Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Cor van de Water via EV]

One of the big draws for nEVs in Europe comes from the market position they are 
in:
These speed limited vehicles can be operated *without drivers license* and if 
you know
that to get a DL in Europe will often cost you $3000+ in fees and also that 
youth cannot get
a DL until they are 18, but they *can* operate a NEV or similar speed-limited 
ICE
with just a simple moped license when they are 16, then you know that the youth 
and the elderly
who no longer can get (or never had) a DL are prime markets for these vehicles,
in contrast to the USA where a NEV still requires a full DL.

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless

office +1 408 383 7626  Skype: cor_van_de_water
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130  private: cvandewater.info
www.proxim.com


This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and 
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received this 
message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is 
prohibited.


-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of brucedp5 via EV
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:24 AM
To: ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...



* Keep discussions EV related *

Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some coming 
trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers.
With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its buying 
habits. 

One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge 
inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs ice. 
But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to smaller 
(non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... 


http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models
Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models By Charles Fleming Los Angeles 
Times  06/15/15 ...

While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in version 
of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv] by 2016. 
Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new battery electric 
and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016

"This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small, fuel-efficient 
cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small, fuel-efficient 
cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in keeping with where 
the market is going, away from hybrids and toward smaller, more efficient 
[ice]." ...
[© Daily Democrat]
...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062


The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the 
automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the 
automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their 
change with 'buyer demand'.

IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's 
part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell a 
few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers'
pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more), and 
their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker.

Yet in:


http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877
Honda Accord goes hybrid
16 June 2015 ...
"We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief 
Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth at 
the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ...


Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly 
electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a profit 
to be made (money talks).


But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate 
smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of years ago as a prelude to 
the U.S. administration change that happened at about the same time (which 
fought the CARB mandate tooth and nail). 

So, does brick-and-mortar (old-school) automakers' marketing changes signal 
they are betting on the coming elections to favor their 'non-plugin' way of 
thinking? ... (it looks that way from what I am reading).


Also, some will notice that I am including more nEVs (lower cost, 
sub-highway-speed EVs) in the newswires I post. Another change is that these 
nEVs are no longer just focused on lower income countries. TMC has long pushed 
that the only EV-market are nEVs. Now, other companies are selling nEVs because 
they are a lower-priced transportation solution that consumers enjoy. China 
buyers like low cost nEVs, and now Euro buyers are going to be offered the same 
de

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Ben Goren via EV]

On Jun 16, 2015, at 10:40 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV  
wrote:

> Many of these guys actively LIKE -- deliberately PREFER -- the noise, stink, 
> and grime that their ICEVs produce.  That may even be more important to them 
> than their actual performance.  They really DO have "gasoline in their 
> veins."   

I'm sure there're some examples of that...but all the reports I hear from, for 
example, the crowds that gather 'round the NEDRA member cars...at least 
outwardly, they're easily convinced that this is something to take seriously.

> If they really wanted to "fish where the fish are" with EVs, they'd have to 
> build something heavy, clumsy, and grossly inefficient, with a 50+ year old 
> chassis and drivetrain layout.  
> 
> That's because the #1 selling vehicle in the USA today is Ford's F-series 
> pickup truck.

Maybe, but perhaps not this coming generation of batteries, but definitely the 
generation after that...Ford will be able to build an electric F-series pickup 
that will be hugely superior to the gasoline version. It'll have more torque, 
more towing capacity, offer a built-in inverter to run power tools off of on 
job sites...and all those pickups parked in shopping malls with perfect paint 
jobs, even in the bed? The ones driven by the proverbial soon-to-be soccer moms 
and the guys they're dating? They might not say it out loud, but they'd really, 
really love the silent ride so they can listen to their tunes.

> I don't have any data, but I suspect that for a very long time, EVs will 
> share more buyers with the Prius than with the Mustang.  So for the 
> immediate future, successful EVs that stick to the conventional vehicle 
> model will tend to look and act more like a Prius than like a Mustang.

I suspect that the automakers will drag their heels on the performance EVs, 
despite all the bad press Tesla is giving their ICE versions on that front.

But I'll bet you a cup of coffee or other suitable beverage that the first high 
performance electric vehicle to come out of a major manufacturer is one that 
they simply won't be able to make fast enough and that becomes as iconic for 
future generations as the Mustang and Camaro have for the past few generations. 
The only real question is going to be who pulls that trigger first.

b&
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 16 Jun 2015 at 6:52, Ben Goren via EV wrote:

> Imagine if Ford made a ... 2017 electric Mustang ... The demand for
> *that* EV would be instant.. 

I guess that depends on how you define "demand."

You might indeed land some buyers.  But you have to remember a salient 
characteristic of most gearheads. It's an attitude that you probably don't 
share.   

Many of these guys actively LIKE -- deliberately PREFER -- the noise, stink, 
and grime that their ICEVs produce.  That may even be more important to them 
than their actual performance.  They really DO have "gasoline in their 
veins."   

These people will never buy an EV, full stop.  They'll never believe that 
EVs are superior in the very thing that they say is important to them -- raw 
acceleration -- even when EVs beating them on the track.  They'll keep right 
on trying to top EVs with their crude, dated ICE technology, until they're 
dead and gone along with their vehicles and the fuel to run them.  

But I also hear you suggesting that the automakers haven't really put their 
hearts (and marketing muscle) into their EVs, and there I agree.  

If they really wanted to "fish where the fish are" with EVs, they'd have to 
build something heavy, clumsy, and grossly inefficient, with a 50+ year old 
chassis and drivetrain layout.  

That's because the #1 selling vehicle in the USA today is Ford's F-series 
pickup truck.  Second place goes to the same damn thing wearing a bow-tie 
badge.  Third place goes to the same damn thing wearing a rampant bull 
badge.

Finally in 4th place we find a car, and it's the midsize Toyota Camry.  
Right below that is a small car, the Toyota Corolla.  There are no sporty 
cars or muscle cars anywhere in the list of top 30-selling vehicles.  

Vehicles are a saturated market.  If you want to sell one successfully, you 
pick a target buyer, preferably one not well served by the other vehicles 
now in the market, and build what he/she wants.  

This is why it probably DOESN'T make sense for the automakers to build EV 
pickups and muscle cars.  The people who buy those vehicles are less likely 
to see (or want to see) any advantage in electric drive.  For EVs to succeed 
as conventional vehicles (and that's another issue right there), they should 
have other characteristics that appeal to people who are open to the very 
idea of electric drive.

This is why the first generation Toyota Prius had mediocre sales and the 
second generation did much better.  For their second try, Toyota determined 
what kind of buyer they wanted and could capture, and tuned the Prius's 
size, features, and image to that buyer.  

I don't have any data, but I suspect that for a very long time, EVs will 
share more buyers with the Prius than with the Mustang.  So for the 
immediate future, successful EVs that stick to the conventional vehicle 
model will tend to look and act more like a Prius than like a Mustang.

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Sorry, didn't get a chance to finish.

You may be correct about EVs, but give it time - there's no turning back. The 
cost delta is shrinking, and some great cars are being produced that raise the 
bar - Tesla comes to mind. High cost, and maybe not as Musk had promised, but 
no boxy car.

And remember, the interest in the innovative Prius took awhile.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 16, 2015, at 6:52 AM, Ben Goren  wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 16, 2015, at 2:25 AM, Mark Abramowitz via EV  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their 
>> line based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that 
>> this is how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other 
>> fields?
> 
> Automakers also drive demand.
> 
> You know one of the big reasons people are buying ICE rather than EV? EVs are 
> perceived as wimpy oversized golf cars. And, save for Tesla, they're all made 
> as econoboxes, more or less. Even BMW, one of the icons of powerful luxury 
> vehicles...their EV is a dinky little thing that's smaller than the very 
> definition of wimpy econoboxes: the classic aircooled VW Bug.
> 
> Honestly, there's absolutely no reason why this should be so. Just look at 
> the Zombie 222 project to see how a few (not-so-)random schmucks can turn a 
> 50-year-old hunk of legendary Detroit steel into something faster than 
> anything that has _ever_ left a Detroit factory even to this day. And they'll 
> sell you one of your own for about the price of a Tesla.
> 
> If they can do that, what the hell is the problem with the big manufacturers? 
> It should be trivial for them to make electric versions of their own modern 
> production muscle cars -- and to make them absolutely smoke the ICE versions. 
> And sell them for less, after subsidies, than the top-of-the-line ICE 
> versions, and still with plenty of range for commuting.
> 
> Imagine if Ford made a fifteen-second SuperBowl commercial for the all-new 
> 2017 electric Mustang, consisting of nothing more than a drag race between it 
> and an ICE Dodge Hellcat. The demand for *that* EV would be instant...and 
> gasoline would suddenly be that old-n-busted stuff that gramps used to have 
> to drive to get twice a day uphill through the snow to put in his lame-ass 
> last-century slowboat. Electric or go home.
> 
> Great that Ford has electrified a Focus, that Honda has the Fit, Nissan the 
> Leaf, BMW the i3, Chevy the Spark, and so on. Wonderful little cars. And we 
> all know that there's a lot more to them than meets the eye.
> 
> But there's not a one of them that the archetypal 18-35 demographic would 
> pick to be seen in on a date. Those aren't even Mom cars...they're the sort 
> of thing bland generic middle-aged resigned-to-be-boring office drones drive 
> to their cube farms and back to their apartment complexes in quiet 
> desperation. Probably even with a prized red stapler hidden in the glove box.
> 
> ...and we're surprised that there's no demand, no excitement for EVs...why, 
> exactly?
> 
> b&
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I won't  argue with your fundamental principle, but certainly, of all the 
automakers, Honda has been one of the most responsible, if not the most, of all 
the automakers.


Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 16, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Robert Bruninga via EV  wrote:

>> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their
>> line based on consumer demand, or the most profit.
> 
> There is the problem.  Our collective failure to understand that our maximum
> approach to GREED and CONSUMPTION is simply unsustainable.
> 
> Maximizing Profit is pure greed especialy when it is done at the expense of
> our future.  Of course, no CEO is going to be popular with his board of
> directors unless he brings in the money.  But there is nothing in stone that
> says Maximum consumption of our environment has to be the only way to
> profit.
> 
> The best CEO's and companies will find a way to capitalize on the future and
> to bring their customers into this new way of thinking.
> 
> That is the challenge!
> 
> And note, it is all driven by "perceived consumer demand"... well THAT IS
> US.
> 
> So it is incumbent on each of us that see's the clarity of EV transportation
> as being one answer to future better living, should strive everyday to be
> ambassadors of this future.. to our friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc.
> They are the "demand" that drives greed.  WE must fix this.
> 
> Bob, WB4APR
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Ben Goren via EV]

On Jun 16, 2015, at 2:25 AM, Mark Abramowitz via EV  wrote:

> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their line 
> based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that this 
> is how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other fields?

Automakers also drive demand.

You know one of the big reasons people are buying ICE rather than EV? EVs are 
perceived as wimpy oversized golf cars. And, save for Tesla, they're all made 
as econoboxes, more or less. Even BMW, one of the icons of powerful luxury 
vehicles...their EV is a dinky little thing that's smaller than the very 
definition of wimpy econoboxes: the classic aircooled VW Bug.

Honestly, there's absolutely no reason why this should be so. Just look at the 
Zombie 222 project to see how a few (not-so-)random schmucks can turn a 
50-year-old hunk of legendary Detroit steel into something faster than anything 
that has _ever_ left a Detroit factory even to this day. And they'll sell you 
one of your own for about the price of a Tesla.

If they can do that, what the hell is the problem with the big manufacturers? 
It should be trivial for them to make electric versions of their own modern 
production muscle cars -- and to make them absolutely smoke the ICE versions. 
And sell them for less, after subsidies, than the top-of-the-line ICE versions, 
and still with plenty of range for commuting.

Imagine if Ford made a fifteen-second SuperBowl commercial for the all-new 2017 
electric Mustang, consisting of nothing more than a drag race between it and an 
ICE Dodge Hellcat. The demand for *that* EV would be instant...and gasoline 
would suddenly be that old-n-busted stuff that gramps used to have to drive to 
get twice a day uphill through the snow to put in his lame-ass last-century 
slowboat. Electric or go home.

Great that Ford has electrified a Focus, that Honda has the Fit, Nissan the 
Leaf, BMW the i3, Chevy the Spark, and so on. Wonderful little cars. And we all 
know that there's a lot more to them than meets the eye.

But there's not a one of them that the archetypal 18-35 demographic would pick 
to be seen in on a date. Those aren't even Mom cars...they're the sort of thing 
bland generic middle-aged resigned-to-be-boring office drones drive to their 
cube farms and back to their apartment complexes in quiet desperation. Probably 
even with a prized red stapler hidden in the glove box.

...and we're surprised that there's no demand, no excitement for EVs...why, 
exactly?

b&
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Robert Bruninga via EV]

> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their
> line based on consumer demand, or the most profit.

There is the problem.  Our collective failure to understand that our maximum
approach to GREED and CONSUMPTION is simply unsustainable.

Maximizing Profit is pure greed especialy when it is done at the expense of
our future.  Of course, no CEO is going to be popular with his board of
directors unless he brings in the money.  But there is nothing in stone that
says Maximum consumption of our environment has to be the only way to
profit.

The best CEO's and companies will find a way to capitalize on the future and
to bring their customers into this new way of thinking.

That is the challenge!

And note, it is all driven by "perceived consumer demand"... well THAT IS
US.

So it is incumbent on each of us that see's the clarity of EV transportation
as being one answer to future better living, should strive everyday to be
ambassadors of this future.. to our friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc.
They are the "demand" that drives greed.  WE must fix this.

Bob, WB4APR
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Some bold statements you put out there for discussion.

I find it ironic that you chose to pick on Honda, as opposed to any of the 
other automakers.

Growing up in Detroit, I remember Honda flipping the bird to the other auto 
makers by not only meeting the "infeasible" new pollution control standards 
that would require "expensive" catalytic converters, but did it without a 
catalytic converter. Honda also has other first in terms of leadership with low 
emission and energy efficient cars, that I'm sure any of their marketing 
materials will be happy to point out to you. And their limited production Fit 
EV has gotten rave reviews. 

Lastly, Honda went it alone in the U.S., producing CNG cars all alone, and saw 
the vagaries of the market, from the 2005s that just sat on the lots, to 2006, 
where they couldn't make enough, and later years, where you paid MSRP plus, to 
this last year, where sales have dropped - all following the price of gasoline. 
I know this so well because I have two of them, and regularly talk to my dealer 
about how sales and demand is going for these cars.

So I think that your criticisms are misplaced.

Since one of the articles requires a signin, I'm not sure what you think are 
misleading comments from Honda, but your own comment that there is not a shift 
back towards the big beasts isn't accurate. Check out recent sales reports from 
GM, which has a multitude of lines, and their earnings reports, which point to 
this shift in sales.

I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their line 
based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that this is 
how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other fields? How 
is that not "valid", as you put it? That's why we have mandates, and 
incentives. Some of these have even worked to allow companies like Tesla make a 
go at it. 

Also ironically, you miss the big news found in your first article - a new line 
of battery electrics. This was a stunner to me. I would have picked Honda to go 
to FCEVs-only for their ZEVs. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 16, 2015, at 12:24 AM, brucedp5 via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> * Keep discussions EV related *
> 
> Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some
> coming trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers.
> With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its
> buying habits. 
> 
> One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge
> inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs
> ice. But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to
> smaller (non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... 
> 
> 
> http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models
> Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models
> By Charles Fleming Los Angeles Times  06/15/15 ...
> 
> While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in
> version of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv]
> by 2016. Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new
> battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016
> 
> "This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small,
> fuel-efficient cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small,
> fuel-efficient cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in
> keeping with where the market is going, away from hybrids and toward
> smaller, more efficient [ice]." ...
> [© Daily Democrat]
> ...
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062
> 
> 
> The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the
> automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the
> automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their
> change with 'buyer demand'.
> 
> IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's
> part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell
> a few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers'
> pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more),
> and their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker.
> 
> Yet in:
> 
> 
> http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877
> Honda Accord goes hybrid
> 16 June 2015 ...
> "We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief
> Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth
> at the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ...
> 
> 
> Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly
> electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a
> profit to be made (money talks).
> 
> 
> But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate
> smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of year

[EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...

[brucedp5 via EV]

* Keep discussions EV related *

Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some
coming trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers.
With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its
buying habits. 

One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge
inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs
ice. But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to
smaller (non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... 


http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models
Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models
By Charles Fleming Los Angeles Times  06/15/15 ...

While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in
version of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv]
by 2016. Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new
battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016

"This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small,
fuel-efficient cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small,
fuel-efficient cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in
keeping with where the market is going, away from hybrids and toward
smaller, more efficient [ice]." ...
[© Daily Democrat]
...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062


The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the
automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the
automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their
change with 'buyer demand'.

IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's
part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell
a few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers'
pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more),
and their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker.

Yet in:


http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877
Honda Accord goes hybrid
16 June 2015 ...
"We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief
Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth
at the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ...


Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly
electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a
profit to be made (money talks).


But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate
smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of years ago as a prelude to
the U.S. administration change that happened at about the same time (which
fought the CARB mandate tooth and nail). 

So, does brick-and-mortar (old-school) automakers' marketing changes signal
they are betting on the coming elections to favor their 'non-plugin' way of
thinking? ... (it looks that way from what I am reading).


Also, some will notice that I am including more nEVs (lower cost,
sub-highway-speed EVs) in the newswires I post. Another change is that these
nEVs are no longer just focused on lower income countries. TMC has long
pushed that the only EV-market are nEVs. Now, other companies are selling
nEVs because they are a lower-priced transportation solution that consumers
enjoy. China buyers like low cost nEVs, and now Euro buyers are going to be
offered the same deal. For companies that sell nEVs, it is cheaper thus more
profitable for them plus there are less regulations on these lower-speed EV
to be hassled with. Sadly, none of these nEVs at this time are offered with
L2 charging which would make them a truly viable low-cost EV (a 50mi@30mph
nEV w/ a L2 6kW on-board charger= ~20mins to 60%SOC?).


EVangels should stay vigilant to know of these automaker marketing changes
and continue to promote the EV-cause no-matter what is thrown at us. Even if
it gets as bad as in the 2000's when automakers got-away-with not
making/offering any plugins at-all by just giving-away egolf-carts/nEVs.




For EVLN posts use:
http://evdl.org/evln/


{brucedp.150m.com}



--
View this message in context: 
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/OT-Change-in-automakers-direction-tp4676263.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at 
Nabble.com.
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)