Reply With Quote
I wonder how they intend to make the enzyme soup in industrial quan ies
It would be nice to skip the process of making sugar into ethanol.
I wonder how they intend to make the enzyme soup in industrial quan ies
Hard to say, but it is a valid point. I recall another attempt at cheap energy, and they proved the method, but couldn't get the "soup" they needed quick enough for large scale.
btw, speaking of sugar, Americans are relentlessly up to an average 130 pounds of sugar consumption per year.
Thanks, BigFood! American love the dead, pathogenic, engineered, food-like substances you put in their feed troughs.
Many car dealers don't want to sell electric cars: Here's why
The stories abound: A car buyer walks into a dealership, educated about the electric car she wants to buy...and the salesperson tries to convince her she doesn't want that car after all.
She really wants a gasoline car, he argues.
Hundreds of cases have been reported of customers walking into a Nissan or Chevy dealer to buy a Leaf or Volt, then being aggressively steered toward a Sentra or Cruze.
Doom, danger, dire predictions
A buyer will run out of charge and be left stranded at the side of the road, he hears, or that very expensive battery will have to be replaced in five years.
Then the electric demo car hasn't been recharged, so its electric range is minimal on the test drive. And so forth.
A recent discussion in a Facebook group prompted us to write, once more, about how car dealers work--and what motivates them to sell specific vehicles.
The salient point is that it takes much longer to sell a plug-in electric car, today, than it does a gasoline or diesel vehicle.
Maximizing profit
And dealers maximize their profits by exploiting the difference in information about complex financial transactions between buyers who do it once every five or six years, on average, and salespeople who sell multiple cars a day.
As we wrote two months ago in another article on dealers:
Every salesperson's mission is to close the deal, today, at maximum profit with minimum time invested. Selling a plug-in car takes three to five times as long for a dealer as does selling a gasoline car.
It requires explanation, education, training, all of the fuss and bother associated with installing a charging station in the garage if the buyer wants one, and so on.
And, today's electric-car shoppers often know as much or more about their desired plug-in model as the salesperson does. To get their questions answered, several other people may have to be brought into the process. And that takes time.
Time, complexity
To make plug-ins equally attractive for dealership salespeople to sell, they would have to be three to five times as profitable per vehicle to sell -- to offset the extra time required.
They're not.
Add to that customers with complex questions about things like off-peak charging and the need to coordinate inspection and installation of a charging station.
Those and other issues -- none of which apply to gasoline cars -- provide the very obvious reasons why most salespeople will default to the easier sell: a gasoline car.
All salespeople are motivated by compensation. But as far as we know, not a single automaker has structured that compensation to make it equally worthwhile to sell plug-in cars.
The few dealerships that move high volumes of electric cars -- we know of at least two in California -- have single-purpose salespeople who specialize in nothing but plug-ins. Not every dealer will have enough plug-in buyers to justify that.
Dealers agnostic
Returning to quote our earlier article one more time:
Aside from a few with strong political beliefs, most car dealers don't care one way or the other about plug-in electric cars.
They care about moving the most cars in the least time at the highest profit with the least hassle.
So until selling a plug-in electric car is as quick and easy as selling any other vehicle that nets the dealer the same profit, many dealers will avoid them, for very logical and understandable reasons.
That means that the appropriate question should be directed to makers of electric cars: What are you doing to make selling electric cars as profitable and painless for your dealers as selling gasoline or diesel vehicles?
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7...news&tag= le
It's not their fault you weigh 380 lbs. That's your choice of diet. They aren't force feeding you. They are only supplying what you demand.
Why...
Because these cars are so highly subsidized, the dealers don't make the same profit and commission.
GM Doubles Down On “Moon Shot” Volt EV
GM is throwing down a cool $449 million for an upgrade of its Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly and Brownstown Battery Assembly plants, and that’s good news for anybody who wants to wrap their hands around a next-generation Volt EV, which company officials have hinted is a “moon shot” compared to the current model.
The Hamtramck plant is the manufacturing home of the Volt as well as the Cadillac ELR. The upgrade, along with the hinted-at technology leap for the Volt, puts GM in a position to compete with Tesla in the market for a $30,000 EV with a 200-mile battery range.
The rest of the pot goes to revamp the Brownstown Battery Assembly plant. If you recall the “web” of advanced battery plants funded by the Recovery Act that we wrote about back in 2010, that included the Brownstown facility.
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/04/12/...p3SGpPOoi8V.99
Republicans who once reviled Tesla, now praise it
For years, Tesla Motors could get no love from the GOP.
The electric automaker neatly embodied two things many Republicans hated: green technology and federal stimulus loans.
Conservative commentators railed that Tesla used $465 million in taxpayer money to build novelty cars for the rich.
Sarah Palin cited Tesla as an example of "crony capitalism."
Even Mitt Romney, who based his presidential campaign on business smarts, called the company a "loser."
Now, quite suddenly, Republicans, who have been struggling to appeal to a wider swath of voters, are singing the company's praises.
In recent weeks, Tesla has won support from such figures as Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly.
"Everybody on the planet should be rooting for Tesla," O'Reilly said on his March 31 show. "I mean everybody, even the traditional car companies that will have to compete."
Perry and Rubio want to ditch state laws that prevent Tesla from selling directly to consumers, rather than through traditional franchise dealerships. For Tesla, which has been fighting auto dealers in state after state, no issue is more important.
Way to update party image
Backing the company in its fight with dealerships could offer Republicans a way to update their image as a pro-business party, and possibly make inroads in the Democratic bastion of Silicon Valley, analysts say.
"This is an issue where the libertarian ethos of Silicon Valley may match up well with the libertarian ethos in the Republican Party," said Mark Muro, a senior fellow at the Brookings Ins ution. "This could be, for either party, a pillar for a very appealing story on economic change."
Tesla has had prominent Republican backers before.
Based in Palo Alto, Tesla was founded in 2003, a time when green technology was not considered particularly political. Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, bragged about Tesla as an example of the state's technological leadership and even bought one of the company's low-slung Roadsters. (He reportedly returned the car later on, after finding it too difficult to climb into and out of.)
But Republican support for clean tech started to wane after President Obama made green jobs a key part of his economic stimulus package.
( aka stupidly blind ideological politics, now exposed FULLY as stupidly blind ideological politics )
It faded further as GOP doubts about the reality of climate change hardened into outright rejection.
Then in 2011, solar startup Solyndra went bankrupt after receiving $528 million in stimulus loans to build a factory in Fremont. As a result, government loans to green companies became a favorite campaign issue for Republicans nationwide.
Tesla, which won $465 million in federal loans to reopen a shuttered auto plant a mile away from Solyndra, got dragged into the fight. Hence the "loser" comments from Romney and Palin.
Success changes minds
But success can change people's minds. In 2013, Tesla paid back the loan in full, nine years early. Despite a sell-off during the last two months, the company's stock still regularly trades above $200 per share, and Model S sedans are selling as fast as Tesla can make them.
http://m.sfgate.com/politics/article...it-5399733.php
Republicans and Tesla.
One of the few examples where an electric vehicle actually works in the marketplace. I can understand their earlier concerns. can't you?
So let the manufacturers sell them direct to the consumers who want them.
Of course, the Auto Dealers Association won't let that happen either.
Texas to offer $2,500 tax credit for alt-fuel vehicles
Though Texas may not be a fan of Tesla’s direct sales model, the Lone Star state is ready to offer alternative-fuel vehicle buyers some extra cash. As soon as next week, buyers of CNG, propane, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicles will be eligible for a $2,500 state tax credit. Combined with the $7,500 Federal tax credit, this could chop $10,000 off the cost of a new alt-fuel vehicle.
The credit only applies to vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 9,600 pounds or less, which is generous enough to apply to many commercial vehicles like the VIA X-Trux. The only other eligibility factor is that EVs must have a battery size of at least 4 kWh, a low barrier of entry that applies to pretty much every hybrid or EV out there, including the Chevy Volt. I wonder if this isn’t also an olive branch to Tesla Motors in a bid to bring the Tesla Gigafactory to Texas.
Actually, scratch that; the tax credit doesn’t apply to Tesla vehicles as they’re “illegal” to sell in Texas, requiring customers to jump though numerous hoops to get their EVs.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/11/texas-to-offer-2500-tax-credit-for-alt-fuel-vehicles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story%29
Are you complaining or rejoicing about the credit?
Are you complaining or rejoicing about the Tesla delema?
I report, you complain.
Your delema needs an enema.
I was wondering what your take was.
I am personally against it.
Any govt policies that reduce BigCarbon burning, I'm for. Such policies will NEVER offset the govt policies, going back many decades, that encourage BigCarbon burning.
The TX alt-fuel credit is very surprising.
It's against BigOil, and dealers don't like to sell alt-fuel cars, esp in TX where consumers don't really want them, and macho man trucks are the big margin sales.
Republicans like WC love the idea of the fat middle man.
First off, I am right leaning, but no republican.
Second of all, I do prefer that there are local businesses to employ people, but I am not against factory direct.
So Tesla would not employ people... Interesting.
What are you implying? Redistribute business money via dealers, that's a good thing?
Something to think about....that fat middleman creates a ton of jobs.
There are advantages to a distribution franchise model. It creates a way more stable retail market for starters...that's the primary driver behind manufacturer opposition to direct sales.
But that's wasteful. The consumer could pay lower prices and have more money left over to distribute to other sectors of the economy which would create jobs.
Part of it is my distaste for McCombs and his tax problems, that no one really wants to mention in SA cause Red's such a giver.
I'm going to have to see some data points showing that jobs created would even sniff jobs lost. Im pretty sure that piece of analysis doesnt exist...likely for good reason. And that's not even considering the disruption halo (suppliers, jobbers, etc) from destabilizing the retail market.
How much lower do you think the prices would be and why?
I have no idea.
Franchising seems like a great idea for businesses that need distribution. Tesla says it does not apparently. So why hold them to something designed to be helpful when the company sees no reason for it?
As I understand it dealers do not have a large profit margin on new cars that they may jazz up a bit. What I have a problem with is how they slay people on used cars. And still hold that franchise that upholds quality for their cars. Tesla can set their prices at whatever they want. If people don't want the cars for that price I don't see the problem.
Franchises work extraordinarily well for the core business logistically and even save the core business from doing work that is not profitable for them, like finishing a product out completely for the consumers demands.
Middle men actually serve the consumer in these cases as well. Will they serve the consumer and the manufacturer in Teslas case? Tesla thinks not. They have a car that is planned on being serviced very differently.
Car Dealers Earn Just $23 Per Car Sold
Car dealers made an average of $23 forevery new car they sold in 2011, according to the National Automobile Dealers Association. Put another way, that profit can help them afford one week of Starbuck lattes, a trip for two to the movies, or a round of drinks for four people (tip not included.)
Dealers are celebrating that $23, because it's a huge swing from 2010 figures, when dealers lost $180 for every car they sold.
Turns out that new cars are essentially a loss leader for dealers, who make most of their money by fixing your car, selling you a warranty when you buy a new car, financing car loans, and used car sales. New car sales are the smallest part of the puzzle, something most dealers do only because the automakers insist. If a business wants to be a certified General Motors dealer, for instance, GM will only allow that if they sell GM's new cars and new trucks.
Don't cry for the car dealers, though. They make a tidy sum on all this other business. The average dealership made $785,855 in 2011, according to the dealers association, the highest revenue since they started tracking the data 40 years ago.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1380136.html
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions