Musk endeavours

[BobbyD]

1. Thanks.
2. So in 2019 year VAG group did 140k 'electric' vehicles, of which about 35k were full-electric BEV and about 105k were actually hybrids with as little electrickery inside them as they could get away with and still euphemistically refer to them as being "electric vehicles".
3. In contrast in 2019 Tesla did 367,375 full-fat BEVs.

regards, dspp

1. No problem

2. No your numbers are off.

35k were e-golfs. VW brand sold atleast 40k pureblood BEV's. Audi and Porsche (just) also sold pureblood BEV's.

Describing PHEV's as electric cars is both accurate and standard. Your electric car apartheid is weird.

3. In contrast VW sold over 10 million cars and made billions in profit in 2019, and increased their electric car production at a rather heady lick ahead of the major entry in to the market this year ...but if you can resist the urge to see everything as an attack on Tesla you might find the figures in some small way inform a more important and longer term aspect of electrification, mainstream acceptance.

[dspp]

1. Thanks.
2. So in 2019 year VAG group did 140k 'electric' vehicles, of which about 35k were full-electric BEV and about 105k were actually hybrids with as little electrickery inside them as they could get away with and still euphemistically refer to them as being "electric vehicles".
3. In contrast in 2019 Tesla did 367,375 full-fat BEVs.

regards, dspp

1. No problem

2. No your numbers are off.

35k were e-golfs. VW brand sold atleast 40k pureblood BEV's. Audi and Porsche (just) also sold pureblood BEV's.

Describing PHEV's as electric cars is both accurate and standard. Your electric car apartheid is weird.

3. In contrast VW sold over 10 million cars and made billions in profit in 2019, and increased their electric car production at a rather heady lick ahead of the major entry in to the market this year ...but if you can resist the urge to see everything as an attack on Tesla you might find the figures in some small way inform a more important and longer term aspect of electrification, mainstream acceptance.

BD,

I may have made an error, if so excuse me. I am as interested in the facts as you are. I certainly don't find the press release easy to parse, and I suspect that is deliberate:
https://www.volkswagen-newsroom.com/en/ ... close-5720

(it is a fact that legacy auto are desperate to cast the 'EV' net as wide as possible, so as to claim compliance with various transformation goals, but lets set that aside as being my opinion if you wish)

The VW brand may include some ID3 as well as eGolf. Do you have a BEV vs PHEV split on that ?

For the Audi brand there are definitely PHEVs in the mix (e.g. Q5 hybrid), but I was not aware that meaningful numbers of BEVs (eg eTron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_e-tron_(2018) ) were actually shipping in 2019. Again do you have a split ?

I didn't think that Porsche were included in VAG numbers at all - I thought they were not consolidated even though there is shareholding commonality (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group) - am I correct ?

As to the other brands there is no breakdown at all - I didn't think serious amounts of the branded PHEV or EV were shipping from any of them. Again am I wrong ?

My opinion : I really don't think it is an accident that they are being as murky as heck.

Anyway, do you have better data ?

regards, dspp

[BobbyD]

BD,

I may have made an error, if so excuse me. I am as interested in the facts as you are. I certainly don't find the press release easy to parse, and I suspect that is deliberate

I feel that might be a little cynical, lets just say that releasing information about past performance, with a natural inclination to make the company look good when bits of it are regurgitated verbatim by lazy 'journalists' as an 'article' is bound to affect the house style. I find them pretty readable, but then recently the content has been quite pleasing which might have an affect.

(it is a fact that legacy auto are desperate to cast the 'EV' net as wide as possible, so as to claim compliance with various transformation goals, but lets set that aside as being my opinion if you wish)

The only electric specific goals which really matter, and which I feel you tend to ignore, are fleet CO2 emissions, compliance with which isn't going to be taken from a press release. Ultimately a gram of CO2 saved from that level is cash money whether the vehicle for the saving is a plug in hybrid or a pureblood BEV. The rest is either coffee break reading for car fanatics, or reassurance for shareholders, I doubt anything in that PR is ever going to trouble a wider public.

The VW brand may include some ID3 as well as eGolf. Do you have a BEV vs PHEV split on that ?

Either way VW brand sold more than 80k electric vehicles of which more than half were pure blood BEV's. They sold around 35k e-golfs, id.3 numbers shouldn't count until the summer, I'd put the difference down to e-ups where 5k or so seems believable. The e-golf is still shifting, averaging over 1000 a month between No, Ne + SPlast year, and over 400 this month. People do love their Golfs.

For the Audi brand there are definitely PHEVs in the mix (e.g. Q5 hybrid), but I was not aware that meaningful numbers of BEVs (eg eTron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_e-tron_(2018) ) were actually shipping in 2019. Again do you have a split ?

The e-tron has been doing pretty solid business. Don't have full numbers, but NO, NE + SP took 9619 last year with 700 being an average month an a bumper December thanks to changes in Ne. The US looks fairly similar, with over 500 a month https://insideevs.com/news/391122/decem ... -sales-us/ so that's around 15,000 in 4 markets not including Germany.

I didn't think that Porsche were included in VAG numbers at all - I thought they were not consolidated even though there is shareholding commonality (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group) - am I correct ?

Porsche Ag the car maker, show up in VW Ag figures, being as they are a wholly owned subsidiary of VW*. However the number of cars that they produce means that their contribution to figures here is going to be negligible. They account for 130 Taycans and an at this point unknown number of hybrids, but in a way I think they are the most important VW company in this regard. If you can persuade Porsche owners to put batteries, big or small, in to their cars then the rest shouldn't be too hard to convince, plus every mile a Porsche doesn't use it's engine is a decent womp off fleet Co2 emissions....

*Porsche holdings a different company, which looks after the family holdings, is the biggest single shareholder in VW which often leads to some confusion.

As to the other brands there is no breakdown at all - I didn't think serious amounts of the branded PHEV or EV were shipping from any of them. Again am I wrong ?

I don't think so which is why the analysis is treating VW electric + Porsche electric + Audi electric = VW Ag electric.

My opinion : I really don't think it is an accident that they are being as murky as heck.

I really don't think they are, nor do I think that many of these figures will be important in a few years time. This is all based on halway house compliance vehicles remember? It's a floor, nothing else, where as the ceiling is far far more interesting.

[dspp]

BD,

I may have made an error, if so excuse me. I am as interested in the facts as you are. I certainly don't find the press release easy to parse, and I suspect that is deliberate

I feel that might be a little cynical, lets just say that releasing information about past performance, with a natural inclination to make the company look good when bits of it are regurgitated verbatim by lazy 'journalists' as an 'article' is bound to affect the house style. I find them pretty readable, but then recently the content has been quite pleasing which might have an affect.

(it is a fact that legacy auto are desperate to cast the 'EV' net as wide as possible, so as to claim compliance with various transformation goals, but lets set that aside as being my opinion if you wish)

The only electric specific goals which really matter, and which I feel you tend to ignore, are fleet CO2 emissions, compliance with which isn't going to be taken from a press release. Ultimately a gram of CO2 saved from that level is cash money whether the vehicle for the saving is a plug in hybrid or a pureblood BEV. The rest is either coffee break reading for car fanatics, or reassurance for shareholders, I doubt anything in that PR is ever going to trouble a wider public.

The VW brand may include some ID3 as well as eGolf. Do you have a BEV vs PHEV split on that ?

Either way VW brand sold more than 80k electric vehicles of which more than half were pure blood BEV's. They sold around 35k e-golfs, id.3 numbers shouldn't count until the summer, I'd put the difference down to e-ups where 5k or so seems believable. The e-golf is still shifting, averaging over 1000 a month between No, Ne + SPlast year, and over 400 this month. People do love their Golfs.

For the Audi brand there are definitely PHEVs in the mix (e.g. Q5 hybrid), but I was not aware that meaningful numbers of BEVs (eg eTron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_e-tron_(2018) ) were actually shipping in 2019. Again do you have a split ?

The e-tron has been doing pretty solid business. Don't have full numbers, but NO, NE + SP took 9619 last year with 700 being an average month an a bumper December thanks to changes in Ne. The US looks fairly similar, with over 500 a month https://insideevs.com/news/391122/decem ... -sales-us/ so that's around 15,000 in 4 markets not including Germany.

I didn't think that Porsche were included in VAG numbers at all - I thought they were not consolidated even though there is shareholding commonality (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group) - am I correct ?

Porsche Ag the car maker, show up in VW Ag figures, being as they are a wholly owned subsidiary of VW*. However the number of cars that they produce means that their contribution to figures here is going to be negligible. They account for 130 Taycans and an at this point unknown number of hybrids, but in a way I think they are the most important VW company in this regard. If you can persuade Porsche owners to put batteries, big or small, in to their cars then the rest shouldn't be too hard to convince, plus every mile a Porsche doesn't use it's engine is a decent womp off fleet Co2 emissions....

*Porsche holdings a different company, which looks after the family holdings, is the biggest single shareholder in VW which often leads to some confusion.

As to the other brands there is no breakdown at all - I didn't think serious amounts of the branded PHEV or EV were shipping from any of them. Again am I wrong ?

I don't think so which is why the analysis is treating VW electric + Porsche electric + Audi electric = VW Ag electric.

My opinion : I really don't think it is an accident that they are being as murky as heck.

I really don't think they are, nor do I think that many of these figures will be important in a few years time. This is all based on halway house compliance vehicles remember? It's a floor, nothing else, where as the ceiling is far far more interesting.

So cutting to the chase, that sounds like ?? maybe ?? 60% x 80k = 48k. That would be 35k eGolfs + 15k etron + negligible odds'n'sods. Clearly there are rounding errors in there somewhere ....

The eGolf is 32kWh. So 35k x 32 = 1120 MWh
The eTron is 95kWh. So 15k x 95 = 1425 MWh
SUB TOT = 2,545 MWh

A typical VW-etc PHEV uses (say) 13kWh so 32k x 13 = 416 MWh
TOT = 2.961 GWh

By comparison Nissan seem to have done 100k Leafs in 2019, say of 62kWh using the larger later 2019 battery

(You can see from that kWh split one reason why I am so dismissive of PHEV. The other reason is I know from personal anecdotal encounters with typical PHEV users that they seldom/never plug them in. Their reason for buying them is to get the tax perks & the zonal access without doing any more than paying lipservice).

Anyway the comparison for 2019 then becomes :
***************************************************************
Tesla : 30 GWh and 367,375 full-fat BEVs
Nissan : 6.2 GWh and 100,000 full-fat BEVs
VW group : 2.9 GWh and 48,000 full-fat BEVs.

I'm not sure where BYD would fit in that summary, or for that matter whether/if the full Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi Alliance would be materially different. What it shows to me is how far behind the curve the legacy car makers are at this stage. Whether they will turn that around in time - and if so which ones will do it - I am unsure. Though I tend to think that VAG and Renault-Nissan are two of the more likely survival candidates as everyone else seems to still be in the pits.

regards, dspp

ps. I'm ignoring Porsche in the above as I don't think it is material. Interestingly Porsche doesn't show as a VAG brand in corporate stuff.

[PeterGray]

2. So in 2019 year VAG group did 140k 'electric' vehicles, of which about 35k were full-electric BEV and about 105k were actually hybrids with as little electrickery inside them as they could get away with and still euphemistically refer to them as being "electric vehicles".
3. In contrast in 2019 Tesla did 367,375 full-fat BEVs.

I don't think anyone would argue that Tesla are not ahead of the curve in EV production (certainly in terms of proportions - though I'm not sure Nissan aren't still ahead in terms of pure numbers).

But the key issue, in terms of investments, is will they stay there? A constant view on this thread is that Tesla represents the new order and that VW and their like are dinosaurs unable to catch up. My view has always been that they have great depth of experience of the whole process of producing, selling and supporting sold cars that the likes of Tesla will take a long time to match. They also have large resources, of money, capacity and engineering expertise. And they have continuing profitable support from ICE production and sales, which will continue for some time over the transition to pure EV - or possibly elsewhere altogether ultimately. It's no surprise they are behind Tesla at this stage, in EV production, but bobby's figures demonstrate that they are moving forward, and that will to accelerate over the next few years. Frankly I will be surprised if VWs EV global sales don't outpace Tesla's, probably by a large margin, in a few years time.

[dspp]

2. So in 2019 year VAG group did 140k 'electric' vehicles, of which about 35k were full-electric BEV and about 105k were actually hybrids with as little electrickery inside them as they could get away with and still euphemistically refer to them as being "electric vehicles".
3. In contrast in 2019 Tesla did 367,375 full-fat BEVs.

I don't think anyone would argue that Tesla are not ahead of the curve in EV production (certainly in terms of proportions - though I'm not sure Nissan aren't still ahead in terms of pure numbers).

But the key issue, in terms of investments, is will they stay there? A constant view on this thread is that Tesla represents the new order and that VW and their like are dinosaurs unable to catch up. My view has always been that they have great depth of experience of the whole process of producing, selling and supporting sold cars that the likes of Tesla will take a long time to match. They also have large resources, of money, capacity and engineering expertise. And they have continuing profitable support from ICE production and sales, which will continue for some time over the transition to pure EV - or possibly elsewhere altogether ultimately. It's no surprise they are behind Tesla at this stage, in EV production, but bobby's figures demonstrate that they are moving forward, and that will to accelerate over the next few years. Frankly I will be surprised if VWs EV global sales don't outpace Tesla's, probably by a large margin, in a few years time.

Peter,
The reason I am (like BD) so interested in getting to the heart of the numbers is that they show the real picture of a single first division Tesla that is - at this stage - accelerating away from the legacy second division, with the third division still nowhere:

2019 BEV league table then becomes :
***************************************************************
Tesla : 30 GWh and 367,375 full-fat BEVs
Nissan : 6.2 GWh and 100,000 full-fat BEVs
VW group : 2.9 GWh and 48,000 full-fat BEVs.

I agree that the legacy players may turn things around, but when you consider that it takes at least 30 GWh of throughput for a battery factory to become cost-effective vs Tesla (of 2019) then you can see the scale of the challenge for the legacy players. For example VW would need to double battery consumption (and car sales) for 3-years to catch up with a 2019-version of Tesla.

If anyone can throw figures on the table for BYD, Renault, etc then I'd be very interested.

regards, dspp

[BobbyD]

(You can see from that kWh split one reason why I am so dismissive of PHEV. The other reason is I know from personal anecdotal encounters with typical PHEV users that they seldom/never plug them in. Their reason for buying them is to get the tax perks & the zonal access without doing any more than paying lipservice).

The only person I know with a PHEV bought it because his missus wouldn't let him buy a full electric on the grounds he would forget to plug it in. But the direct relevance of this rather depends on whether we are assessing the effectiveness of regulations to save the planet or look at the electric car market, which are not necessarily the same thing.

Whilst those tax perks and zonal access exist for the punters and the battery knocks down fleet CO2 emissions for the company then they are every bit as relevant as full BEV. For a company without the resources to run parallel programmes, they also offer a toe dipping method of entry, which might leave them at an insurmountable disadvantage later on but might allow to at least make it to the starting line.

There are other potential benefits as well, allowing people to become habituated to the idea of plugging their car in will in many cases make the loss of a petrol engine less traumatic, and forgetful drivers will have the chance to assuage their partners worry about whether they posses the necessary discipline to be trusted with a battery only vehicle, amongst others.

Anyway the comparison for 2019 then becomes :
***************************************************************
Tesla : 30 GWh and 367,375 full-fat BEVs
Nissan : 6.2 GWh and 100,000 full-fat BEVs
VW group : 2.9 GWh and 48,000 full-fat BEVs.

I'm not sure where BYD would fit in that summary, or for that matter whether/if the full Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi Alliance would be materially different. What it shows to me is how far behind the curve the legacy car makers are at this stage.

Here I think is where our outlooks fundamentally differ. You think the race has started. From my point of view we are coming to the end of the development phase, topping up their batteries, and giving them a final polish before sending them out to the start line where the race will be started with a big flag with new emissions regulations printed all over it.

The job of legacy auto companies wasn't to produce more electric cars than Tesla it was to ensure that come the squeeze they were well placed to survive the change, and maximise their returns. Some it will turn out will have prepared better than others, but I wouldn't count on BEV production prior to the squeeze to provide any form of indication as to which companies those were.

For instance VW's stake in Northvolt, it's interest in a similar stake in a Chinese battery manufacturer, it's two BEV platforms, the numerous factories on three continents which have or are in the final stages of being converted to MEB production, and the thousands of id.3's it is stockpiling for a summer release are not reflected in your figures. Neither is Stuttgart's new Taycan line, which in full production should account for more than 3 GWh.

These are far more relevant considerations than their 2019 GWhage. I have no doubt that those figures will be just as misleading, although not always in the same way, for a number of other manufacturers. They are development lap times, but you don't know what was being tested on that lap. What will count has yet to make it's way on to the sales book, but much of it is visible to us.

* Oh my favourite thing I read today was that the VW chargers with built in batteries I linked to the other day use MEB battery packs, and are likely to offer packs taken off cars a second lease of life before they go to recyc.

[dspp]

(You can see from that kWh split one reason why I am so dismissive of PHEV. The other reason is I know from personal anecdotal encounters with typical PHEV users that they seldom/never plug them in. Their reason for buying them is to get the tax perks & the zonal access without doing any more than paying lipservice).

The only person I know with a PHEV bought it because his missus wouldn't let him buy a full electric on the grounds he would forget to plug it in. But the direct relevance of this rather depends on whether we are assessing the effectiveness of regulations to save the planet or look at the electric car market, which are not necessarily the same thing.

Whilst those tax perks and zonal access exist for the punters and the battery knocks down fleet CO2 emissions for the company then they are every bit as relevant as full BEV. For a company without the resources to run parallel programmes, they also offer a toe dipping method of entry, which might leave them at an insurmountable disadvantage later on but might allow to at least make it to the starting line.

There are other potential benefits as well, allowing people to become habituated to the idea of plugging their car in will in many cases make the loss of a petrol engine less traumatic, and forgetful drivers will have the chance to assuage their partners worry about whether they posses the necessary discipline to be trusted with a battery only vehicle, amongst others.

Anyway the comparison for 2019 then becomes :
***************************************************************
Tesla : 30 GWh and 367,375 full-fat BEVs
Nissan : 6.2 GWh and 100,000 full-fat BEVs
VW group : 2.9 GWh and 48,000 full-fat BEVs.

I'm not sure where BYD would fit in that summary, or for that matter whether/if the full Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi Alliance would be materially different. What it shows to me is how far behind the curve the legacy car makers are at this stage.

Here I think is where our outlooks fundamentally differ. You think the race has started. From my point of view we are coming to the end of the development phase, topping up their batteries, and giving them a final polish before sending them out to the start line where the race will be started with a big flag with new emissions regulations printed all over it.

The job of legacy auto companies wasn't to produce more electric cars than Tesla it was to ensure that come the squeeze they were well placed to survive the change, and maximise their returns. Some it will turn out will have prepared better than others, but I wouldn't count on BEV production prior to the squeeze to provide any form of indication as to which companies those were.

For instance VW's stake in Northvolt, it's interest in a similar stake in a Chinese battery manufacturer, it's two BEV platforms, the numerous factories on three continents which have or are in the final stages of being converted to MEB production, and the thousands of id.3's it is stockpiling for a summer release are not reflected in your figures. Neither is Stuttgart's new Taycan line, which in full production should account for more than 3 GWh.

These are far more relevant considerations than their 2019 GWhage. I have no doubt that those figures will be just as misleading, although not always in the same way, for a number of other manufacturers. They are development lap times, but you don't know what was being tested on that lap. What will count has yet to make it's way on to the sales book, but much of it is visible to us.

* Oh my favourite thing I read today was that the VW chargers with built in batteries I linked to the other day use MEB battery packs, and are likely to offer packs taken off cars a second lease of life before they go to recyc.

BD,

All good points, well made.

My thought when I saw that was if the VW packs are going to last as well as they need to, in order to be competitive with Tesla, then it will be 10-14 years before any of them will be making it into charger grid reinforcement second-lives. I'm not saying pack/design reuse is a bad thing, but that is a misleading explanation of the intended use at this time.

Getting a competitive BEV into the market is about a lot more than just taking the dino-engine out of a PHEV and slipping in a battery pack into the slot. Those legacy companies going down that pathway are teaching themselves the wrong lessons. I admit I thought that way back in 2000 or so, but I learned better. So imho any legacy company that is still going down that pathway for that reason are digging a bigger grave with every year they continue to think that.

If VAG scale at the rate you are suggesting then a lot of other car companies are going to get mercilessly squeezed, very quickly. Is anyone else planning to scale at that rate ? As far as I can see only Nissan-Renault are planning anything vaguely comparable (and BYD of course) ?

Noting the 2019 GWh and the BEV numbers is very important. If you are a battery (cell) manufacturer and you re being asked by an auto maker to invest in a 30 GWh cell plant, then you are going to look at just that as part of your risk analysis, along with the balance sheet stability of the auto company. If Tesla asked you to do it, you'd think there was an excellent chance of them scaling from 30 GWh to 60 GWh in the next year or so. If VAG ask you to do it what do you think are the real chances of them scaling from 3 GWh to 30 GWh in two years ? And how low down the global list of auto players are you prepared to go in placing those bets before you run out of risk appetite, bearing in mind that 30 GWh and a 400-500,000 cars/year assembly plant is the minimum scale unit to be competitive against the peer group. That is precisely why I am paying close attention to these sorts of numbers as they give me an insight into the competitive landscape and risk for my investment in TSLA.

It sure is fascinating watching isn't it.

regards, dspp

[BobbyD]

My thought when I saw that was if the VW packs are going to last as well as they need to, in order to be competitive with Tesla, then it will be 10-14 years before any of them will be making it into charger grid reinforcement second-lives. I'm not saying pack/design reuse is a bad thing, but that is a misleading explanation of the intended use at this time.

Ah, but indicative of the fundamental interconnectedness of all things electric at VW. Of course in the first case it means they can just pluck new packs straight off the existing line, taking MEB from a platform to an environment. That's an immediate effect which adds scale and utilises the current system. Hell it looks like VW have their own battery standard. AAA, AA, MEB...

Obviously one hopes they won't be ripping packs off cars anytime soon, but it's nice to know that when the time does come it could be as simple as dropping the battery out of the car, running a few diagnostic checks, and putting it in to a charger.

Another example of an efficiency in design not reflected in your GWh numbers!

...and revealing a clear pathway for the future is hardly misleading. There's a lot of talk about greenwashing and insincere actions. What could show a better acceptance of the business and environmental aspects of electrification than planning for the seamless and efficient transition of your batteries as they fall below the standards required for their initial use? Sounds downright responsible to me.

If VAG scale at the rate you are suggesting then a lot of other car companies are going to get mercilessly squeezed, very quickly.

Oh yeah! ...and by a bigger, more solvent, competitor who competes in every sector, has quite a successful history in platforming, and one of the world's biggest R&D budgets. It almost seems unfair.

With regard to the rate of scaling:

Porsche were initially looking at 20,000 Taycans pa. which was subsequently increased to 40,000 based on initial interest. Given it's reception I don't doubt they could sell out, and there are more body variants in the works. A Taycan (quick google for speed) has 79.2-93.4 kWh capacity. That line is up and running, so when they are up to speed that's VW's 2019 GWh's and most of their 48,000 BEV's right there in Porsches! So you can see why I think your 48,000 BEV number might be a touch irrelevant.

MEB appears to be planned on a fairly standard 300,000 per installation running at full wack.

Production of the id.3 started in Zwickau in November. This line is already running, cars are being stockpiled.

Then there's Anting, which is a brand new MEB plant from the ground up, went in to pre-production in August. Isn't scheduled for series production until October, alongside Foshun.

Zwickau, Anting and Foshun is 900,000 planned capacity.

This is the 1st planned wave of MEB production:



- https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/4P2kJ ... ga-usa.jpg

I think Chattanooga will be the last plant their to come in to action, they broke ground on their MEB unit in November and are supposed to enter production in 2022.

Is anyone else planning to scale at that rate ?

Not that I'm aware of, I'm not sure many other manufacturers could.

Noting the 2019 GWh and the BEV numbers is very important. If you are a battery (cell) manufacturer and you re being asked by an auto maker to invest in a 30 GWh cell plant, then you are going to look at just that as part of your risk analysis, along with the balance sheet stability of the auto company. If Tesla asked you to do it, you'd think there was an excellent chance of them scaling from 30 GWh to 60 GWh in the next year or so. If VAG ask you to do it what do you think are the real chances of them scaling from 3 GWh to 30 GWh in two years ?

I'm not sure they are always relevant in the context in which they are quoted! Although if your argument is one of the realism of projections then it does make somewhat more sense.

Given the choice between being owed money by VW and being owed money by Tesla I'd be lending to VW, and if they want to buy my batteries and they can pay the bill what do I care if they actually need the batteries? Given where I've put my money that shouldn't surprise. If I were a battery company I'd probably fancy I had a feel for the size of the market even if I couldn't select which players would be left in it with any certainty. Arguably if I haven't I might be in the wrong game. Besides batteries are so old hat, now it's about buying battery companies, and if that doesn't signal a commitment to selling BEV's nothing will!

It sure is fascinating watching isn't it.

At times, at times I just want the race to start!

[dspp]

It sure is fascinating watching isn't it.

At times, at times I just want the race to start!

BD,

At a car: charger site contention ratio of about 500:1, which is about a car: connector contention ratio of 50:1, then the amount of packs going into sites as opposed to cars is quite trivial. In the high-car demand case one actually sends zero car-cells to chargers, and instead uses out-of-spec (or uncertified) cells for the chargers (this latter is what Tesla does). However in the low-car demand case the ability to switch cells into chargers (static storage) to meet minimum 'take-or-pay' contractual obligations with the cell manufacturer is the real short-term driver for VAG, i.e. short term risk management. As to design foresightedness I completely agree, that is why VAG are copying TSLA.

Don't get me wrong about VAG please. I think that they are utterly committed to the BEV route now, and they are reprogramming anyone that thinks otherwise (hence Audi ditching fuel cell and hydrogen sidelines). I also think that they may well overtake Tesla at some point - that is why I am keen to see the real data. But I also think that they now wish they'd started a wee bit earlier, because they now recognise that ICE is a burning platform.

What I find more interesting is that when I do these analyses there seems to be so few constraints, and every motivation to do a blitzkrieg landgrab. Yet so many other manufacturers are reluctant to admit they are on fire.

Let's assume that TSLA and VAG both execute perfectly and reach 20m vehicles/yr. That leaves 40m cars/year for the others. Put it a different way, by the time they each reach 5-mln BEV vehicles a year they are also at 400 GWh/yr, and almost uncatchable by competitors that are not already (today) seriously in the race, and I only see BYD and Nissan-Renault doing so. But that might be in only 5-6 years time at the rate Tesla are executing and (I believe you) VAG are planning. So this is a race that could in many ways be over extremely quickly from a investment selection perspective. It really is much more remiscent of a software (or computer hardware) competition landscape than trad auto, and that is a strategic understanding that I am sure TSLA are comfortable with. But outside of the very obvious moves by TSLA and VAG I do not see serious discussion of the implication of that going on in public ?

Will it be a four-manufacturer outcome ? Or what ? I don't know, but I'd be very interested in real numbers (BEV, PHEV, GWh) for the other major players if your sleuthing abilities can turn them up.

(other network etc factors tend also to make these a rapid platform change paradigm rather than a trad auto technology cycle, which is perhaps why there is such a seeming complacency around)

regards, dspp

[odysseus2000]

Peter Gray
I don't think anyone would argue that Tesla are not ahead of the curve in EV production (certainly in terms of proportions - though I'm not sure Nissan aren't still ahead in terms of pure numbers).

But the key issue, in terms of investments, is will they stay there? A constant view on this thread is that Tesla represents the new order and that VW and their like are dinosaurs unable to catch up. My view has always been that they have great depth of experience of the whole process of producing, selling and supporting sold cars that the likes of Tesla will take a long time to match. They also have large resources, of money, capacity and engineering expertise. And they have continuing profitable support from ICE production and sales, which will continue for some time over the transition to pure EV - or possibly elsewhere altogether ultimately. It's no surprise they are behind Tesla at this stage, in EV production, but bobby's figures demonstrate that they are moving forward, and that will to accelerate over the next few years. Frankly I will be surprised if VWs EV global sales don't outpace Tesla's, probably by a large margin, in a few years time.

Regarding VW, what happens to their legacy ICE business if they do start selling a lot of BEV?

If as you suggest they start to sell a lot of BEV then their sales of ICE will likely decline. They then have the business of dealing with their workforce and ICE production facility which is imho likely to both consume a lot of management time and a lot of money.

We are not in a race between two new entrants here, but between a new one and a legacy one that has to re-position its entire business.

It is difficult for me to see how the existing VW legacy business will not be a serious issue that will cause them a lot of troubles and expense.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

Update: Cleantechnica have the e-tron at 18,483 in Europe last year. - https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/27/te ... es-report/

That's well over a billion quids worth of e-trons in it's first year in Europe Not bad for the joke-car which was going to bankrupt Audi!

Unfortunately LG appear to be unable to produce batteries at a rate commensurate with their commitments, so production has been pulled back to a mere 5700 for next quarter. - https://www.electrive.com/2020/01/26/au ... s-factory/

Extrapolating that would put full production at 9,800 a quarter or 39,200 a year. Demand doesn't seem to be a problem.

Don't get me wrong about VAG please. I think that they are utterly committed to the BEV route now, and they are reprogramming anyone that thinks otherwise (hence Audi ditching fuel cell and hydrogen sidelines). I also think that they may well overtake Tesla at some point - that is why I am keen to see the real data. But I also think that they now wish they'd started a wee bit earlier, because they now recognise that ICE is a burning platform.

Given the starting gun from VW's point of view was fired in 2015, with dieselgate, they've done pretty well to comprehensively pivot in 4.25 years! Maybe they could have gone what 12 months earlier? But why? We've reached the point where people have to buy battery cars because companies need to sell them or pay out a lot in fines. There's less risk this way, and even after signing billions of dollars of battery contracts there have still been some supply issues. Take your time, iron out the kinks, line your ducks up... VW are still the 800lb Gorilla in this cage match and the time hasn't been wasted even if they weren't producing a lot of BEV's.

Imagine what's going to happen when companies start announcing how much they've missed their targets by, calculating their fines!

As for ICE, VW are selling more of them than ever before! It's going to be a declining platform sure, but for who in the here and now? The ICE pathway is being managed in to extinction, but I wouldn't rule out hybridisation giving it a somewhat longer lifespan than many around here expect, in fact I wouldn't assume it's bound for the graveyard although the odds aren't in it's favour.

As the market shrinks and manufacturers begin to lose volume they will become less competitive against VW's ICE tail! ...and just because ICE development will stop doesn't mean that ICE cars can't continue to be improved. Many of the improvements being made during digitisation apply regardless of power source, again not great news for a company with too few resources to do anything properly.

What I find more interesting is that when I do these analyses there seems to be so few constraints, and every motivation to do a blitzkrieg landgrab. Yet so many other manufacturers are reluctant to admit they are on fire.

I put a lot of it down to many car companies not being capable of doing what needs to be done. At which point no CEO can afford to admit to their shareholders that their feet are on fire.

I think VW's saving grace has been it's scale, and that is something which most competitors lack. It affords them flexibility and the ability to survive the odd error or misfortune. Electrification is going to be expensive. A billion dollars here, a billion dollars there... for some companies, not all of whom were in the best of health to start with, that is serious money!

Not only do they have more choices about how to approach electrification, but VW have the luxury that they don't have to get them all right. They can afford to be brave, if not reckless. Against competitors without those luxuries what for some is an existential crisis is an opportunity for VW.

Dieslegate didn't hurt either. The company's hand was forced, the political argument was possibly somewhat easier to win than it would have been elsewhere where a few more years of the same old same old would pad out the retirement account nicely.

It's also true that we are only aware of part of the picture. It's possible somebody is sitting on something nice, but I wouldn't bet against a healthy dose of blood.

Overall I suspect the people who should have gone earlier are those thrashing around looking for a convenient hook up to give themselves scale, and those who found a partner but never got around to moving in together.

Let's assume that TSLA and VAG both execute perfectly and reach 20m vehicles/yr. That leaves 40m cars/year for the others. Put it a different way, by the time they each reach 5-mln BEV vehicles a year they are also at 400 GWh/yr, and almost uncatchable by competitors that are not already (today) seriously in the race, and I only see BYD and Nissan-Renault doing so.

This bits interesting. I just don't see VW and Tesla as equivalents, but if we take your hypothetical then what are the variables which have a significant effect on outcome? Battery price and availability obviously. Who can command a margin which allows them to stay in the game at a higher cost? What confers the ability to hold a margin? What about non-car manufacturers? ...or car manufacturers moving in to other forms of vehicle? Does anybody else have a sellable/licensable platform?

So this is a race that could in many ways be over extremely quickly from a investment selection perspective. It really is much more remiscent of a software (or computer hardware) competition landscape than trad auto, and that is a strategic understanding that I am sure TSLA are comfortable with.

How much of this is already decided is another interesting question. Having talked about the race several times, for me this particular aspect is more a spin of the roulette wheel. The ball is already in motion, it's final destination is all but decided yet still unknown, but the croupier hasn't yet called 'no more bets', and on the sidelines we are using the computers hidden in our shoes to try and determine from the frequency with which it passes 0 which quarter of the wheel the ball will fall in!

Events may change the outcome, but I think they are more in the realms of politics than business. Companies have made the decisions which determine their position down the first straight and in to the first bend, but a last minute change to the course can't be ruled out.

Will it be a four-manufacturer outcome ? Or what ? I don't know, but I'd be very interested in real numbers (BEV, PHEV, GWh) for the other major players if your sleuthing abilities can turn them up.

Genuinely I have no idea, the only constant I see when considering different futures for the car market is a good chance of a healthy VW emerging better off/less scathed then those around them. To be more precise about the futures of some of the smaller companies I think requires a higher resolution lens than I have and knowledge of certain individual events which haven't happened yet.

Here's some European sales figures for 2019 by model:



- https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/27/te ... es-report/

[Howard]

If you add up the manufacturers' shares of the top 20 models in the European plug-in market, shown in Bobby's post above, you get an interesting top three by sales volume.

1. Tesla,104,057 2. BMW, 86,005 3. VW, 47,193.

It will be interesting to see how profitable these three manufacturers are by the end of 2020 after any fines are levied in Europe and how much cash they can invest in new models. The smart operators will be those that meet the EU standards and grow market share without damaging margins.

Sales of ICE cars, especially in the USA and Germany, still appear to have good margins. Will the cash generated help the premium brands to develop more electric models which meet consumer demands?

regards

Howard

[BobbyD]

If you add up the manufacturers' shares of the top 20 models in the European plug-in market, shown in Bobby's post above, you get an interesting top three by sales volume.

1. Tesla,104,057 2. BMW, 86,005 3. VW, 47,193.

It will be interesting to see how profitable these three manufacturers are by the end of 2020 after any fines are levied in Europe and how much cash they can invest in new models. The smart operators will be those that meet the EU standards and grow market share without damaging margins.

Sales of ICE cars, especially in the USA and Germany, still appear to have good margins. Will the cash generated help the premium brands to develop more electric models which meet consumer demands?

regards

Howard

Meant to post these amidst yesterdays flurry.

BMW Releases New Infographics On Plug-In EV Sales for 2019 - https://insideevs.com/news/394901/bmw-g ... rted-2019/

Lots of pie charts and bar charts, example:

[dspp]

If you add up the manufacturers' shares of the top 20 models in the European plug-in market, shown in Bobby's post above, you get an interesting top three by sales volume.

1. Tesla,104,057 2. BMW, 86,005 3. VW, 47,193.

It will be interesting to see how profitable these three manufacturers are by the end of 2020 after any fines are levied in Europe and how much cash they can invest in new models. The smart operators will be those that meet the EU standards and grow market share without damaging margins.

Sales of ICE cars, especially in the USA and Germany, still appear to have good margins. Will the cash generated help the premium brands to develop more electric models which meet consumer demands?

regards

Howard

I think you need to do the numbers again, calculating the GWh used. The BMW i3 is a small-battery compliance BEV car with avge 30kWh battery. The other BMWs are PHEVs. This becomes obvious when you calculate the GWh.

However I really think you need to do the numbers on a global scale to really understand as there are some manufacturers prioritising one market geography over another.

Anyway my observations are that:
- Nissan Leaf + Renault Zoe is bringing the 'group...' towards a credible manufacturing scale.
- Jaguar and Hyundai are very much also-rans
- the others are pretty much all PHEV

regards, dspp

[Howard]

Moving to the UK market, I see that Drive Electric are forecasting that sales of BEVs may reach 100,000 in 2020, mainly because of the change in BIK rules which will massively subsidise full BEVs.

It's worth looking at the vast range of BEVs which have literally become available for leasing in the UK in the last few weeks. Presumably manufacturers have been waiting for 2020 to start pushing volume.

I counted 44 different models available just on the page linked below, including a couple of small vans. Ranging from a Skoda Citgo e from £131 a month to a Tesla S ludicrous at £855 a month (business rates excl vat plus an initial payment of 9 months).

See: https://www.drive-electric.co.uk/car-type/electric/

It is likely that we'll see even more choice available once VW launch their ID range later in the year.

regards

Howard

The forecast of 100k cars is quoted in the article: https://insideevs.com/news/395379/forec ... s-sold-uk/

[BobbyD]

I counted 44 different models available just on the page linked below, including a couple of small vans. Ranging from a Skoda Citgo e from £131 a month to a Tesla S ludicrous at £855 a month (business rates excl vat plus an initial payment of 9 months).

...and only 6 of them are Teslas!

Nice to see a Taycan on the list.

I'm guessing £131 a month is pretty cheap? Time to rerun the total cost of ownership for somebody working in a congestion zone debate...

However what could easily swing the equation is congestion charging / pollution charging. The London ULEZ is £12.50/day. So if you are doing four days/week in London ULEZ for 40 weeks/year then that is 4 x 40 x 3 x £12.50 = £6,000.

Meaning the base model Citigo-e, El Born and ID3 become profitable after 4-5 years based on cg/ulez charging alone, before you even take in to account other benefits and cost savings like the congestion charge...

Please excuse me if I have done the London ULEV numbers wrong. And please correct me if I should also be including congestion charging.

You should.

You need to pay an £11.50 daily charge if you drive within the Congestion Charge zone 07:00-18:00, Monday to Friday. If your vehicle does not meet the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) standards, you must also pay the ULEZ charge. The ULEZ operates from midnight to midnight, 7 days a week, every day of the year.

- https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/conges ... harge-zone

so £24 x 5 (no slacking!) x 40 = £14,400 over 3 years, leaving a Citigo-e with an expected net cost of £3600, and an ID3 owing it's owner £7600 after 3 years, again before any other benefits are considered!

It's almost like the green drive has created the world's first truly disposable cars!

[PeterGray]

How long will the congestion charge exemption for low emission vehicles last if EV's start being taken up big time?

[Howard]

If you add up the manufacturers' shares of the top 20 models in the European plug-in market, shown in Bobby's post above, you get an interesting top three by sales volume.

1. Tesla,104,057 2. BMW, 86,005 3. VW, 47,193.

It will be interesting to see how profitable these three manufacturers are by the end of 2020 after any fines are levied in Europe and how much cash they can invest in new models. The smart operators will be those that meet the EU standards and grow market share without damaging margins.

Sales of ICE cars, especially in the USA and Germany, still appear to have good margins. Will the cash generated help the premium brands to develop more electric models which meet consumer demands?

regards

Howard

I think you need to do the numbers again, calculating the GWh used. The BMW i3 is a small-battery compliance BEV car with avge 30kWh battery. The other BMWs are PHEVs. This becomes obvious when you calculate the GWh.

However I really think you need to do the numbers on a global scale to really understand as there are some manufacturers prioritising one market geography over another.

Anyway my observations are that:
- Nissan Leaf + Renault Zoe is bringing the 'group...' towards a credible manufacturing scale.
- Jaguar and Hyundai are very much also-rans
- the others are pretty much all PHEV

regards, dspp

dspp

We appear to be coming at the electric car issue from different angles. You are interested in one component of a car, admittedly a big component, the battery. I'm looking at the actual number of cars sold in a particular market, the trends, the upcoming legislation and the potential profitability of the volume of cars sold.

Maybe Tesla will have bigger batteries than every other manufacturer. But will they meet the needs of new generations of car owners profitably? At the moment they are failing to do that. Perhaps they will dazzle us tonight with stories of increased profitability which will show that their approach is succeeding.

The next year or two will indicate if big batteries are going to win in a much more competitive BEV market particularly in big cities. If we take London, for example, I can see that the new regulations will encourage much higher BEV sales. Will Tesla win a large market share or will slightly smaller cars with less range be more popular? At the other end of the market, if I were running an S class Mercedes diesel as a limo operator would I be tempted to change to a Tesla S? At the moment, there is no sign that this is occurring given that the second hand values of Tesla S models are not holding up that well, perhaps because of their reputation for unreliability compared with cars like Mercedes.

The average car buyer may be persuaded by battery size. Particularly in California. But will huge batteries be an advantage in Europe and other markets? I don't know the answer, and I'm sceptical about any forecasts which don't take into account much wider issues like profitability, reliability and customer service.

regards

Howard

[odysseus2000]

We appear to be coming at the electric car issue from different angles. You are interested in one component of a car, admittedly a big component, the battery. I'm looking at the actual number of cars sold in a particular market, the trends, the upcoming legislation and the potential profitability of the volume of cars sold.

Maybe Tesla will have bigger batteries than every other manufacturer. But will they meet the needs of new generations of car owners profitably? At the moment they are failing to do that. Perhaps they will dazzle us tonight with stories of increased profitability which will show that their approach is succeeding.

The next year or two will indicate if big batteries are going to win in a much more competitive BEV market particularly in big cities. If we take London, for example, I can see that the new regulations will encourage much higher BEV sales. Will Tesla win a large market share or will slightly smaller cars with less range be more popular? At the other end of the market, if I were running an S class Mercedes diesel as a limo operator would I be tempted to change to a Tesla S? At the moment, there is no sign that this is occurring given that the second hand values of Tesla S models are not holding up that well, perhaps because of their reputation for unreliability compared with cars like Mercedes.

The average car buyer may be persuaded by battery size. Particularly in California. But will huge batteries be an advantage in Europe and other markets? I don't know the answer, and I'm sceptical about any forecasts which don't take into account much wider issues like profitability, reliability and customer service.

regards

Howard

As things now are, and they could change with robotic driving & political mandates, I feel that the way to look at what will do well as a car is to consider what historically has done well, starting with the model T and progressing through the list of popular models since.

The model T gave Americans freedom, it was simple to drive, big enough for families and had a long range and good performance and was affordable.

Many competing cars emerged and there was the development of luxury brands but as I look at it the big sellers always had these model T characteristics.

One can argue that the mini was a popular car even though it was small and it sold well, but it sold nothing like as well as the Cortina which was an updated version of the model T characteristics.

In the current market BEV, PHEV etc car market one has many cars that a buyer can choose between but as I look at things it is the model 3 which is more like the model T in all ways except price. I expect Tesla to lower prices on the 3 going forwards while keeping good margins from improvements in manufacturing techniques and in batteries.

If car buying is to continue as it did historically it seems to me that a maker who can offer the model T parameters will do well. There are of course many added caveats that were not there in Ford's time, the desire to reduce pollution being a very strong one. Here I believe is an Achilles heel for many of the hybrid and plug in cars as we do not know what regulations the politicians will bring in, but we expect them to get more towards zero emission cars. Anyone buying a non full fat BEV puts themselves at the risk of loosing clean credentials as has happened to Prius owners. Anyone leasing doesn't care as they will be gone in 3 years, but anyone who wants to buy a car for 12 years or what ever will have to accept that their car may become out of clean spec long before it is worn out. By contrast it seems likely that a full fat BEV will be as clean in terms of emissions in 12 years as it is now.

Regards,