In short, expensive means expensive. They cost a lot to make.
Fracking may have semi-permanently put a cap on the cost of oil, which is horrific from a global warming standpoint but does seem to have altered what cars most people purchase.
When GM started Volt development in about 2006, sedans were still popular and the Toyota Prius was selling relatively well. So I think GM just failed to anticipate the market shift.
About 20 years ago, the classic The Innovator's Dilemma came out. Included was a chapter based on a report the author had done for the auto industry back in the 1990s. On existing technology curves he found that mass market electric cars for the American model should become commercially viable around 2020, and in the next several years after that would become dominant. Until then it was a bad business to be in, and after that success was imperative for any car manufacturer that wants to remain in business.
The same author in that book and its follow-up The Innovator's Solution said that conventional car manufacturers would come up with hybrid cars first, but that route would lose to fully electric. Exactly how sailing ship companies came up with hybrid steam/sailing ships (go under steam for short trips, and you have sails if you run out of coal on a long trip), but all manufacturers who invested in that lost.
GM's actions show that they understood a lot of the message of those books. They worked on hybrid cars once that was commercially feasible, and put in the effort to figure out how to make good electric cars. They did this knowing that the technology wasn't yet commercially viable. They have declared that their future is electric only, and are explicitly avoiding committing to the tempting hybrid mistake.
That said, it remains to be seen whether they are committing another mistake pointed out in The Innovator's Solution. Which is that they are trying to make the switch without doing it as a spinoff, without separating the companies, and trying to leverage existing dealer networks. Which opens them to the problem that dealers have come to expect maintenance costs as a big part of their profit model, and therefore will try to steer customers away from electric, or will try to charge extra to stay in business. If GM can't resolve this conflict, they will fail.
GM rushed the Bolt out because also ending in 2017 were two ZEV related credit (CARB credits by another name) traits that were easily exploited, banking them for future use and double dipping by getting credit in a non CARB state for a sale there plus the CARB credit.
The key thing to note about EV sales, how to tell if a manufacturer is serious about selling them. The common figure of twenty to twenty five thousand units is bandied about as where the CARB value falls off after. As in, selling into that maximum allows GM and others to exploit the credit system to the extent it covers all possible sales for their other vehicles. This number will slowly increase but when they say "we cannot sell more because we cannot get batteries" don't believe them
[1] https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/california-and-western...
From my perspective, energy prices and auto regulations are the biggest reasons it took that long.
If it costs $1,000,000 to design a car and I sell that car for $30,000 and I sell 33 cars, I've lost $10k. But just selling one more car will turn a profit.
On the other hand if that car costs $32,000 to make and I'm selling it for $30,000... GM has long been in the business, for whatever reason, of selling cars below cost [1]. And for the Volt, it's more like selling a $40k car that actually costs $80k to manufacture [2], not even taking engineering and marketing costs as a factor.
Selling more Bolts and Volts would hurt GM, not help.
[1] https://www.hotcars.com/gm-admits-bolt-not-profitable/
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/09/10/stu...
It looks like engineering is included as "Development" in the original report: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-generalmotors-volt/factbo...
And there's the rub. People say they want these things, but when it comes time to open the pocketbook, their calculations change. Worst thing is that the people who can afford this stuff will instead drop more money on an ICE SUV.
:(
I think it would have sold a lot better if they had positioned it as a more upscale vehicle to match the asking price, or at least had given it some other value proposition beyond economy. I've never been able to figure out exactly who the target market for the Volt was.
> "While it was a financial loser, it did what was intended," said retired GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, who shepherded the Volt into production. "We viewed it as a stepping stone to full electrics, which were totally out of reach due to the then-astronomical cost of lithium-ion batteries."
> GM needed to stop making it due in part to changing consumer preferences for SUVs, he said. The company also lost money on every Volt, cash that is needed for research on autonomous vehicles and more advanced electric cars, he said.
In 2019, people don't want their cars to break at all. Even a trivial matter might have you lose a customer.
Worse, when he started saying there were no local charger available he refuse to do a web search to prove his point since the last time I looked there were plenty available locally.
I just walked out, on the other hand I could have bought the car CASH if he had not lied.
The dealers are more than 50% of the problem!
There are specifications. We don't buy overkill material.
At worst, we stop tracking issues of they are too old, like after 5 years of use.
Edit, due to HN limits. The person below me doesn't understand engineering and how specs work. You make your product at specific costs and quality. Not everything can be made out of titanium.
As a happy Volt owner (I've yet to met one who didn't love theirs), I can't help but wonder if "expensive" is code for "lost service revenue because the thing is too dang low maintenance and reliable". ;)