That's what gets me. I end up putting too many miles on a vehicle in random spurts that could defeat me on a lease depending on my needs at the time. I wanted to keep my truck, but I was over the miles as well so it saved me from that. While it was a lease it didn't really feel like mine and I know it was in my possession and driving it was no different, but the point that I would have to eventually turn it in made me buy it out early because it just felt like a long term rental.
What is the endgame on all these super-cheap EV leases?
- Thread starter Brons2
- Start date
You can look at Nissan's 1st gen Leaf and find the answer. Most of the lease return has residual value way above market value once they find out the battery depreciation problem, and Nissan was throwing a lot of money at the leases to try to get them to buy off at the end. Most ended up not and Nissan lost a lot of money trying to sell them used.
Honda Clarity EV was meant to be scraped after the initial 4 year lease, but they were build well and they decided to lease it again used for 2 more years with insurance paid for at a good price.
I think it depends on the cars, many would likely be in the money for the dealer / manufacturer in the end they can be sold for CPO.
Honda Clarity EV was meant to be scraped after the initial 4 year lease, but they were build well and they decided to lease it again used for 2 more years with insurance paid for at a good price.
I think it depends on the cars, many would likely be in the money for the dealer / manufacturer in the end they can be sold for CPO.
The industry is in trouble, USA EV sales growth in the toilet and overseas even worse. Furthermore even today, analysts just lowered Tesla's expected numbers to be released Oct 2. The big guys let us know this over a year ago? When they started slashing new product introductions and the legacy EV company Tesla was showing a huge fall in growth.
Spruce = https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fewer-consumers-planning-buy-evs-071800468.html
Spruce = https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fewer-consumers-planning-buy-evs-071800468.html
Last edited:
Hmm. Well, Hyun/Kia have introduced vehicles that charge faster on an 800V architecture, and consumers are responding, or at least ATMO they are responding. If you give the people what they want (faster charging in this example), hum the story seems different than the prevailing logic. Funny how that works.
"Kia, benefiting from smart design and affordable pricing, saw 17,980 EVs sold in the US during the second quarter, up 135% from 7,636 of the same period in 2023"
https://www.autoweek.com/news/a61927470/electric-vehicle-sales-winners-and-losers/
People are going to believe what they want to believe. That's what the US and much of the free world has devolved to, a world of 100% confirmation bias. Heck, I'm not even going to deny it in my own case, it's obvious in this post, I went and searched for some good news. But at any rate, it's popular in media right now to ding EV sales, even in supposedly left leaning publications that are otherwise pro-EV. I can find negative articles even on EV fanboy sites. So anyway.
I think it is too soon to say buyers are responding do to any technology such as faster charging.
I do think lower price of these expensive cars will win sales over the long term and that is what is driving Kia sales.
But Im not getting the "bias" thing. Im a numbers person, all I care about. Kia was #4 in sales, nothing more. I dont know what that number was before this quarter, its not mentioned here.
I would just add that some mfrs had to sell/lease them perhaps due to some state requirements. This thread reminded me of the Fiat 500e.
https://www.reuters.com/article/bus...ont-buy-fiat-500e-electric-car-idUSL1N0O71MS/
"Speaking at a conference in Washington on Wednesday, Marchionne said Tesla Motors Inc was the only company making money on electric cars and that was because of the higher price point for its Model S sedan. Decrying the federal and state mandates that push manufacturers to build electric cars, Marchionne said he hoped to sell the minimum number of 500e cars possible.
"I hope you don't buy it because every time I sell one it costs me $14,000," he said to the audience at the Brookings Institution about the 500e. "I'm honest enough to tell you that."
The gasoline-powered Fiat 500 starts at almost $17,300 including delivery charges, while the 500e starts at $32,650 before federal tax credits. Consumers are not willing to pay a price that covers Fiat's costs so it loses money on the 500e.
Through April, the automaker sold 11,514 of the 500 cars in the United States this year, down about 15 percent from the same period last year. The company does not break out 500e sales.
"I will sell the (minimum) of what I need to sell and not one more," Marchionne said of the 500e."
https://www.reuters.com/article/bus...ont-buy-fiat-500e-electric-car-idUSL1N0O71MS/
"Speaking at a conference in Washington on Wednesday, Marchionne said Tesla Motors Inc was the only company making money on electric cars and that was because of the higher price point for its Model S sedan. Decrying the federal and state mandates that push manufacturers to build electric cars, Marchionne said he hoped to sell the minimum number of 500e cars possible.
"I hope you don't buy it because every time I sell one it costs me $14,000," he said to the audience at the Brookings Institution about the 500e. "I'm honest enough to tell you that."
The gasoline-powered Fiat 500 starts at almost $17,300 including delivery charges, while the 500e starts at $32,650 before federal tax credits. Consumers are not willing to pay a price that covers Fiat's costs so it loses money on the 500e.
Through April, the automaker sold 11,514 of the 500 cars in the United States this year, down about 15 percent from the same period last year. The company does not break out 500e sales.
"I will sell the (minimum) of what I need to sell and not one more," Marchionne said of the 500e."
