Ford Says It Will Lose $3 Billion on EVs This Year, but Sales Are Rising
The company forecasts increased profits from its internal-combustion and commercial business, while losses from EV sales continue to grow.
www.caranddriver.com
Ford loses 3 billion on EV
- Thread starter Trav
- Start date
www.caranddriver.com
OK-sales are rising? Does that mean Ford will lose even more??
I bet the same thing happened when buggy makers first started building cars.
Maybe if they should change their lineup, up the quality on their Flagship product they'd up profits in the more successful aspects of their business. Wake up Ford!!
Ford Says It Will Lose $3 Billion on EVs This Year, but Sales Are Rising
The company forecasts increased profits from its internal-combustion and commercial business, while losses from EV sales continue to grow.
Telsa was at an operating loss for almost a decade.
I know, but in the case of Ford they have a somewhat profitable ICE division. Which IMO is slowly going down the toilet, they should try to improve that too. There are still a lot of people who won't own an EV,
and that's still a large market.Right but they're taking losses on the EV business because they're investing in additional manufacturing capacity and changes in battery tech. There's consumer demand for a Ford EV.I know, but in the case of Ford they have a somewhat profitable ICE division. Which IMO is slowly going down the toilet, they should try to improve that too. There are still a lot of people who won't own an EV,
They were pumped full of "free" government money. There wouldn't be a Tesla on the road today if they weren't. Pay me to lose money. I assure you I won't disappoint you. Vegas is only 2-1/2 hours away.
Sales mean nothing if there is no profit associated with it. Our government paid companies on a "Cost Plus" business model during World War II, in order to support manufacturing during the war.
Adjusted for inflation that war cost the U.S. taxpayer over $4 TRILLION dollars. Ronald Reagan was the first U.S. President who didn't have to pay off WW II debt. Do you think Tesla is ever going to pay it back? Don't hold your breath.
I know, the business man in me says wake up Ford before you start losing on both fronts, EV and ICE.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,485
I think the Escort was the top car in the 80’s and the Taurus in the 90’s - or they were close. The Explorer was the top family SUV at some point. If anyone can find a way to squander a lead it’s Ford.
I know you're not going to like this but Tesla paid back their $400M govt loan in 2013. In any case Tesla remained afloat because they sold millions in carbon credits every quarter.
There wouldn't be a lot of companies today if the USG didn't bail them out such as GM and Chrysler.
IMO if it were only Ford I'd say you have a point, but everyone is moving towards EV and hybridization. Ford seems to have always been a problem child no matter what they do. In any case they still made a profit. They just made less of a profit because of their EV teething pains unlike their rivals (GM, VW, etc)
Last edited:
Yes, they're all moving towards the EV, but imo it is a little premature to lose focus what is making them money now. The profitable segment can fund the EV business. If what makes them money goes down the ****ter, there won't be an EV business. IMO Ford has one foot on a banana peel and the other is over a grave.
"Carbon Credits"....... Yet another scam created by none other than Al Gore. If you want to use him as a "business model", I rest my case.
Pointing to GM and Chrysler bailouts is simply trying to justify bad behaviour, by pointing to other bad behaviour. In World War 2 we were fighting on 2 fronts for our nation's very existence.
Besides, one could argue Lee Iacocca saved Chrysler, not the government. Many stockholders back then would back that argument. It was he who made the successful argument to the government, "You either pay me now, or pay them later". Referring to the fact he would have had to lay off thousands who would have went straight to the unemployment line.
Paying companies to manufacture for the World War II war effort, is not the same as fronting an upstart company, so they can produce shiny new battery powered toys for some well tanned, Armani suited California executive, to show off when he pulls into the company parking lot.
And yet here we are, years later, and EV car companies are still losing money, all while trying to turn a profit making a product that occupies less than 2% of the total market, and would be completely useless to many others.....
I won't even get into the inability of our nation's power grid, that in its present state, is incapable of keeping them on the road.......But not to worry because, "sales are increasing".
When Mullaly righted the ship at Ford he got out with an 18 million dollar 'golden parachute' IIRC. I guess he realized that the automobile building business is very competitive and it's hard to compete against SK etc...even when you move manufacturing to Mexico. I think one of the problems with our American business system is that CEOs are 'mercenaries' who aren't thinking long-term but rather looking at how they can make a killing before bailing out. (I think many of our elected officials are doing the same thing.)
PS: The Fusion was a very good car (much better than the Malibu IMO) but Ford wouldn't invest in keeping up with the competition and were happy to be a 'pick-up truck' and SUV company.
Carbon credits are an attempt to address negative externalities with regards CO2 emissions. It's essentially a way for consumers to pay for pollution which they didn't have to pay for in the past.
My point is that govts bailout companies all the time. The reasoning is irrelevant. In any case I'm talking the most recent bailouts of 2008.
What does WW2 have to do with this?
The idea behind developmental subsidies is to temporarily reduce the initial per unit costs so that a manufacturer can be given time to scale up and offer lower priced models in the future.
It took Tesla over 10 years to turn a profit so what exactly are you expecting from current EV companies? Some EV divisions within legacy automakers are profitable btw (ex VW, GM, BMW, etc).
Last edited:
Except that the cars were built by new companies. And most of the buggy makers simply went under.
The problem is quite simple. The raw batteries and complex electrical components are expensive. The news is full of "good" reports, noting that lithium prices have come down 20% this year. They fail to mention the previous 30% increase in cost.
Any way we look at it, the price per KWh was on a general trend down for the last 2 decades and appears to have leveled out. In fact, the price per "battery pack" has fluctuated up a bit, likely due to more complex cooling requirements and modular designs. We are still well above $100 per KWh, despite predictions saying otherwise.
Possibly more interesting is that Tesla produces the least expensive battery packs, at $132 per KWh. Meaning that we can't easily calculate the real world price of GM's 200KWh or Ram's 230KWh packs. I suspect both hover well above $40,000.
Also of note, automotive battery energy density has not improved at predicted rates, for practical reasons of reliability. Manufacturers simply install more cells to get more capacity.
Any way we look at it, the price per KWh was on a general trend down for the last 2 decades and appears to have leveled out. In fact, the price per "battery pack" has fluctuated up a bit, likely due to more complex cooling requirements and modular designs. We are still well above $100 per KWh, despite predictions saying otherwise.
Possibly more interesting is that Tesla produces the least expensive battery packs, at $132 per KWh. Meaning that we can't easily calculate the real world price of GM's 200KWh or Ram's 230KWh packs. I suspect both hover well above $40,000.
Also of note, automotive battery energy density has not improved at predicted rates, for practical reasons of reliability. Manufacturers simply install more cells to get more capacity.
Last edited:
You are correct and that is why Tesla lost money for over TEN years before showing a profit. That wasnt until around 2021 that they did and most of the profit was from carbon credits.
I can see some in here understand. This goes for any business you cant have a profit until you build the equipment and factories to make the product that you are going to profit from.
Simple stuff, but mass media headlines and social platforms distort every day business activities and practices for a "click"
Sorry translated =
All car and truck production with an ICE show increasing profit margins, EV production showing greater loss do to expansion of manufacturing facilities. Yet Ford will have 13 BILLION dollars in profit from ICE operations that will easily cover the 3 billion in projected losses from EV manufacturing.
Last edited:
D