The Competition: 2024 Silverado EV Reviews Are In

[Knucklehead]

I don't claim to know what CT pricing would be. Just guessing like everyone else. All I am saying is that Elon has made the connection between volume and price many times. And setting up the factory and the supply to be capable of high volume. I just listened to Farley saying my truck is made of ton of modules coming from different manufacturers. Tesla makes a lot of stuff in house, it uses the giga-casting (none of the examples from the competitors you mentioned do that). It is reasonable to assume Tesla is capable of producing CT at lower cost than competitors. So if it sells CT at the same or lower price than competition, it does not mean it is losing money on it. Also, cost of production may be the limiting factor but not the only factor on pricing. As long as Rivian, GM and Ford are selling trucks at a certain price (even if it is at a loss), consumer will look at their options and CT pricing will only result in high volume sales if has a justifiable value (with respect to both ICE and BEV truck options on the market). Of course initially, nothing will work based on reason. Rivian was selling at $150K on open market.

You have to assume radical breakthroughs in production efficiency and design to get $30k less than the almost equivalent Rivian:

I agree there are reasonable arguments for why Telsa can do it. But I think no matter what they do, the batteries cost what they cost, and the motors cost what they cost. And adding everything up you get $80k+ for the dual or tri-motor, fully optioned CT. Easy.

Sponsored

 

[jerhenderson]

So when they priced out the Cybertruck in 2019 and the price was less, far less then the X was it an accounting error at Tesla, ignorant guess, or bold face lie?

100% I think the CT will be very close if not the same to the ratio as the initial MY price equality. "knife in the heart to legacy trucks."

 

[jerhenderson]

You have to assume radical breakthroughs in production efficiency and design to get $30k less than the almost equivalent Rivian:

I agree there are reasonable arguments for why Telsa can do it. But I think no matter what they do, the batteries cost what they cost, and the motors cost what they cost. And adding everything up you get $80k+ for the dual or tri-motor, fully optioned CT. Easy.

Tesla will crush Rivian prices / value... the economy of scale difference and production differences are too great.

 

[TirNaOg]

My hope for the CTDM is 55K-60K as speced in 2019.
If it comes with a few extras and stays within that range then Yipeeee!.



Else bugger!

 

[Diehard]

You have to assume radical breakthroughs in production efficiency and design to get $30k less than the almost equivalent Rivian:

I agree there are reasonable arguments for why Telsa can do it. But I think no matter what they do, the batteries cost what they cost, and the motors cost what they cost. And adding everything up you get $80k+ for the dual or tri-motor, fully optioned CT. Easy.

Tri-motor max range at $80 is not a stretch but dual 250-300 mile at $80 is a big departure from original announced price and would have less battery than Rivian max pack. And I do consider 48V system, Giga cast and paint less door stop ss body fairly radical when it comes to design and manufacturing. I am not as emotionally invested in CT as I used to be. If it is a good value and make sense for me, I will go for it. If not, there are so many EVs coming to market that waiting for something else for better tech down the road will not be that much of a pain.

 

[Knucklehead]

Tesla will crush Rivian prices / value... the economy of scale difference and production differences are too great.

Maybe. It took Tesla years to even approach the promised $30k M3 price. And still they are not there. Lofty goals meet reality.

 

[HaulingAss]

But to me the bottom line is profit. Ford is not making money off any EV it produces. GM is not either. So we cannot use their vehicles as price benchmarks, except to say they are too low for a profitable vehicle. If Ford can't make money on the Lightning, do we assume Tesla will sell the CT at a loss also? Ford can absorb the loss better than Tesla can, IMO.

The first vehicles off the production line of all manufacturers are always sold at a loss and the first few thousand Cybertrucks will be no exception, even when costing out tooling and buildings over their expected lifespans. But as production starts humming along, like a well-oiled machine, profits will suddenly appear. And they will grow over time.

But I have to think you have been living under a rock if you are completely unaware of Tesla's huge lead in manufacturing efficiency. Tesla can make an EV more efficiently than any other automaker today. And the difference in cost of manufacturing of Tesla vs. Ford, GM and Stellantis is stark. They are not even in the same ballpark as Tesla when it comes to manufacturing efficiency.

This is evidenced by the fact that Tesla has higher profit margins on their EV's than legacy auto has on their ICE vehicles. Legacy auto even has to pay outside software developers to write the code their vehicles need to operate. Legacy auto buys almost every component that is not part of the engine, transmision or chassis (and even much of that they buy). Tesla is vertically integrated and has carefully crafted every step of the way to be more cost effective, they even make all their own seats which is unheard of today. Legacy auto has to spend billions on advertising just to try to hold onto the market share they have while Tesla grows their marketshare with no advertising expense. Because of all of these things (and more), Tesla has the most pricing power in the industry.

Tesla can sell a much better truck, for a lot less money, and actually make a good profit while legacy auto is crippled, they can only sell a lesser quality truck, with inferior specs, for a higher price and yet they still lose a ton of money. That's why I say the difference is stark.

Tesla is more efficient every step of the way, from sourcing parts and materials to delivering the vehicles (and all the manufacturing in between). I've been writing about this for over three years now, I'm surprised you haven't connected the dots. And the difference is not narrowing, as the mainstream media would have you believe with their ridiculous stories about how the competition is always right around the corner (for the last 6 years now). It was a false narrative 6 years ago and it's a false narrative now. But that doesn't stop them from recycling it over and over and sheeple people just lap it up because, of course, GM and Ford and Stellantis are mightier and more experienced than Tesla. Of course.

But here's the problem with that narrative: When a company has been on top so long, and processes throughout the organization are just refined, and never completely overhauled, well, technology keeps marching forward, and, before you know it, there are better ways to do things. And guess what is more difficult than learning a new way to do something? That's right, unlearning the old way. Legacy auto has heaps and heaps of processes they need to unlearn. These processes were useful at one time but now, with EV's being a completely different product, they are like a ball and chain on legacy organizations. These organizations don't even know how to unlearn them, it's a completely foreign concept to the corporate culture. Tesla employees routinely do things that would get them fired at a legacy automaker. And this is the source of Tesla's expanding lead when it comes to efficiency of manufacture and bringing value to buyers of new vehicles while still having some nice profit left over so they can re-invest it in themselves. In becoming bigger and more efficient.

Tesla's biggest competition is Tesla, they make and sell far more EV's in N. America than all the other manufacturers combined. And all the rest lose huge amounts of money on EV's because they literally cannot price them at the cost of manufacture. As Tesla continually ramps production and sales higher, the prices will have a long-term downtrend. But this is not a problem because the higher volumes and constant manufacturing innovation will cover this long-term price decline. This is what it looks like when Tesla is Tesla's biggest competition.

Do not make the mistake of thinking that the cost to produce a vehicle of a given specification is fixed, it depends upon how competent the maker is when it comes to efficiency. And Tesla is heads and shoulders above the rest when it comes to competency, so the price gulf of two cars with the same specs, one designed, built and sold by Tesla, and one designed and built by legacy auto and sold through their dealer networks will be huge, surprisingly huge. That's how big the gulf between Tesla and the rest really is.

Tesla has surgically removed the fat every step of the way and they are not done yet, either. The amount of fat in legacy auto is shockingly huge (and surprisingly hard to get rid of) and buyers of legacy vehicles pay for every last cent of it. Legacy auto no longer efficiently serves the needs of buyers of new vehicles in the manner that allowed them to rise to the top. That is why they will now fail. They cannot turn their sinking ships around quickly enough. At best, they will become a tiny shadow of their former selves, more likely they will go down in flames with huge debt. They have already failed; they just don't know it yet.

Mainstream media will constantly trot out story after story implying that Tesla is about to get run over by legacy auto. But these are flimsy stories based on nothing but misinformation and rank speculation that is supported by nothing that is relevant. The gulf is growing wider. So don't project Cybertruck pricing based upon how much legacy auto charges and the fact that they lose money on every EV they sell. Tesla does not resemble them at all and this is evidenced many ways, probably the most clearly by comparing their respective financials. This should not be in doubt by anyone who has been paying attention, even a little bit.

I'm shocked that so many still don't understand this, and how impossible it is for legacy auto to unlearn what they already know. You would have better luck making water flow uphill.

 

[HaulingAss]

Maybe. It took Tesla years to even approach the promised $30k M3 price. And still they are not there. Lofty goals meet reality.

The announced price of the Model 3 was $35K, not $30K, and Tesla did not take years to "even approach" that price, they hit it one year after they started delivering to non-employees:

$35,000 Tesla Model 3 Available Now | Tesla

Tesla launches standard Model 3 starting at $35,000 (cnbc.com)

So don't try to re-write history with your anti-Tesla fake narratives.

 

[Ogre]

Maybe. It took Tesla years to even approach the promised $30k M3 price. And still they are not there. Lofty goals meet reality.

Frustrating that people on Tesla oriented forums repeat these myths.

@HaulingAss has provided some helpful links for you so hopefully you will educate yourself and stop spreading lies.

 

[Knucklehead]

The announced price of the Model 3 was $35K, not $30K, and Tesla did not take years to "even approach" that price, they hit it one year after they started delivering to non-employees:

$35,000 Tesla Model 3 Available Now | Tesla

Tesla launches standard Model 3 starting at $35,000 (cnbc.com)

So don't try to re-write history with your anti-Tesla fake narratives.

Sorry, not trying to rewrite history. I should have left that part out of my post since it was off the top of my head and I didn't research it. I just remember a $30k target and I don't recall they ever hit it. If they promised $35k, then certainly they did that.

BTW - I am definitely not a Tesla hater. I really admire what they have done and the fact they can produce the Y and 3 at a profit while Ford can't make any money on their EVs is very impressive. In fact, it is the main reason they might surprise me with the CT release price. Their cost structure is industry leading. But still. They sell the X for $100k. That is the data point that is relevant I think.

 

[Ogre]

Sorry, not trying to rewrite history. I should have left that part out of my post since it was off the top of my head and I didn't research it. I just remember a $30k target and I don't recall they ever hit it. If they promised $35k, then certainly they did that.

BTW - I am definitely not a Tesla hater. I really admire what they have done and the fact they can produce the Y and 3 at a profit while Ford can't make any money on their EVs is very impressive. In fact, it is the main reason they might surprise me with the CT release price. Their cost structure is industry leading. But still. They sell the X for $100k. That is the data point that is relevant I think.

Cybertruck is not a luxury vehicle. It is a high volume truck made to be inexpensive to manufacture. Much closer to the Model 3 than the Model X.

Musk suggested they only continue manufacturing the Model S/X product lines due to nostalgia. They are vanity products which are built using much older/ less efficient techniques.

 

[Arctic_White]

Luckily, Tesla isn't limited by your imagination.

The Cybertruck has always been priced like a Model Y. It's designed to be easy to assemble and take parks that are easily sourced.

Yeah, any new technology has challenges, but why would Tesla be limited by others' difficulties?

-Crissa

I think it's pretty clear that CT will be priced b/w Model Y and Model X. How much closer to Model Y will ultimately determine how many they sell.

Elon made a remark that somewhat surprised me: he said that affordability is the key and they intend on making 250K to 500K per year, depending upon the demand. This tells me that CT will be closer to Model X in pricing than Model Y.

Put it this way: if CT is close to a Model Y in price, it'll sell 1M+ per year. Do you disagree?

 

[Ogre]

Just the occasional reminder.

The only trucks that sell 250k+ per year have an average selling price around $55k. For every $80k truck Ford sells, they sell 5 $50k trucks. GM’s “Denali” line sells in the mid 10s of thousands and Ford sells about the same volume of Lariats.

Rivian and Ford‘s Lightning have both hit brick walls in terms of sales growth because the market has a very limited appetite for trucks in that price category.

Over and over Musk has emphasized that sales volume is Tesla’s #1 priority. The days of high end boutique products are over. Tesla’s future is in mass market vehicles with the occasional vanity product like the Roadster. Cybertruck is not one of those vanity products. It’s as mass market as you can get.

 

[Arctic_White]

The first vehicles off the production line of all manufacturers are always sold at a loss and the first few thousand Cybertrucks will be no exception, even when costing out tooling and buildings over their expected lifespans. But as production starts humming along, like a well-oiled machine, profits will suddenly appear. And they will grow over time.

But I have to think you have been living under a rock if you are completely unaware of Tesla's huge lead in manufacturing efficiency. Tesla can make an EV more efficiently than any other automaker today. And the difference in cost of manufacturing of Tesla vs. Ford, GM and Stellantis is stark. They are not even in the same ballpark as Tesla when it comes to manufacturing efficiency.

This is evidenced by the fact that Tesla has higher profit margins on their EV's than legacy auto has on their ICE vehicles. Legacy auto even has to pay outside software developers to write the code their vehicles need to operate. Legacy auto buys almost every component that is not part of the engine, transmision or chassis (and even much of that they buy). Tesla is vertically integrated and has carefully crafted every step of the way to be more cost effective, they even make all their own seats which is unheard of today. Legacy auto has to spend billions on advertising just to try to hold onto the market share they have while Tesla grows their marketshare with no advertising expense. Because of all of these things (and more), Tesla has the most pricing power in the industry.

Tesla can sell a much better truck, for a lot less money, and actually make a good profit while legacy auto is crippled, they can only sell a lesser quality truck, with inferior specs, for a higher price and yet they still lose a ton of money. That's why I say the difference is stark.

Tesla is more efficient every step of the way, from sourcing parts and materials to delivering the vehicles (and all the manufacturing in between). I've been writing about this for over three years now, I'm surprised you haven't connected the dots. And the difference is not narrowing, as the mainstream media would have you believe with their ridiculous stories about how the competition is always right around the corner (for the last 6 years now). It was a false narrative 6 years ago and it's a false narrative now. But that doesn't stop them from recycling it over and over and sheeple people just lap it up because, of course, GM and Ford and Stellantis are mightier and more experienced than Tesla. Of course.

But here's the problem with that narrative: When a company has been on top so long, and processes throughout the organization are just refined, and never completely overhauled, well, technology keeps marching forward, and, before you know it, there are better ways to do things. And guess what is more difficult than learning a new way to do something? That's right, unlearning the old way. Legacy auto has heaps and heaps of processes they need to unlearn. These processes were useful at one time but now, with EV's being a completely different product, they are like a ball and chain on legacy organizations. These organizations don't even know how to unlearn them, it's a completely foreign concept to the corporate culture. Tesla employees routinely do things that would get them fired at a legacy automaker. And this is the source of Tesla's expanding lead when it comes to efficiency of manufacture and bringing value to buyers of new vehicles while still having some nice profit left over so they can re-invest it in themselves. In becoming bigger and more efficient.

Tesla's biggest competition is Tesla, they make and sell far more EV's in N. America than all the other manufacturers combined. And all the rest lose huge amounts of money on EV's because they literally cannot price them at the cost of manufacture. As Tesla continually ramps production and sales higher, the prices will have a long-term downtrend. But this is not a problem because the higher volumes and constant manufacturing innovation will cover this long-term price decline. This is what it looks like when Tesla is Tesla's biggest competition.

Do not make the mistake of thinking that the cost to produce a vehicle of a given specification is fixed, it depends upon how competent the maker is when it comes to efficiency. And Tesla is heads and shoulders above the rest when it comes to competency, so the price gulf of two cars with the same specs, one designed, built and sold by Tesla, and one designed and built by legacy auto and sold through their dealer networks will be huge, surprisingly huge. That's how big the gulf between Tesla and the rest really is.

Tesla has surgically removed the fat every step of the way and they are not done yet, either. The amount of fat in legacy auto is shockingly huge (and surprisingly hard to get rid of) and buyers of legacy vehicles pay for every last cent of it. Legacy auto no longer efficiently serves the needs of buyers of new vehicles in the manner that allowed them to rise to the top. That is why they will now fail. They cannot turn their sinking ships around quickly enough. At best, they will become a tiny shadow of their former selves, more likely they will go down in flames with huge debt. They have already failed; they just don't know it yet.

Mainstream media will constantly trot out story after story implying that Tesla is about to get run over by legacy auto. But these are flimsy stories based on nothing but misinformation and rank speculation that is supported by nothing that is relevant. The gulf is growing wider. So don't project Cybertruck pricing based upon how much legacy auto charges and the fact that they lose money on every EV they sell. Tesla does not resemble them at all and this is evidenced many ways, probably the most clearly by comparing their respective financials. This should not be in doubt by anyone who has been paying attention, even a little bit.

I'm shocked that so many still don't understand this, and how impossible it is for legacy auto to unlearn what they already know. You would have better luck making water flow uphill.

My man! Another amazing post of yours. I'm going to copy this and keep it somewhere safe where I can look at it. Maybe I'll even print out a copy and frame it in my office LOL.

One thing you missed: the dealership network which is an albatross for the legacy automakers.

Final prediction: many legacy automakers will go bankrupt. Some very large automakers will be but a shadow of themselves, if they even survive.

When autonomous driving is fully solved, no one would buy a vehicle that cannot drive itself. Tesla's lead in autonomous driving is just insane and it seems like Tesla will take the majority of the profits (not market share) over the next coming years and decades.

Great post, as always.

 

[Arctic_White]

Just the occasional reminder.

The only trucks that sell 250k+ per year have an average selling price around $55k. For every $80k truck Ford sells, they sell 5 $50k trucks. GM’s “Denali” line sells in the mid 10s of thousands and Ford sells about the same volume of Lariats.

Rivian and Ford‘s Lightning have both hit brick walls in terms of sales growth because the market has a very limited appetite for trucks in that price category.

Over and over Musk has emphasized that sales volume is Tesla’s #1 priority. The days of high end boutique products are over. Tesla’s future is in mass market vehicles with the occasional vanity product like the Roadster. Cybertruck is not one of those vanity products. It’s as mass market as you can get.

True. And Elon also said that Cybertruck and its corresponding profits will not be material for their bottom line overall.

I do think they will start off with ~$80K for a 420-mile variant and will come up with a 500+ mile variant later on, along with a sub-$50K dual motor variant.

But the initial price at or just below $80K is my guess... not $100K as some are suggesting. That'd be insane!

I'd be happy paying $80K for a quad motor if it comes with a 500+ mile range. Even at 420-mile range, I'd be OK but not super happy. Anything under that then the price has to be very low for it to be appealing.

Sponsored