I think this is exactly right.

People cross-shop against different categories, and a huge number of F150 customers don’t need a truck. They buy them because they’re the best value for their needs, and I bet many of them would be driving large three-row SUVs if the price was similar. Same thing for me; I wanted an EV that could pull my old boat when I was looking at the end of last year. The Lightning had a long wait and high price, so I went with the Model Y for $20K less.

After three years of driving EVs, a new ICE isn’t really on the menu. I’m hooked on the low operating cost and ease of use, so I’m looking at anything with an electric powertrain that can pull 6,000 lbs and deliver at least 140 miles of range pulling my trailers. If not the Lightning, it’ll likely be a Rivian R1T, used Model X, Cybertruck, the new Kia EV9, or even a BMW iX. I’m focused on the used market, but I’m convinced most buyers look at a similarly diverse group of vehicles when they make a purchase.

The Lightning is competing against ICE full-size trucks, and people will buy them if the value is right. There’s a price where the average pickup buyer will be willing to make the switch, at which point they’ll sell in droves. Tesla found that price with their latest round of price cuts two weeks after I bought mine. Ford needs to find that price point and sell them at a profit. I think they’ll get there.

 

Most people forget, or don't know that Tesla earns more selling carbon credits than they do in any other endeavor. Being a "green" company, Tesla gets carbon credits from the government. The legacy car manufacturers don't, so they need to buy credits from companies, such as Tesla, to offset their carbon output. Between carbon credit sales and stock prices, Tesla could almost give cars away and remain profitable. No current domestic company can fairly compete with them in the EV share of the market.

 

Good point, that certainly illustrates yet another aspect, in addition to CAFE, Emissions standards, tax credit, etc ways that the .gov is picking winners and losers.

But try telling that to the EV fans who keep telling us EVs are ready to stand on their own mertis.

 

That’s just not true. Regulatory credits are just over 2% of their annual income. They make cars much cheaper than their competition, which is how they afford to sell them so cheaply. Everyone is trying to adjust their manufacturing processes to compete, which will eventually lower costs. We’re already seeing this with Ford’s recent price cuts.

Don’t just take my word for it: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...s_supplementar

 

Not trying to be ornery here but urging caution interpreting this chart. The chart is for revenue...not net income. I'll guess that revenue from regulatory credits is all profit while revenue from sales is not all profit.

Like most topics, the truth takes a little more digging.

 

I guess I’m. Unicorn. My First EV was a new 2015 Nissan Leaf. It was my EV gateway drug. I was hooked on EVs.

Look at my signature for my current stable. 3 EVs and a Big Diesel tow vehicle for the RV. All paid for from my reserves.

I will admit that if it weren’t for the Federal Tax Credit I possibly would only be driving Hybrids.

 

1.77 billion is 1.77 billion that they didn’t have to incur much expense besides processing the transactions. That’s thousands each vehicle in the US that they can cut from price and maintain the same profit per unit.

 

That’s all true, but they don’t make more from credits than they do anything else. It’s not even close, and they certainly can’t afford to give cars away from what they make on them.

Tesla’s net profit last year was $3.7 billion. Those regulatory credits were a substantial part, but it shows they can make and sell relatively inexpensive EVs at a profit. Those lower prices are attracting consumers who would have bought ICE cars, and the same will happen to trucks when the value is right.

 

Look I know I’m king deleted and feel much disliked around these parts. My name actually means simplicity- as In, delete the things that are not necessary- as in - enough is best. But these EV’s just don’t make sense- not when the world is falling apart. My fiesta nets 1000 miles with 22 gallons of fuel- so for $88 a month I drive anywhere I can think of - got the workhorse which gets 20 mpg loaded. So for $200 a month I’m good- and most others are too- holding onto their **** box until what? That’s all we can afford!! I cannot and will not get another 600-900 a month payment to be limited on range

looked up the range on the latest Econoline electric and I can barely get my trailer out of storage and take it to the job before I need a charge. None of this makes sense to me anymore

 

If they don’t make sense for your situation, then you shouldn’t buy one. They don’t make sense for everyone, and I’m the first to admit that.

I’ve been driving EVs in semi-rural Minnesota for over three years, and I won’t be going back. The Lightning has better range than my Model Y, and I’ve covered over 28,000 miles over the last 11 months with it. That’s including 7,400 miles pulling trailers on road trips, which is why I’m interested in switching for a Lightning in the coming months. The Supercharger network brought me back to Tesla, but that’s going to be open to Ford in a few months, so traveling won’t be a problem.

I usually drive 2,000 miles a month, which costs me about $50 in electricity. A Lightning will be more, but a far cry from paying for gas, and the EV is far more comfortable in the winter.

 

ok what about the payment for the 70k truck? It doesn’t make economic sense. If you have 100’s of thousands to spend then yeah I get it- more power to ya. But for the average American- nope

 

Lightning efficiency is about 2.1 m/kw. My Model Y Long range is about 3.3 m/kW. The lightning costs about 1-1/2 as much to feed it. Also I charge at home with a 60 amp Tesla Wall connector output 48 amps / 11.4 kw. The Tesla recharges faster at Super Chargers and at home.

The announcement that Tesla is opening Suoer Chargers to Lightning is a game changer.

 

so almost half of their net profit comes from EV credit. I considerate that pretty significant.

 

Sure, but I was replying to this:

Tesla sold 1.31 million cars last year, so their regulatory profit is about $1,350 per car.

 

I think a huge concern for those who are watching their money more closely is, when does the $80K+ Lightning pay for itself as compared to the $60K F-150?

I could definitely benefit from a small EV just for commuting to work but that adds a third vehicle and another payment all for what, to save two gallons of gas a day and two oil changes per year.

I'm seeing the benefits for some but the price has to get down to where I feel as though I'm coming out ahead.