don't be offended.

If they were so in tune with the coming requirements - why did they design a vehicle that wouldn't meet the tax credit requirements - which GM and others did or are trying to do.

Also - EPA MPG estimates have been going up for decades. It doesn't have to be EV - others are doing it with hybrid or plug in hybrid.

My opinion is Jim Farley - who is banker raised and Georgetown educated - doesn't have a clue. He wanted to jump on the Tesla craze - which was fueled by pandemic money and decided to do it with a 4 door mustang - which few families would buy even if it were any good. Complete management failure. The dealers knew they wouldn't sell, which is why they were fighting it from the start.
Click to expand...
Who is they?
This isn’t specific to Ford every manufacturer in the world has cut back plans.
Why haven’t they done something sooner?
Because you can’t get cost-effective parts in the United States, and this requirement only came up a year or two ago.

Let’s not forget the American people don’t want electric vehicles in most cases.

The biggest name out there Tesla is having the same issues. They have slashed profit margins on a scale that’s almost unprecedented in such a short period of time.

Just so you know, I’m not offended at all. I just answered a question and posted the link for the person that I answered the question for.. this person asked, why did the big traditional manufacturers get into EV’s in the first place and the answer was government regulations.
 
alarmguy said:
Who is they?
This isn’t specific to Ford every manufacturer in the world has cut back plans.
Why haven’t they done something sooner?
Because you can’t get cost-effective parts in the United States, and this requirement only came up a year or two ago.

Let’s not forget the American people don’t want electric vehicles in most cases.

The biggest name out there Tesla is having the same issues. They have slashed profit margins on a scale that’s almost unprecedented in such a short period of time.

Just so you know, I’m not offended at all. I just answered a question and posted the link for the person that I answered the question for.. this person asked, why did the big traditional manufacturers get into EV’s in the first place and the answer was government regulations.
Click to expand...
"they" would be Ford and Jim Farley specifically. CEO's get paid millions to to predict the future. That's it. Farley failed. Given the dealers at the time of launch told him it wouldn't work, he wouldn't listen. He also wouldn't pay attention to see people wanted hybrid mavericks - they could have sold many more than they have. Its a management failure.

Toyota hasn't cut back plans. They continue on the hybrid / plug in hybrid model. A year ago everyone said they were way behind. Possibly Toyota management has driven a few cars and grew up in a middle class family and has a clue.

Say what you want about Musk - and I won't buy a Tesla either - but Musk is a visionary. He invented the entire modern EV industry on his own. Yes, there earnings have fallen a lot - but are still the highest in the car industry by a mile.

You yourself have lamented on buying a Bolt. It seems like a practical afordable family car. American's don't want to be told what to buy. They could care what power them however. If they could get a car powered by banana's they wouldn't care - assuming there was an ample and affordable supply of banana's.

Ford upper management failure. IMHO.
 
SC Maintenance said:
"they" would be Ford and Jim Farley specifically. CEO's get paid millions to to predict the future. That's it. Farley failed. Given the dealers at the time of launch told him it wouldn't work, he wouldn't listen. He also wouldn't pay attention to see people wanted hybrid mavericks - they could have sold many more than they have. Its a management failure.

Toyota hasn't cut back plans. They continue on the hybrid / plug in hybrid model. A year ago everyone said they were way behind. Possibly Toyota management has driven a few cars and grew up in a middle class family and has a clue.

Say what you want about Musk - and I won't buy a Tesla either - but Musk is a visionary. He invented the entire modern EV industry on his own. Yes, there earnings have fallen a lot - but are still the highest in the car industry by a mile.

You yourself have lamented on buying a Bolt. It seems like a practical afordable family car. American's don't want to be told what to buy. They could care what power them however. If they could get a car powered by banana's they wouldn't care - assuming there was an ample and affordable supply of banana's.

Ford upper management failure. IMHO.
Click to expand...
Long story short imo Farley should be filing for unemployment. No comment on Musk other than there was a time I liked him.
 
SC Maintenance said:
"they" would be Ford and Jim Farley specifically. CEO's get paid millions to to predict the future. That's it. Farley failed. Given the dealers at the time of launch told him it wouldn't work, he wouldn't listen. He also wouldn't pay attention to see people wanted hybrid mavericks - they could have sold many more than they have. Its a management failure.

Toyota hasn't cut back plans. They continue on the hybrid / plug in hybrid model. A year ago everyone said they were way behind. Possibly Toyota management has driven a few cars and grew up in a middle class family and has a clue.

Say what you want about Musk - and I won't buy a Tesla either - but Musk is a visionary. He invented the entire modern EV industry on his own. Yes, there earnings have fallen a lot - but are still the highest in the car industry by a mile.

You yourself have lamented on buying a Bolt. It seems like a practical afordable family car. American's don't want to be told what to buy. They could care what power them however. If they could get a car powered by banana's they wouldn't care - assuming there was an ample and affordable supply of banana's.

Ford upper management failure. IMHO.
Click to expand...

Since Farley is at the top he takes the blame.

Is he the root of the failure, or was he given bad info by his trusted management team all telling him " Jim we've got this".

I give the guy credit for coming onto shows like Autoline daily.
It took a lot of balls for him to admit they underestimated how tricky fast charging is.

Most guys hide in the weeds, at least Farley owns it.
 
alarmguy said:
Who is they?
This isn’t specific to Ford every manufacturer in the world has cut back plans.
Why haven’t they done something sooner?
Because you can’t get cost-effective parts in the United States, and this requirement only came up a year or two ago.

Let’s not forget the American people don’t want electric vehicles in most cases.

The biggest name out there Tesla is having the same issues. They have slashed profit margins on a scale that’s almost unprecedented in such a short period of time.

Just so you know, I’m not offended at all. I just answered a question and posted the link for the person that I answered the question for.. this person asked, why did the big traditional manufacturers get into EV’s in the first place and the answer was government regulations.
Click to expand...
You answered your question in your previous post (see below). Worldwide automakers were put on notice pre-pandemic that the phaseout of ICE was a goal in order to reduce a huge contributor to global emissions. China, EU, California all made pronouncements and set dates. The fact is that Ford sells vehicles worldwide and they cannot predict the future. CEO's like Farley had no choice. They either choose to act on what the expected plan is or ignore it hoping that implementation is delayed. People can argue that firing him over either action would be justifiable. I suppose you could blame Farley for launching their EV under the Mustang label. That's about it.

Automakers have no control over politicians, interest rates or the press which generates revenue by politicizing/demonizing EV's.

alarmguy said:
Three letters - your EPA requirements are forcing EVs. Auto manufacturers have no choice.
But …
Due to the high cost and low public acceptance of EVs they are talking about delaying a 2030 requirement and pushing it back to 2035

This is just one link there is a ton of information on it if you just do a search on the subject.
It’s important to know the electric vehicle push was not from the manufacturers of automobiles, but it was the effort to comply with upcoming government regulations.
Not in this link but a recent story in the last few days has talked of the administration of pushing back the requirements because they’re not going to come close at this point due to the high prices and public resistance.

You don’t have to listen to the audio you can just click on the link and read the story.
Here is a quote from the story and it’s available from every source in the media not just this one.

“The new standards are so strict that, according to the EPA's estimates, up to 67% of new vehicles sold in 2032 may have to be electric in order for carmakers to be in compliance.”

Click to expand...
 
Getting back on topic here, am I correct in assuming that CAFE standards are based upon production figures for a model year as opposed to sales? Could it be that the production of the Mach-E serves some nefarious purpose?
 
Astro_Guy said:
Getting back on topic here, am I correct in assuming that CAFE standards are based upon production figures for a model year as opposed to sales? Could it be that the production of the Mach-E serves some nefarious purpose?
Click to expand...
Im "pretty sure" the way it works is that the EPA mileage of all the offerings for sale when tallied and divided by the number of them come to a corporate average.

In that the EPA uses MPGE as an EV's fuel economy number, even one an EV in a mix will raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy.

If by nefarious you mean it raises Fords number, the answer would be yes. It basically tosses something like a 100 MPG car in the mix.
 
UncleDave said:
If by nefarious you mean it raises Fords number, the answer would be yes. It basically tosses something like a 100 MPG car in the mix.
Click to expand...
What I meant was did Ford intentionally overproduce the Mach-E in order to drive down their CAFE number AND allow themselves to sell more of their profitable large SUVs and light trucks without fear of an EPA penalty? In other words, was this massive oversupply of the Mach-E actually planned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

john_pifer
New Shotgun Day - Mossberg 590A1 Retrograde!
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
12K
Quantico
OVERKILL
  • Locked
Ontario: Energy has never been cheaper...
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
HTSS_TR
H
  • Locked
Tesla could be profitable if it wanted to
2
Replies
30
Views
6K
HTSS_TR
The Critic
  • Locked
Ford To Reduce MPG Est on C-Max Hybrid By 10%.
2
Replies
21
Views
7K
friendly_jacek
S
  • Locked
End of ethanol subsidy will raise the price of gas
2 3
Replies
54
Views
19K
Samilcar
Back
Top