Government Motors Volt Costs Taxpayers $250,000 per Vehicle

page: 20
25
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 


Unproven? Wow! So 15 plus years of development and research since the introduction of the EV1 way back in 1997 as it predates the Prius. So popular a car club formed and lost their bid to keep their cars and is the about to be released Spark which will be better then the Volt as it will be pure electric only!

The tech we got now is far superior to that of the Prius!

Nearly 10 Million in 10 years a failure? See the Lexus' "Engineering Amazing" campaign that start with a shelf system for various chemicals like 10 feet wide and it crashes through them?

Lexus' "Engineering Amazing - Wall" commercial :
youtu.be...

Hybrids have more then proven themselves worthy as evidenced by the massive influx of companies who are producing gas (Reg through Diesel), gas/electric, electric/solar, electric. That's 4 types of systems.

Ever wonder why it's growing and expanding instead of being long dead. That and that alone proves them wrong

BMW is about to populate it's i brand with models of pure electric nature! Look at the 2009 i8 Concept and that foresaw the next 7 that hit in the last couple years! Even the big sedans are coming into their own :
Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Mercedes S Klasse (Maybach is no more again), Maserati Quattroporte. Porsche Panamera P989, Bentley Continental Flying Spur-Muslane, Rolls-Royce Phantom, Aston Martin Rapide! will all have hybrids soon. Daimler confirmed back in 09 that the next S Klasse Flagship be a complete hybrid! Far from unproven when the top like 6 in the game are all banking on it and are seeing success! Once Daimler adds tech to it's S-Klasse it will be in just about everything soon. Alot of tech now being seen in cheaper cars like Push Button start all started in hyperexotics like the Mercedes SLR, Aston Martin, Lamborghini!

Top 6 are GM, Daimler, Fiat, VW/Porsche, Toyota, Renault/Nissan! Notice all have hybrids in some form! This is the future and now trillions of money in available funding can now be tapped for research and development as the era of petrolchemical powered transportation is pretty well over. The sun is now setting on that tech with the new one being completely free from hydrocarbons! This is the next major evolutionary leap for the automobile to properly move it into the 21st Century, it's 3rd Century! Did you honestly think we'd keep the same 125 yr old tech today? This is the 21st Century, I think it's fair to assume fully and tell that it's time we sent 19th Century tech into retirement!

Every new leap forward early on is always met with questioning, quizing, curiosity, intrigue and 25 years later everyone sits around and wonders what would we ever do without it! That's the way it's being treated by most.
edit on 8-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Lamborghini a custom car company? What? Not as with any company you can spec your car as much as you want as long as you are willing to pay for it however Lambo themselves did offer 1 car two trims in 1 interior/exterior combo only, The now retired Gray Barra bodied Reventon Coupe and Roadster, One colour only, no options list, no nothing but a am/fm/cd/satnav and a backup cam as well as the standard heated seats, Air Con, abs! The Aventador or the next "Baby Lambo" to replace the Gallardo in 2014 as well as any future car will never be offered in it. Including the upcoming 4 door based off the Estoque from 08 and the production of The Sesto Elemento! Some have called the Reventon Coupe being a fully optioned and reskinned Murcielago LP640 for which is true but nothing is better then rarity!


7,671 units in customer hands is impressive! 76.7% of the target which is not that bad and is quite good. The return on investment may not be seen (correcting earlier projection of Year 3 - 4) Year 5 or 6! That's when they are expected to see green again.

Since the topics "Volt" and "Hybrid" have total and complete relevance here whoever else is launching is is vital.

The investigations of the fires will no doubt be investigated by Federal authourities as it is now and afterwards GM will not be at fault.

The deal with China is that it is the next marketplace for the finished product. The creation of an assembly plant there will be for them and by them only so that domestic production will remain unaffected. Corporate expansion as 2012 will be the first year of the Volt for China! In the US it's the 4th year of production for the GT-R but global production is 43 years old! They are casting up the tooling now for them to use there and will be shipped by the fall to go online by Q1 13!

Domestic production at Detroit-Hamatrack plant of our domestically sold Volts they are staying put! This saves a ton of manufactuering which is shipping and import/export fees and tarriffs! Build in every market it is to be sold in in that market to reduce overhead!

I apologize to you if you felt like I went for your throat! I was not and will not!
edit on 8-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


So the only thing of substance you added was that GM paid off the loan.
Funny, as they still got the loan in the first place, which was wrong.
And secondly, I thought it was shown a whole ago that GM basically paid the loan off, with funds from another loan.

And for recalls? This is not a recall for a turn signal issue, where a fix is ordered.
The recall is a buy back. Way big difference there.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Oh good lord.

Still trying to inject Lamborghini into this?
Sorry, but showing you for the fool that you are on this is useless. You won't get it, and will just keep ramming away.

Sales of 7k+ models is not a success. Sorry, but it is not. Just about every article searched for states this.
It was even deemed one of the biggest tech flops of 2011. But, I am sure you will just blindly ignore that as well.



Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
The investigations of the fires will no doubt be investigated by Federal authourities as it is now and afterwards GM will not be at fault.

So, how is GM not a fault? Now you really are just rah-rahing for GM.



Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I apologize to you if you felt like I went for your throat! I was not and will not!

What are you talking about?
Just remember, this is the internet. Your opinion of me ranks about as high as old gum on a New York Sidewalk. I could care less what you state about me.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


1. A hybrid Aventador is coming soon as well as one for the Gallardo successor. Ferrari's California gets 20 mpg, unheard of a Ferrari! We have to move in both directions at the same time so that gas can be phased out without negatively impacting the system! Even Walgreen's is installing EV charging stations in the next few months!
2. Ohm overload to 1 box for that and the house hence customer at fault for not specifying the proper wiring diagrams!
3. Mod nicked me for what they thought was me attacking you and apologize if you happen to take it the wrong way!

I digress on what people think because I forgot who it was said it best "
"When they are talking about you is when you have nothing to worry about but it's when they aren't talking about you is when you have to worry!"! Which in itself is true! I care about what people think about me because I use all that data to become a better fighter for us all! Most occasions you notice me use, "We" in reference to non #OWS movement items is defined by you, me, him, her, The American People!
edit on 8-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


You still don't speak for me, nor does OWS.
We? Does not include me.

The issues still stand in this topic/thread.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman
 

...
I use all that data to become a better fighter for us all!


Then why do you misrepresent facts, as a rule, then retract or ignore the lie after you're called on it?

Credulous thinking is what got us in the sad and lonely place we are today.

You "cited" 15,000 Volts as "sold." when you knew that was false.

7,671 units in customer hands is impressive!
Now, you are "impressed" by sales of less than one-half of production! And that forgets that 250 have already been returned for the loaner/buy-back offer. And that omits that 7,671 will be "called back" beginning in February.

If you want to offer imaginary claims you are free to do so as long as you honestly state that this is nothing but something you made up in your devotion to nationalized industries and government redistributive policies, state-planned production, and GM's bailout and susidization at taxpayer expense.


76.7% of the target which is not that bad and is quite good.

77% of target is a "flop" in industry publications. 48% of production, with a 100% "call-back" ( a recall in any other situation not involving the corrupt UAW and present administration), is an un-funny and unsustainable joke.


The return on investment may not be seen (correcting earlier projection of Year 3 - 4) Year 5 or 6!


Return on investment?"
I don't recall (pun intended) asking anyone to "invest" my tax dollars in a failed enterprise or the UAW or Fiat!

First, it's a "3-4 year" window; now, it's "5 or 6?"
Don't forget the "may be seen" qualifier.

So, if GM is reducing the cost to $39,750 (hypothetically speaking) and the "investment" is $3,000,000,000; then that assumes sales of 2,039,430 Volts! (GM's operating "profit" is 3.7%, click for source)
(In a "gift" to you and your friends here, let's cut the total Volt giveaways to $1,000,000,000. That's still 679,810 Volts sold in 3,4,5,or 6 years!)

No one imagines any such thing! That is a preposterous proposition.


That's when they are expected to see green again.


Who are "they?" You and your imaginary friends? "Matchbox" (TM) collectors? The Obama adminstration?
"They" have no idea what it will take for the Volt to be "green" ever:

First, they have to keep what they sell, sold, instead of "called-back."
Second, they have to reject future bailouts and life-support.
Third, they have to stay in business, and in the business of selling Volts.
Fourth, sales over six years will have to be at least 28,000 per month! Even at the generous concession of only $1 billion in Volt subsidies, the monthly sales will have to be at least 9,400!

Just for fun, let's say the Volt subsidies and give-aways were only $500,000,000.
At a $1,471 "profit" per vehicle (3.7% margin on $39,750 (projected) MSRP), it would still require GM to sell more than 4,700 Volts every month for 6 years!

These "projections" and "predictions" you and Indigo keep blathering about "debunk" nothing so much as the hopeless rhetoric of your arguments that somehow, somewhere, sometime GM's bailout and the Volt were good ideas, much less a prudent use of shrinking US tapxpayers' income taxes.

Do you really believe any of that is possible? The entire US auto industry did not even sell 6,000,000 units in all of 2011.
articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com...


jw



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
And for recalls? This is not a recall for a turn signal issue, where a fix is ordered.
The recall is a buy back. Way big difference there.


Article


Now, GM is advising Volt owners to bring their EVs to the dealerships for a customer service campaign, which is like a recall but without the bad publicity attached. There are currently 8,000 Volts on U.S. roads and another 4,400 in showrooms for sale.

Dealers will address the battery issues by adding steel to the plate that protects the EV's T-shaped, 400-pound battery. This will prevent penetration into the battery in case of an auto accident, which will ultimately stop coolant from leaking. It will also evenly distribute the force of a crash.

NHTSA already tested Volts with the new added steel around the battery in December, and found that it was the right fix for the problem. However, it will continue to monitor the car for another week to make sure that it doesn't catch fire later on like the Volt back in May managed to do.


Erm, you were saying?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


An article that was released on Dec 5th, addressing an issue that I stated before that release, I believe.
Good find though.
Ok, so what is the point?

We are still discussing the facts that GM is/did operate under an interest free loan from the Govt, got/gets tax subsidizes for use on R&D and manufacturing of the vehicle that was deemed not only a HUGE tech flop of 2011, but the sales figures are terrible as well.
Why purchase a $40k plus vehicle, that can not only go a max distance on electrical power of what 50 miles, but also requires it to dram power from the coal based power grid, when you can purchase a Ford Focus that gets 40mpg for $15k?
The cost vs savings vs ROI is terrible, when looking at the Volt.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I suggest you heed your own statement as well. Seems you went off topic.
The fact still stands that GM is operating on an interest free loan from the Govt and huge Tax Subsidizes to manufacture a vehicle that is not only being recalled, but investigated for fire hazard now outside just the power cord, and MAY be moving manufacturing to China.



And while your above statement is factually accurate, the OP article is entirely BS in it's mathematics, headline and claims.

See how that works? I acknowledge facts...You can still have an opinion while acknowledging the facts.

It confuses me when people become so wed to a view that they feel it requires them to defend lies that support that view. Those opposing views become more credible when there is a trust between debating sides that facts will respected and I am not seeing that anywhere on this thread.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


An article that was released on Dec 5th, addressing an issue that I stated before that release, I believe.



It's actually January 5th. My point was that it's not a re-purchase.


Ok, so what is the point?


There is only one point, that the OP is a libel. The number right there, in the title, is a lie.


We are still discussing the facts that GM is/did operate under an interest free loan from the Govt, got/gets tax subsidizes for use on R&D and manufacturing of the vehicle that was deemed not only a HUGE tech flop of 2011, but the sales figures are terrible as well.


Again, the sales have only started. When you have mere thousands of vehicles on the road, it's ridiculous to declare it a "flop" of any sort. And by the way, R&D has a sweet sound to my ears, I think America should spend more on that (and stop tax evasion by the likes of GE).


Why purchase a $40k plus vehicle, that can not only go a max distance on electrical power of what 50 miles, but also requires it to dram power from the coal based power grid, when you can purchase a Ford Focus that gets 40mpg for $15k?


If you don't want to purchase it, then don't. There will be people who will. I really don't understand why some folks get a Harley, which is not a practical means of transport, but hey, we live in a free country. So I see you in your Ford Focus. Ride in style!

And sorry, but I see your complaint about "drawing power from coal grid" as quite silly. The cost savings are right there, since coal power is dramatically cheaper than burning gasoline on the road.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I suggest you heed your own statement as well. Seems you went off topic.
The fact still stands that GM is operating on an interest free loan from the Govt and huge Tax Subsidizes to manufacture a vehicle that is not only being recalled, but investigated for fire hazard now outside just the power cord, and MAY be moving manufacturing to China.



And while your above statement is factually accurate, the OP article is entirely BS in it's mathematics, headline and claims.

See how that works? I acknowledge facts...You can still have an opinion while acknowledging the facts.

It confuses me when people become so wed to a view that they feel it requires them to defend lies that support that view. Those opposing views become more credible when there is a trust between debating sides that facts will respected and I am not seeing that anywhere on this thread.



Fair enough.
The article used numbers, and anyone that has been around or in the numbers or statistics game knows that the outcome/result can be crafted for any point of view.
But, the figures provided did not just come from thin air.
The application filled the view that the article author had.

edit on 9-1-2012 by macman because: Additon



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Correct, it was Jan 5th, not Dec 5th. I am still back in 2011.


As for not wanting to purchase it?
In affect, I funded it, via my tax money. See the issue?
If it can't stand on it's own feet, it should not exist.
Business, Banks and so on should fall under this as well.


To the idea of pulling power from the grid?
So, look at the law suite filled against Toyota, in reference to the Prius Battery degrading.
As the battery ages, the ability to hold the charge decreases, thus the ability to travel the max distance goes as well.
This requires more power applied to the batteries. Now, after the battery ages 8 years, the charge hold will be decreased drastically. Now, you move to the realm of replacing those batteries. That is at the expense of the owner, and I am sure will not be cheap. Not to mention that disposal costs will be large as well.
Include that into the cost of power from your home electrical source, and you will not be saving much, if anything.
But, by all means, go forth and use the EV.
If they become popular, then the cost of refined fuel will hopefully go down, and that will make me happy driving my car that gets 35-40 mpg.
Yet, the cost of power will go up for my home. So, basically a zero sum gain.

edit on 9-1-2012 by macman because: Correction.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Fair enough.
The article used numbers, and anyone that has been around or in the numbers or statistics game knows that the outcome/result can be crafted for any point of view.

But, the figures provided did not just come thin air.
The application filled the view that the article author had.



No they didn't come out of thin air, they came from the Macinac Policy Center who is literally funded by a who's who of Oil Industry barrons including the Koch Brothers...this is public information.

And yes...statistics can be manipulated. But this article is NOT based on "statistics", but rather mathematics...and the most well known and practiced form of mathematics...FINANCE.

That is why a publication such as "The Street" has stock analysts posting WTF articles about the math employed.

Look at it this way...

The Volt officially launched in a Nationwide campaign in October last year..so the numbers are based on the first 3 months of rollout.

Pfizer spent 1.6 Billion developing Viagra...what do you think each capsule of Viagra cost if you took the first 3 months sales for a cost per unit analysis? Considering they probably rolled out in free samples? What?...A Million Dollars per pill? 30 Million per prescription? More?

You would call BS math would you not?

Now you can debate how many Volts will sell etc. etc. But this article was BS and anybody with a passing understanding of mathematics or finance sees this article for a pig trying to pass as the Queen of England.

Not statistics...math...finance.

You can still make a case that the Volt sucks or that it won't sell or that the Gov. shouldn't have given GM a penny...and I might disagree with you, but all of that debate will be opinions weak or strong supported by evidence...but none of that debate should begin with an OP that pretends BS is facts.

Attaching lies to an otherwise reasonable opinion just turns off honest folks.

edit on 9-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Statistics, Finance opinions and such are about the same, they can be pushed to go one way or the other.
So, we are both correct. My failure was in that I forgot to add in my retort the connecting of the two.

I am sure that we could find an article produced by the Sierra Club (or like minded sources) that counters the Article you state is backed by the Oil Companies.
They all have an agenda.

My other statements still stand.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 

Yes, the Volt is unproven in the real world. It is not anything like the EV1, they only way they are similar at all is they both have batteries.
Perhaps you can tell me exactly about the Volt makes it a far more advanced hybrid than existing hybrids? Then explain how 15years of development is the same thing as "proven", especially since they are now being recalled for a major design flaw in the battery protection?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Statistics, Finance opinions and such are about the same, they can be pushed to go one way or the other.


Finance and Math: 6/10 equals .6

Statistics: 6/10 "Barely over half" or "a clear majority" ...however you choose to spin it.

Again... ROI equations have been around as long as people have sold stuff. There is no mystery there. The OP article poses as a ROI equation when it is a whole lot of BS. It's not "spin"...its BS.


Originally posted by macman
I am sure that we could find an article produced by the Sierra Club (or like minded sources) that counters the Article you state is backed by the Oil Companies.
They all have an agenda.


Sure...and the Sierra club might inflate projected sales and that would be yet to be disroven BS. (Spin)

But to premise math and 20 years of projected funding on the first 3 months of national launch and assume that another Volt will not ever be sold is outright factual BS.

Must we choose between the two? Or can we just look for the truth and call BS where we see it?

edit on 9-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



The Volt officially launched in a Nationwide campaign in October last year..so the numbers are based on the first 3 months of rollout.

You and BuddhaSystem and Dudley are cut from the same cloth: present speculaton as fact, make stuff up, post it as fact and pat yourselves on each others' backs.
You post conjecture, "projections," and "plans" as if they were facts; then, you simply make others up to fit your biased worldview.

3 months of "sales"?
The Volt was on the market in 2010!


Hendrick Motorsports owner Rick Hendrick bought one of the first Chevrolet Volts, with the proceeds going to Detroit schools.

Chevy began shipping Volts to dealers this week.

www.autoweek.com...

The figures used in the Mackinac article are based upon facts and simple math.

As I pointed out to your ideological and intellectual twin, TheImmaculateD1, even if the estimated subsidies were cut to $500,000,000 and spread over 6 YEARS, GM would have to sell more than 4,700 Volts for 72 straight months just to "break even."


If you want to offer imaginary claims you are free to do so as long as you honestly state that this is nothing but something you made up in your devotion to nationalized industries and government redistributive policies, state-planned production, and GM's bailout and susidization at taxpayer expense.

D1:
"76.7% of the target which is not that bad and is quite good."

77% of target is a "flop" in industry publications.
48% of production sold, with a 100% "call-back" ( a recall in any other situation not involving the corrupt UAW and present administration), is an un-funny and unsustainable joke.

D1:
"The return on investment may not be seen (correcting earlier projection of Year 3 - 4) Year 5 or 6!"

Return on investment?"
I don't recall (pun intended) asking anyone to "invest" my tax dollars in a failed enterprise or the UAW or Fiat!
Don't forget the "may not be seen" qualifier.

So, if GM is reducing the cost to $39,750 (hypothetically speaking) and the "investment" is $3,000,000,000; then that assumes [6-year] sales of 2,039,430 Volts! (GM's operating "profit" is 3.7%, click for source)
(In a "gift" to you and your friends here, let's cut the total Volt giveaways to $1,000,000,000. That's still 679,810 Volts sold in 3,4,5,or 6 years!)

No one imagines any such thing! That is a preposterous proposition.

D1
"That's when they are expected to see green again."

"They" have no idea what it will take for the Volt to be "green" ever:

First, they have to keep what they sell, sold, instead of "called-back."
Second, they have to reject future bailouts and life-support.
Third, they have to stay in business, and in the business of selling Volts.
Fourth, sales over six years will have to be at least 28,000 per month! Even at the generous concession of only $1 billion in Volt subsidies, the monthly sales will have to be at least 9,400!

Just for fun, let's say the Volt subsidies and give-aways were only $500,000,000.
At a $1,471 "profit" per vehicle (3.7% margin on $39,750 (projected) MSRP), it would still require GM to sell more than 4,700 Volts every month for 6 years!


You can nit-pick about potential future sales, and long-term recoupment, but the bottom line is that the Volt is grossly over-subsidized, and will never see a positive return on taxpayers' "investment!"

Hell, Bentley sold as many cars in 2011 as GM sold Volts in 2010-2011! (And they stayed sold.)


Luxury-car maker Bentley says 2011 was a banner year, with global sales of 7,003 cars, up 37 percent from the year before. Bentley capped the year with a strong December, selling 1,059 cars--the second-best month for sales in its history.

www.autoweek.com...

Before I was crowing about the Mackinac math, I'd be certain my projections were at least based upon reliable estimates instead of imaginary (and ephemeral) sales.

jw










Read more: www.autoweek.com...



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

If you are thinking about buying a Chevrolet Volt, your eligibility for the $7500 Federal rebate, as well as a potential $5000 California Rebate will surely have a significant impact on your purchasing decision. Combined this is as much at $12,500 in government incentives on a car that many expect will MSRP for over $40,000. These rebate programs however are not unlimited in their funding.


www.mychevroletvolt.com...

Let's see $7500 rebate your paying for not owning the car since that money comes from your pockets lining GM Bank accounts.

Hip hip horrah for crony capitalism or course green rebates has cost us billions already most likely trillions the legal bailouts for failed tech that is made cheaper elsewhere in the world.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Indigo5
 



The Volt officially launched in a Nationwide campaign in October last year..so the numbers are based on the first 3 months of rollout.

You and BuddhaSystem and Dudley are cut from the same cloth: present speculaton as fact, make stuff up, post it as fact and pat yourselves on each others' backs.


Sorry but it was you who posted a fabrication. Imagine that at some point in time only 10 Volts made it to consumers (as apparently was the case at one point in time). You would say that a single Volt contained $1B of govt subsidies? This is complete bullcr@p. And then somebody says "oh but Volt is cr@p anyhow, shame" -- again, that's beside the point, let the consumers decide. So far they give it 4.8 out of 5.0 on KBB.

Then you start harping on how the business will move to China and all. And that is a speculation. What I know is that GM has built and is building facilities to accommodate its production plan of Volts.

There is just no way that you can deflect the fact that you posted a lie in the OP, and then you had to play the "China" card, then the "recall" card, then "the Volt is cr@p" card, but you know, you can't talk yourself out of this lie anyhow.





new topics
 
25
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join