What would make you buy an electric car?

Tyk

LE
London had electric taxis in 1897
they could take them back to the depot and exchange batteries in half an hour
thats 124 years of development

Indeed, but humping some lead acid batteries into a vehicle is a vastly different proposition from a Tesla battery pack. Plus the taxi's were never ranging that far from the depot.
Like most of us I remember the electric milk floats, apart from the fact they are battery powered they bear no resemblance to a passenger EV, the development isn't similar.

Electric drive motors are absolutely fine, better than an internal combustion engine in most ways, the problem is how to fuel and refuel them effectively
 
Last edited:
Initially quite expensive yes, but not even marginally comparable to the cost of a car in annual income terms, 20 years later much less so. Not forgetting that mobiles supplied with phone contracts very rapidly became heavily subsidised by the mobile networks, the technology became functionally FREE with an airtime deal quite rapidly hence the mass market penetration.
Today's smartphone is the product of over 30 years as a mass market item with numerous iterations, semi viable EV's have been around about 5 years, the technology is far from matured and won't be by the absurd 2030 date and the cost relative to income of an EV (even a cheap crappy one) compared to a phone is streets different.

That's ignoring the huge functionality gap of charging times and charging supplies for anyone that actually has to get any meaningful distance.

Your comparison is absurd.

Mobiles were not subsidised, it was included in the price of the contracts because poor people couldnt afford to buy outright.

Electric cars have been around longer than 30 years.

I think these companies might have more of a clue than those who cant get to grips with technology






Clearly these billion pound companies need to be advised by the ARRSE luddites where they are going wrong.
 

RBMK

LE
Book Reviewer
We have the Golf GTD , outstanding on fuel economy , well if you remover her lead foot.
I had a Mk2 GTD which was stonking for 1992. Bought with 16,000 on it, sold with 140,000 and at the last MOT it had 205,000.

SWMBO is going to get a horrible shock if she does go EV, she is a complete technophobe, struggles with the concept of adaptive cruise control, doesn't like or use the auto wipers, doesn't understand that the speed limit warning is occasionally wrong and after nearly 18 months of me having the Volvo still can't remember how to turn the engine off [clue-- it's the button marked Start / Stop].

God alone knows how she will get on with no gears and regenerative braking -- especially as she doesn't like automatics. A lot of new EVs also have things like head up displays etc.
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
..., Im sure at least some of the poor wont be a fussy as some people on here.
You seem to be conflating 'the poor' with anyone that earns / holds less value than yourself. Whilst i'm not 'poor' in having to use foodbanks etc. I don't have the luxury of having surplus funds to absorb the increased cost of changing to an EV that my current vehicle fulfils (not that one exists at the moment...) So why should I, for example, have my dogs put down, change my holidaying habits, change my interests and lifestyle to suit which EV I can afford - either outright or lease?
Financially I am where I am, due to poor life choice of spouse, i'd be interested given your superior life choices as how i could have mitigated that given that it took 20 years for my poor choice and subsequent financial penalties for doing so to become apparent.
 
You seem to be conflating 'the poor' with anyone that earns / holds less value than yourself. Whilst i'm not 'poor' in having to use foodbanks etc. I don't have the luxury of having surplus funds to absorb the increased cost of changing to an EV that my current vehicle fulfils (not that one exists at the moment...) So why should I, for example, have my dogs put down, change my holidaying habits, change my interests and lifestyle to suit which EV I can afford - either outright or lease?
Financially I am where I am, due to poor life choice of spouse, i'd be interested given your superior life choices as how i could have mitigated that given that it took 20 years for my poor choice and subsequent financial penalties for doing so to become apparent.

Im pretty sure someone mentioned only being able to spend a grand on a car earlier.

Im also pretty sure I gave an example of cheap chinese EV which clearly one person thought they were too good for.

Its your own fault for choosing a shit spouse wasnt it? Did you do anything over that 20 years to protect yourself from the future or did you just carry on thinking it would always be okay?
 

Tyk

LE
Mobiles were not subsidised, it was included in the price of the contracts because poor people couldnt afford to buy outright.

Electric cars have been around longer than 30 years.

I think these companies might have more of a clue than those who cant get to grips with technology






Clearly these billion pound companies need to be advised by the ARRSE luddites where they are going wrong.

Incorrect I saw enough of the contracts, how they evolved and the wholesale and retail prices of the mobile equipment. The subsidies from the networks started by 1990 and continue to this day, all the mobile networks subsidise, they wouldn't be competitive if they stopped. You're either telling porkies or are utterly clueless on the subject.

Easy example as I'm considering my mobile contract at the moment, my current handset is getting a bit long in the tooth. In the past I've bought SIM free handsets and SIM only deals.
Best possible price of the SIM free handset I want via a Hong Kong supplier £620 (UK retail £800)
Current Sim only deal with more data than I need +unlimited calls and texts (few pence more, but what the fark) 24 months at £20 = £480

Standard off the shelf deal via a UK supplier TOTAL cost of ownership over 24 months, that's the contract PLUS brand new handset £774. Same Data and calls/texts as currently.
Compared to the UK retail of £1,280 or more risky £1,100 via Hong Kong.

The network subsidies are very real, unless the electricity suppliers were to subsidise EV purchases to a significant extent not only is it ludicrous to compare mobiles to EV's on a technological front, but the business models are entirely dissimilar.

As to car manufacturers there's no doubt that there have been a combination of carrots and sticks applied to them for vehicles supplied to Western markets. With the likes of the UK, EU, Australia, Canada and probably the USA stating they intend to ban the sale of internal combustion cars they've had to move with an immature fuelling technology.
The charging infrastructure is firmly someone else's problem other than where they can build charge points attached to the nationally supplied grids and make a surcharge to recover their investment and profit from fuel.

Oh and the cheap Chinese EV you linked, that wasn't the price it would be sold in the UK for, add a minimum of 50% of that price if not 100% in the UK. Plenty of current cars are vastly cheaper in India or China than in the European area, for the same car.
 
Last edited:

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
First mobile I bought myself was a Motorola MicroTAC, close to £1k outright but 'only' £320 up front plus £32 PCM plus call costs if I took out a contract for a year subject to ID and credit checks.

And that wasn't subsidised?
 
Incorrect I saw enough of the contracts, how they evolved and the wholesale and retail prices of the mobile equipment. The subsidies from the networks started by 1990 and continue to this day, all the mobile networks subsidise, they wouldn't be competitive if they stopped. You're either telling porkies or are utterly clueless on the subject.

Easy example as I'm considering my mobile contract at the moment, my current handset is getting a bit long in the tooth. In the past I've bought SIM free handsets and SIM only deals.
Best possible price of the SIM free handset I want via a Hong Kong supplier £620 (UK retail £800)
Current Sim only deal with more data than I need +unlimited calls and texts (few pence more, but what the fark) 24 months at £20 = £480

Standard off the shelf deal via a UK supplier TOTAL cost of ownership over 24 months, that's the contract PLUS brand new handset £774. Same Data and calls/texts as currently.
Compared to the UK retail of £1,280 or more risky £1,100 via Hong Kong.

The network subsidies are very real, unless the electricity suppliers were to subsidise EV purchases to a significant extent not only is it ludicrous to compare mobiles to EV's on a technological front, but the business models are entirely dissimilar.

As to car manufacturers there's no doubt that there have been a combination of carrots and sticks applied to them for vehicles supplied to Western markets. With the likes of the UK, EU, Australia, Canada and probably the USA stating they intend to ban the sale of internal combustion cars they've had to move with an immature fuelling technology.
The charging infrastructure is firmly someone else's problem other than where they can build charge points attached to the nationally supplied grids and make a surcharge to recover their investment and profit from fuel.

Have you never noticed the difference between sim only and contract with a phone? Its almost as if the price of the phone is included in the contract.

Why not say the name and of your phone company and make of phone?

Heres an apple phone

Only 43.37 for 3 years plus 30 quid to give a total of 1591 for a 15gb data a month


Buy brand new for 999. remainder 592 (from the previous total of 1591)

592 divided by 36 is 16 quid a month and for 15 quid a month (for 18 months) they will give you 30 GB a month.

Buy upfront, have a smaller sim contract and they will give you double the data and its still cheaper.

Given that its highly likely that O2 get a hefty discount for bulk buying they are certainly spanking their customers despite these subsidises when they take out a phone on contract.
 
I beleave Aus has gone the way of battery storage, big time, That the way to go if you want plenty of solar and wind renewables, another thing is, using batteries gives stability to the grid,
Grid stability being a big problem with wind turbine being in the system
In truth, Australia has done **** all about renewables. Current grid instability isn’t caused by reliance on wind; it’s caused by shagged out coal burning plants going off line before new capacity is installed. And by a massive over reliance of overhead line at the HV and LV distribution (as opposed to HV transmission) level.

The latter is very much union driven; way too much transmission infrastructure is still in the public sector, maintained and repaired by a very unproductive workforce riddled with Spanish practices.

Only South Australia has really done anything about grid instability, with its giant batteries.

At the other end, State governments have completely ducked local generation by screwing up feed-in tariffs and by failing to encourage / mandate the installation of solar in new developments.

Australia is decades behind most the developed world in adopting renewables.
 

Tyk

LE
Have you never noticed the difference between sim only and contract with a phone? Its almost as if the price of the phone is included in the contract.

Why not say the name and of your phone company and make of phone?

Heres an apple phone

Only 43.37 for 3 years plus 30 quid to give a total of 1591 for a 15gb data a month


Buy brand new for 999. remainder 592 (from the previous total of 1591)

592 divided by 36 is 16 quid a month and for 15 quid a month (for 18 months) they will give you 30 GB a month.

Buy upfront, have a smaller sim contract and they will give you double the data and its still cheaper.

Given that its highly likely that O2 get a hefty discount for bulk buying they are certainly spanking their customers despite these subsidises when they take out a phone on contract.

Apologies to everyone else interested in the thread for the derail. We all know it's Stacker, but well he's clearly fitted for, but not with, a clue on this.

The handset and airtime supplier is irrelevant, as it happens same airtime supplier as currently, but via a reseller, the airtime supplier can't compete on price directly. This isn't anything new either as the resellers get incentives the airtime company staff can't access to sell to customers, it's part of the reseller contracting business model.

I showed the DIRECT comparison of prices for the same airtime deal, same duration, same handset, same airtime package.
£774 vs £1,280 or £1,100 if I'm prepared to risk a grey import (I'm not).

The price difference is partly due to wholesale prices, but MOSTLY due to subsidies from the airtime companies. I was part of the business when the subsidised business model kicked off and I know people IN the business still, I've seen the airtime contracts and reseller contracts from airtime suppliers I KNOW there are subsidies.
It is true that a proportion of the handset price is paid in the contract price, but far from all of it, because the price is subsidised. It cuts the profits of the airtime companies a bit, but in order for them to have a massive number of subscribers on a network that costs them beans to run relative to their income it's value for money. The subsidies were initially to encourage takeup of (what were very expensive) mobiles so they had the cash flow to grow the networks and the business model has stuck. No one company is willing to risk losing millions of customers if any other company sticks with the subsidy model, if they all agreed to change the model there'd be an interesting legal case for operating as a cartel.

ETA. I Know for an absolute fact in the 1990's the handsets were sold at a significant loss as part of airtime deals as the income over the life of the deal offset that loss and provided cash flow for growth of the networks to cover outside of metropolitan cities which was critical to success.
 
Last edited:
Apologies to everyone else interested in the thread for the derail. We all know it's Stacker, but well he's clearly fitted for, but not with, a clue on this.

The handset and airtime supplier is irrelevant, as it happens same airtime supplier as currently, but via a reseller, the airtime supplier can't compete on price directly. This isn't anything new either as the resellers get incentives the airtime company staff can't access to sell to customers, it's part of the reseller contracting business model.

I showed the DIRECT comparison of prices for the same airtime deal, same duration, same handset, same airtime package.
£774 vs £1,280 or £1,100 if I'm prepared to risk a grey import (I'm not).

The price difference is partly due to wholesale prices, but MOSTLY due to subsidies from the airtime companies. I was part of the business when the subsidised business model kicked off and I know people IN the business still, I've seen the airtime contracts and reseller contracts from airtime suppliers I KNOW there are subsidies.
It is true that a proportion of the handset price is paid in the contract price, but far from all of it, because the price is subsidised. It cuts the profits of the airtime companies a bit, but in order for them to have a massive number of subscribers on a network that costs them beans to run relative to their income it's value for money. The subsidies were initially to encourage takeup of (what were very expensive) mobiles so they had the cash flow to grow the networks and the business model has stuck. No one company is willing to risk losing millions of customers if any other company sticks with the subsidy model, if they all agreed to change the model there'd be an interesting legal case for operating as a cartel.

Ive just shown you with links the two offers from O2, one showing the contract phones are more expensive and one showing the sim is cheaper. (even though the sim gives more data and is for a shorter contract) That was also without taking bulk buying of handsets into account.

You then say your example is the other way around but dont show any links.

You say phone companies are prepared to lose 500 quid per customer when they cant even make their money back on texts and calls because its included in the price.
 

Tyk

LE
Ive just shown you with links the two offers from O2, one showing the contract phones are more expensive and one showing the sim is cheaper. (even though the sim gives more data and is for a shorter contract) That was also without taking bulk buying of handsets into account.

You then say your example is the other way around but dont show any links.

You say phone companies are prepared to lose 500 quid per customer when they cant even make their money back on texts and calls because its included in the price.

Feel free to Google, Sony Xperia 5 II 30Gb/unlimited/unlimited 24 months and SIM free price on the phone in the UK. My current SIM only deal is £20 plus a few pence a month. Uswitch would be an option if you can't be bothered to Google.
Total cost over 24 months £774.



Same price on Amazon and everywhere else that's not a grey import with associated risks.

I know you insist on being right and having the last word, but you're wrong and I'm posting from a perspective of actual knowledge of how the mobile business developed and I've kept in touch with it since leaving it.
Mobile contracts with handsets are subsidised by the airtime suppliers, no matter how much you bluster that's the reality in the UK.

Yet again your comparison of the mobile market to the EV market is an absurdity, their business models (and products) are dissimilar the handset is close to a loss leader if not actually still one, EV's completely the opposite.
 
Apologies to everyone else interested in the thread for the derail. We all know it's Stacker, but well he's clearly fitted for, but not with, a clue on this.

The handset and airtime supplier is irrelevant, as it happens same airtime supplier as currently, but via a reseller, the airtime supplier can't compete on price directly. This isn't anything new either as the resellers get incentives the airtime company staff can't access to sell to customers, it's part of the reseller contracting business model.

I showed the DIRECT comparison of prices for the same airtime deal, same duration, same handset, same airtime package.
£774 vs £1,280 or £1,100 if I'm prepared to risk a grey import (I'm not).

The price difference is partly due to wholesale prices, but MOSTLY due to subsidies from the airtime companies. I was part of the business when the subsidised business model kicked off and I know people IN the business still, I've seen the airtime contracts and reseller contracts from airtime suppliers I KNOW there are subsidies.
It is true that a proportion of the handset price is paid in the contract price, but far from all of it, because the price is subsidised. It cuts the profits of the airtime companies a bit, but in order for them to have a massive number of subscribers on a network that costs them beans to run relative to their income it's value for money. The subsidies were initially to encourage takeup of (what were very expensive) mobiles so they had the cash flow to grow the networks and the business model has stuck. No one company is willing to risk losing millions of customers if any other company sticks with the subsidy model, if they all agreed to change the model there'd be an interesting legal case for operating as a cartel.

ETA. I Know for an absolute fact in the 1990's the handsets were sold at a significant loss as part of airtime deals as the income over the life of the deal offset that loss and provided cash flow for growth of the networks to cover outside of metropolitan cities which was critical to success.
The EV manufactures already have subsidies in place; Tesla offered early adopters free charging at their Superchargers for the life of the vehicle and are still subsidising charging on every car they sell. Other manufactures are doing similar; IONITY is a JV between a number of car manufacturers (IIRC including VW & Merc) through which the manufacturers will be able to provide subsidised charging.

Parts of the motor industry have operated at loss leading margins for years. GM has hardly ever made a profit on its cars; it often sells them at a loss but its money on the finance and spares.

None of this is revolutionary; almost all disruptive early entry businesses have to buy customers to achieve profitable volume. My own business does this to grow; we use a Lead Magnet strategy to get people to buy their first product. We aim to break even, so that we recover of marketing costs and COGS, but we rarely do. We tend to run at a Cost of Customer Acquisition of about $25. But by subsequently selling around $1000 a year to about 25% of them at a 60% margin, so we make a healthy profit.

Stacker wouldn’t have a clue.
 
This was an interesting thread.
Then along came Stacker. Killed it stone dead. As per.
 

Chef

LE
Simple: Move to where they will work.


I've no idea if such a place exists yet, if it does, stacker1 will surely have first dibs on the best bits due to outstanding life choices. The rest of us, well, buy a trailer to carry your autonomous vehicle to where it needs to be, using your contraband diesel in your well hidden ICE powered relic of times gone by.
You're either Geddy Lee or Richard Foster. We know a song about this:

 

wheel

LE
I am sure an arrse expert will confirm numbers but I have noticed that there does not appear to be many of the original model of Toyota Prius on the road. I remember all the green save the world crowd buying them. Loads of old oil burners from same period with 250k plus on the clock no doubt.
 
I did a 500km plus (310 miles) round trip yesterday. Started with about 610 on the range estimate. I had a 25 minute charge at the half way point where we had a pee, sandwich and a coffee. When I got home I had about 200km left on the range estimate. The temperature was -1 going down to -3 at our destination, and I gave it about 30 minutes warm up before leaving. I had it self drive most of the highway bits. No dramas or anxiety just a nice trip. Tesla Model S.
 
Last edited:

Joshua Slocum

LE
Book Reviewer
Indeed, but humping some lead acid batteries into a vehicle is a vastly different proposition from a Tesla battery pack. Plus the taxi's were never ranging that far from the depot.
Like most of us I remember the electric milk floats, apart from the fact they are battery powered they bear no resemblance to a passenger EV, the development isn't similar.

Electric drive motors are absolutely fine, better than an internal combustion engine in most ways, the problem is how to fuel and refuel them effectively
The London Cab company had several electric taxis in the 70s
Harrods had electric deliveery vans in the 1920s
and in fact still use one of them for advertising
but range was always a problem
the Army trialled electric hybrid trucks in the 1930s
and the Italians prodiced small electric cars in the 70s that were succesfull
its all a learning curve
 
The London Cab company had several electric taxis in the 70s
Harrods had electric deliveery vans in the 1920s
and in fact still use one of them for advertising
but range was always a problem
the Army trialled electric hybrid trucks in the 1930s
and the Italians prodiced small electric cars in the 70s that were succesfull
its all a learning curve
The first car to do 100 kmh, Le Jamais Contente, was electric. It did so in 1899.
 

Joshua Slocum

LE
Book Reviewer
The first car to do 100 kmh, Le Jamais Contente, was electric. It did so in 1899.
Indeed, I had forgotten that, I sat next to it a few years ago as I dined in style
italy trip 2013 1976.JPG
italy trip 2013 1977.JPG
italy trip 2013 1978.JPG
 
Top