Ford just reported a massive loss on every electric vehicle it sold

Racer88

Racer88

Big Kahuna Admin
Staff member
Exchange Privileges
Joined
Feb 26, 2022
Messages
14,362
Reaction score
16,642
Points
168
Location
USA! USA!

I find this quite hilarious, because anyone with a shred of intelligence saw this coming YEARS ago. Yet, we were ridiculed by those with an agenda and their willfully ignorant sycophants (I just wanted to use that word!) In the Soviet Union, they called them "useful idiots."

Ford’s electric vehicle unit reported that losses soared in the first quarter to $1.3 billion, or $132,000 for each of the 10,000 vehicles it sold in the first three months of the year
Click to expand...

The EV unit, which Ford calls Model e, sold 10,000 vehicles in the quarter, down 20% from the number it sold a year earlier. And its revenue plunged 84% to about $100 million, which Ford attributed mostly to price cuts for EVs across the industry. That resulted in the $1.3 billion loss before interest and taxes (EBIT), and the massive per-vehicle loss in the Model e unit.
Click to expand...

On Tuesday Tesla, the world’s largest EV maker, reported that its adjusted earnings plunged 48% in the first quarter as revenue fell 9%, after it reported the first year-over-year drop in sales since the pandemic.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Totally predictable by the laws of physics and economics, but those facts never seem to convince EV proponents or gooberment's use of taxpayer funds to incentivise EV production and sales. SCROOM!
 

Mercedes is seeing the writing on the wall with its EVs​


As per a report by Automotive News, the three-pointed star announced that it will be adjusting its stateside electric vehicle strategy during a recent event attended by North American retailers in Stuttgart, Germany.

Attendees who attended said that Mercedes will be shifting from its once-aggressive EV push toward a "flexible and tactical" powertrain strategy that emphasizes full-fledged gas powered internal-combustion cars and hybrids alongside its electric offerings.
Click to expand...
 
I hope they figure the EV thing out -- clearly we are dependent on fossil fuel which is largely supplied by entities that hate or at least don't like us. I do think it is a matter of our national security. I don't want it figured out by government edict, I want it figured out because it actually works. In the meantime, I am more than happy to pay a premium for gasoline which is reliable in most weather, works, and takes minutes to replenish at a pump. I'm traveling back from the FL panhandle and have to chuckle at someone from that area who regularly travels a 90 mile distance to a from the area I was in who expressed a concern about the route they needed to drive as they have an EV. I bit my tongue while thinking, "you reap what you sow" and also applauding that at least one "conventional" vehicle was in the household in case of the need for hurricane evac.
 
brian said:
I want it figured out because it actually works.
Click to expand...
Except it doesn't work. And it's not because of a lack of technology or development. It's because of the Laws of Thermodynamics (Physics).
 
Racer88 said:
Except it doesn't work. And it's not because of a lack of technology or development. It's because of the Laws of Thermodynamics (Physics).
Click to expand...
And maybe it doesn't and/or can't. Or maybe we haven't discovered what makes it work. Not suggesting battery approaches themselves are the solution (given what we know). Some better APU concept, powering things from a Hydrogen by splitting/breaking down atoms of H2O, harnessing a "nuclear power plant in a reactor "the size of a 12oz can". Who knows. Figuring out how we can function, as a nation, without dependency on resources outside of our control is a matter of national security.
 
I think you missed the bigger one this week when Tesla fired a bunch of workers at their headquarters in Austin and on the East coast. Yes, I know Ford is way bigger as a company, but the golden goose of EVs is Tesla and what everyone points to in the EV industry in the news.

Tesla moved to Austin a couple of years ago into that mega factory and they are letting thousands of workers go as announced this past week. I forget the spin they had on the press release, but it was something stupid like "for positive growth" we are restructuring.... blah, blah, blah... When you're firing thousands, it ain't because things are positive.

It is amazing that PR staff can come up with such bullshit. A nuclear bomb could be en-route and they would spin it into something stupid and positive on Twitter. I think I've mentioned before that the developer and designer of the Chevy Volt called me around 2008-ish seeking help with a project he was overseeing in Nigeria. He was Obama's golden boy planted on the GM bailout. We talked for a couple of hours. I never called him back. The project did not involved EV's, but I predicted the Volt would fail as it was being pushed hard at the time. I didn't tell him my thoughts on that, but it was a major reason I never called him back.
 
Last edited:
brian said:
And maybe it doesn't and/or can't. Or maybe we haven't discovered what makes it work.
Click to expand...
No. We already understand the Laws of Physics. The 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Simply put... you can't get more energy out of a system than is already in it. Even more simply... you can't get more of something from less of something.

brian said:
powering things from a Hydrogen by splitting/breaking down atoms of H2O
Click to expand...
Nope. There are basically two ways of harvesting / producing hydrogen. One is by splitting H2O with a TON of electricity. The result is a net LOSS of energy. That pesky 1st Law of Thermodynamics at work. In other words, it takes MORE energy INPUT to split the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen than the energy you'll get by burning the Hydrogen. Where is the energy used to split the H2O coming from?!??

The 2nd way is steam reformation of methane into Hydrogen and CO2. Two problems... it's also a net loss of energy. AND it produces a LOT of CO2.

brian said:
Who knows.
Click to expand...
We know. WE know. We actually already know, because we understand the Laws of Physics. The public is being sold an UNscientific agenda cloaked in the false mantle of "science."

A lot of people are going to get rich and then SPLIT. See: Solyndra. Gosh, why don't we hear about solar panels on houses hardly anymore??

This is an agenda to exert CONTROL.
 
Last edited:
Racer88 said:
No. We already understand the Laws of Physics. The 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Simply put... you can't get more energy out of a system than is already in it. Even more simply... you can't get more of something from less of something.


Nope. There are basically two ways of harvesting / producing hydrogen. One is by splitting H2O with a TON of electricity. The result is a net LOSS of energy. That pesky 1st Law of Thermodynamics at work. In other words, it takes MORE energy INPUT to split the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen than the energy you'll get by burning the Hydrogen. Where is the energy used to split the H2O coming from?!??

The 2nd way is steam reformation of methane into Hydrogen and CO2. Two problems... it's also a net loss of energy. AND it produces a LOT of CO2.


We know. WE know. We actually already know, because we understand the Laws of Physics. The public is being sold an UNscientific agenda cloaked in the false mantle of "science."
Click to expand...
I get your points. Sure, purely from a law of physics then we have issues to deal with. If you have an open mind you get that even gasoline is not a 100% return on investment -- there's a lot that goes into processing oil into gasoline & we lose energy when we burn gas, etc. If we could dump water into our cars and drive just like we do with gasoline (or maybe even 75% or 50% of), we'd be effen' nuts not to do so as we'd be putting hot pokers into the eyes of nations that hate us.

At the end of day. I double down that I am happy to see thing explored. I'll also double down that I want to see the free market figure out what to do. Government subsidy and/or mandate is not free market. I don't even support the Tesla "self navigation crap" even though a number of people seem vested in it. Out of 300 million+ in the USA, even 10's of thousands is not a mandate....
 
brian said:
Sure, purely from a law of physics then we have issues to deal with.
Click to expand...

Sigh. No. Suggesting that we have to "deal with the issues of Physics" is ignoring... well... PHYSICS. It's the LAWS of Physics, not the "rules," "suggestions," or "hurdles" of Physics. The Laws of Physics cannot be defied regardless of technological development. NO amount of "science" will overcome the FACT (ie LAWS of Physics) that you can't get MORE energy from a source of LESS energy.

We can ACKNOWLEDGE the Laws of Physics and move on accordingly to other potential VIABLE solutions.

So, it will ALWAYS take MORE energy to harvest Hydrogen from water or methane (for example, since it doesn't exist freely in nature in usable amounts) than you'll ever get by burning Hydrogen as a fuel source. We can't pump hydrogen out of the ground. So, a net negative of energy to produce it and then use it as an energy source.

Petroleum / gasoline is very much a net positive energy source. We get FAR more energy out of it than it takes to pump and refine it.

At BEST, with a THEORETICAL 100% efficiency (also impossible), you can get the SAME amount of energy from a particular source. The reality is that solar, wind, Hydrogen, and other so-called "green" energy sources are extremely low energy density. In other words, "the juice isn't worth the squeeze."

The highest energy dense fuel source is nuclear. By many orders of magnitude. But nuclear suffers a tremendous (and unsubstantiated / irrational) stigma. People are irrationally fearful of nuclear power generation. And THAT will hold us back more than anything. We're afraid to build nuclear power plants.
 
Last edited:
Racer88 said:
The highest energy dense fuel source is nuclear. By many orders of magnitude. But nuclear suffers a tremendous (and unsubstantiated / irrational) stigma. People are irrationally fearful of nuclear power generation. And THAT will hold us back more than anything.
Click to expand...
You more or less circled back to the point.

Racer88 said:
Sigh. No. Suggesting that we have to "deal with the issues of Physics" is ignoring... well... PHYSICS. It's the LAWS of Physics, not the "rules," "suggestions," or "hurdles" of Physics. The Laws of Physics cannot be defied regardless of technological development. NO amount of "science" will overcome the FACT (ie LAWS of Physics) that you can't get MORE energy from a source of LESS energy.
Click to expand...
I get ya and am on board. By having "an open mind" means we need to embrace our options. We, as a country, could flip the bird to our enemies by embracing nuclear power. If we can figure out how to make it work on an aircraft carrier and a sub, I'd think we could make it work on land. Probably even safer so. To a degree even if charging a car battery with it over an inefficient grid then it may not be great but we'd make it work. The sad thing is that ultra liberal Europe has a lot of Nuclear power in use. While I don't aspire to be like those jack-tards, if they can figure it out and live with it why can't we?!?!?!
 
brian said:
If we can figure out how to make it work on an aircraft carrier and a sub, I'd think we could make it work on land. Probably even safer so.
Click to expand...

Ummm... we've been doing that for decades. But we quit building nuclear plants. Like I said... irrational fear. Nuclear is statistically (in terms of human lives lost) the safest major source of energy on the planet.

1714101139041.png
 
Last edited:
They have car parks in France that are full of city & county electric vehicles that have expired, and they are just sitting there, taking-up space. They can't responsibly dispose of them b/c the battery packs are so toxic and dangerous, so they just sit there.

"Green initiative" fools. Sadly, the auto industry largely went all-in, to play the stupid little game and show their commitment to the climate nazis. Pfft. Serves them right, for serving a despicable agenda and system.
 
Racer88 said:
Ummm... we've been doing that for decades. But we quit building nuclear plants. Like I said... irrational fear. Nuclear is statistically (in terms of human lives lost) the safest major source of energy on the planet.

View attachment 19291
Click to expand...
What can I say? You and I both build guns too. Neither one of us is "The Issue" ;)
 
USApat said:
I think I've mentioned before that the developer and designer of the Chevy Volt called me around 2008-ish seeking help with a project he was overseeing in Nigeria.
Click to expand...
I have never really looked this guy up until tonight and thus I could have slightly misstated above. If you believe the Wikipedia page linked to below, the guy I chatted with was the "lead exterior designer" of the Volt. However, he presented to me as he was the "designer" in the call, but it has been many years. Regardless, he was one of the founding guys who started this EV saga that we confront today and it was dovetailed with that GM bailout funded by tax payers launching on or around 2008. At the time, Ford was one of the only manufacturers that you wanted to hold American automotive stock due to the recession crash at the time in that industry. GM got the nestegg of the bailouts and a lot of attention by Obama and the Volt was a focus with a future of EVs. Just a little EV automotive history here.

What I never knew about this guy from Nigeria until tonight after reviewing Wikipedia is that he was also involved with the Opel Astra. You folks probably won't know what that vehicle is, but the Astra was one of the "saloon" cars (or "tintops") I raced in the UK alongside the open wheel series I also raced in which was run by Opel/Vauxhall (GM stateside). The Astra was normally aspirated and called the Vauxhall Astra in the UK (Opel Astra in Europe). It was 16 valves at about 170hp off the showroom floor, but not the power for the race car. It was north of that in the 200+ hp range and front-wheel drive. It looks like I was racing them before this guy from Nigeria began working on them.

And here he is in a photo with one of the founding EVs in this country. Could be the godfather of EV design if the Volt had sold. Woulda, coulda, shoulda. LOL! :p . It has always been a losing idea due to infrastructure issues and battery issues. And don't get me started on the ridiculous (and quiet) electric vehicle racing. Argh! Nothing like a V8, V10 or V12 sound.

Jelani-Aliyu.jpg


Jelani Aliyu pictured working on the Chevy volt concept prototype.

Is it me? But, the guy looks like Obama's son!

Aliyu-jelani.jpg




en.wikipedia.org

Jelani Aliyu - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
Found it. The Tesla job cuts over 6000 workers. This press story is two days prior to @Racer88 's link above.

And the ridiculous spin "As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth...." LOL

========================
“As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth, it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity,” he wrote. A subsequent WARN notice filed in New York indicated that 285 positions were being eliminated at a factory in Buffalo.

  • Tesla is eliminating 2,688 jobs in Austin, Texas, where the electric vehicle company is headquartered.
  • The company is also cutting 3,332 jobs across California.
  • The steep job cuts are part of a broader restructuring Tesla announced last week.

 
Last edited:
USApat said:
Found it. The Tesla job cuts over 6000 workers. This press story is two days prior to @Racer88 's link above.

And the ridiculous spin "As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth...." LOL

========================
“As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth, it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity,” he wrote. A subsequent WARN notice filed in New York indicated that 285 positions were being eliminated at a factory in Buffalo.

Click to expand...
Isn't that like "spending your way to prosperity?"

The EV writing is (finally) on the wall. It's always been there for those of us who actually took and passed high school Physics and Chemistry.
 
Racer88 said:
Isn't that like "spending your way to prosperity?"

The EV writing is (finally) on the wall. It's always been there for those of us who actually took and passed high school Physics and Chemistry.
Click to expand...
Here's my favorite part:

"it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity"

Looks like they will be hammering staff for more output to make up for lost crew.

beatings-will-continue-until-morale-improves_u-L-PXJGXP0.jpg


I know someone who worked on the factory floor. She made really good money for her qualifications (she had none in the automotive industry) and was under the age of 30. She trekked out to work at 3am and got home at 5pm after the drive to work. I don't want to imply that Tesla is abusive in the above graphic, but they do have long hours. And, no doubt, cutting workers will probably make it a lot tougher working there. Maybe Musk should focus on Rockets. Just a thought.
 
Last edited:

Share this page

Back
Top