Most consumers willing to pay for hybrid cars

[eurohazard]

I don't mean to downplay the fact that there is high voltage cables/batteries in the hybrids. But it's worth considering that every car has a gas tank full of fuel (or at least fumes). Airbags were once considered more dangerous than the potential life-saving worth. Throttle-by-wire and brake-by-wire were considered sci-fi at one time. And don't forget those people who think fiberglass bodied cars are "death traps"!

p.s. Your 'vette is phat!

[DuSpinnst]

Originally Posted by eurohazard

I don't mean to downplay the fact that there is high voltage cables/batteries in the hybrids. But it's worth considering that every car has a gas tank full of full (or at least fumes). Airbags were once considered more dangerous than the potential life-saving worth. Throttle-by-wire and brake-by-wire were considered sci-fi at one time. And don't forget those people who think fiberglass bodied cars are "death traps"!

p.s. Your 'vette is phat!

I know all that, but when you see the training mechanics have to go thru to work on these high voltage systems you'd think twice about putting your family inside one.

Especially since a battery is more likely to fail than the other technologies due to it being newer.

Maybe in 20 years they will be safe, but as of today I am avoiding them.

[64malibu]

Yeah a Tahoe hybrid is 50K in the US, 75K in Canada but if you need a big vehicle there's nothing like it yet. GM thought to bring out the hybrids where it would do the most good-a big heavy vehicle, not os a car that's a fuel sipper anyway.

[64malibu]

Speaking of the voltage, 300+ DC. That will kill you. You really don't want a short in that system. If yoour car is in an accident the first responders are trained to cut the battery cable before they do anything else.

[hunchman]

Originally Posted by eurohazard

Which of the bolded are you? Check out the posts in this thread, some Hybrids are worth it. If the diesel Liberty was near as fuel thirfy as you claim....why did Jeep drop it? It sold for like 2 years. http://www.dieselpowermag.com/featur...sel/index.html

Dude, here's an article where a Jeep Liberty diesel didn't match an Escape Hybrid....let alone a RAV4 non-hybrid in gas mileage. http://trucktrend.automotive.com/580...ats-price.html

dude it was a jeep patriot diesel and it averaged 38.9mpg all they could manage was 39.9 mpg on the same trip with the prius http://fifthgear.five.tv/jsp/5gmain....1196&pageid=-1

[hunchman]

Originally Posted by genjy

That's because the GMT-900 hybrids are expensive. $50k to start... that's a lot of money that many people don't have nowadays.

The Vue isn't that cheap of a car either. I am guessing the two-mode Vue Hybrid will start at least $30k, since it uses the 3.6L v6 as the gas motor.

The Prius can be had for $21k. It's large enough for most people, and most importantly, it's affordable enough.

Prius around here is selling for way more than that and there are no discounts what so ever on them. Actually many sell for over sticker.

[Xenon]

Originally Posted by DuSpinnst

I know all that, but when you see the training mechanics have to go thru to work on these high voltage systems you'd think twice about putting your family inside one.

Especially since a battery is more likely to fail than the other technologies due to it being newer.

Maybe in 20 years they will be safe, but as of today I am avoiding them.

Not just the voltage/amperage going on, but also lithium isn't a very friendly substance....

[Fusion2.3H]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

It's not about just selling people on a hybrid to save on fuel.

It's about selling the image of a hybrid because you think you are saving fuel and helping to protect the environment.
That's the ONLY way GM's going to sell the Volt at $40,000.

I saw on CNN a week or so ago that at current gas prices, the amount to make up the cost differential on a Prius in gas savings is 1.5 years. For an Aura... it s was some ridiculous amount. I want to say 17 years or something.

The problem is there is no image incentive for a Prius owner to switch to a higher priced Chevrolet Volt. Toyota understands that the key selling point will be providing customers the ability to say that their vehicle can run purely on electricity, which the Prius can do...7 miles, but costs significantly less than the Volt.



Toyota is going about targeting potential customers, while making the technology affordable enough to entice early majority customers to purchase. Early majority are less focused on the image and more on the rational savings, such as cost. As you get up into the $40,000 range the number of early adapters decreases, so that funnel I was talking about earlier might only produce 1% customers out of 76% who expressed interest in the Chevrolet Volt, so they will have plenty of traffic in the showroom, but not a lot of people actually making a purchase.

Think about this, we start off with 100% of consumers, 72% which are interested in hybrids, 46% after hearing the price, and only 3% (based on latest sales data) are purchasing a hybrid, thats a steep funnel.

If a Prius is setting someone back 25k, how does GM expect to charge 10-15k extra for MSRP and obtain 10,000 to 60,000 customers the first two years. I am all for the Volt, in concept it is a great car, but the cost curve for the technology is not at a point to execute that strategy. From a PR standpoint it makes sense to sell the Volt, but from a finanical standpoint, which they SHOULD be focusing on it does nothing for them. They'd be better off putting those resources into sizing down the two-mode hybrid for installation into the their A-D class vehicles, which they could sell at a lower price point and generate profit while acheving their Green Image.

If GM goes from selling a $40,000 vehicle in the first two years to a $30,000 vehicle when it hits 100,000 units there is going to be some pissed off customers like those who purchased the Apple Iphone, when they dropped the prices in half.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by Fusion2.3H

The problem is there is no image incentive for a Prius owner to switch to a higher priced Chevrolet Volt. Toyota understands that the key selling point will be providing customers the ability to say that their vehicle can run purely on electricity, which the Prius can do...7 miles, but costs significantly less than the Volt.



Toyota is going about targeting potential customers, while making the technology affordable enough to entice early majority customers to purchase. Early majority are less focused on the image and more on the rational savings, such as cost. As you get up into the $40,000 range the number of early adapters decreases, so that funnel I was talking about earlier might only produce 1% customers out of 76% who expressed interest in the Chevrolet Volt, so they will have plenty of traffic in the showroom, but not a lot of people actually making a purchase.

Think about this, we start off with 100% of consumers, 72% which are interested in hybrids, 46% after hearing the price, and only 3% (based on latest sales data) are purchasing a hybrid, thats a steep funnel.

If a Prius is setting someone back 25k, how does GM expect to charge 10-15k extra for MSRP and obtain 10,000 to 60,000 customers the first two years. I am all for the Volt, in concept it is a great car, but the cost curve for the technology is not at a point to execute that strategy. From a PR standpoint it makes sense to sell the Volt, but from a finanical standpoint, which they SHOULD be focusing on it does nothing for them. They'd be better off putting those resources into sizing down the two-mode hybrid for installation into the their A-D class vehicles, which they could sell at a lower price point and generate profit while acheving their Green Image.

If GM goes from selling a $40,000 vehicle in the first two years to a $30,000 vehicle when it hits 100,000 units there is going to be some pissed off customers like those who purchased the Apple Iphone, when they dropped the prices in half.

That's the MBA Answer. And an answer I regurgitated for 2 years at B-School.
It's also an answer I keep on the back burner, just to make sure I know what's going on "theoretically."
But displaying the adoption lifecycle is only good for theory. In real life, you don't know where you are in the lifecycle until after the fact. For example Hybrids are still the Early Adopter stage.

If you take a look at the Volt and its whopping $40,000 sticker price, it really is a new class of hybrid. So in this case, if you want to put a name to it, Volt will attract the "Innovators." But I'm not going to turn this thread into a discussion of the proper steps of product marketing. I'm going to assume GM's already done the leg work for that and identified the initial customer group with with the market to.

GM needs to do it, despite all spreadsheets and pointing otherwise. Volt is about image.
I can go 40 miles without ever using gas.
I only have to fill up once a month.
I am saving the environment.
I am not contributing to terrorism.
I want to buy an American hybrid.
Whatever emotional reason the customer wants to stick on the car will be a reason to buy the Volt.

As for iPhone? The price decrease should have been expected. It's a technology product and will depreciated over time. In addition, Apple shuffled the iPhone lineup, removing the 4GB version and maintaining only the 8 GB version at the time.
So what if you spent $100-200 more on your iPhone?
The difference is Apple recognized the agitation and offered a credit back to Apple Stores. They didn't have to do that.
Not that I'm expecting GM to do that. But as compontent prices decreas in price, you can expect Volt to subsequently decrease in price. But it probably won't be as fast as you think, as GM is already taking a loss per vehicle. So the $40K price might hold steady for 3-5 years -- essentially 1 model cycle.

[blank disk]

Originally Posted by DuSpinnst

People want the IMAGE of one.

Why?

People are retards, simple as that.

Call me retarded then, because I want to get about 45-50mpg in the city. Heck, I would be happy with 34 mpg in the Escape.

[eaton53]

Originally Posted by Xenon

Uhh, no it doesn't, Maybe after incentives it does. A base 2.2 is $15,110, and the 2.4 you speak of is $20,355, and that's the base price and according to the EPA it requires premium. And do keep in mind that your gas savings varies with how much you drive. Someone who drives 30k miles a year will see a bigger benefit than someone who only drives 12k.

Well, I got a bill of sale, which is a lot more meaningful than any MSRP (which you got very close, $20,220) number minus anything you got. This does show you one thing... crap like Edmunds True Cost To Own is meaningless garbage.

The actual selling price for my well equipped SS 2.4 was $14.1K (minus another $400 Driver's Edge card cash, which you can use on anything). $13.7K out the door.

I run it on E10, which is the cheapest gas you can get around here.
Runs great on the stuff. It's pretty fast for an economical little spud.

[goblue]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

It's not about just selling people on a hybrid to save on fuel.

It's about selling the image of a hybrid because you think you are saving fuel and helping to protect the environment.
That's the ONLY way GM's going to sell the Volt at $40,000.

I saw on CNN a week or so ago that at current gas prices, the amount to make up the cost differential on a Prius in gas savings is 1.5 years. For an Aura... it s was some ridiculous amount. I want to say 17 years or something.

Problem is, they compared a Prius to a Camry 4 cyl.

[TruckMan]

I didn't see anybody mention the incorrect title to this thread. It says "Most" people are willing to pay for hybrids. Most means more than half, but the stats show that only 46% (less than half) are willing to pay for them. More misleading information by the press.

And if only 3% of people are actually buying hybrids, what's with the other 43%?

[GreenGreySS]

Originally Posted by eaton53

Those numbers are more like it.

Of course, here's some more numbers...

Prius: 78-hp gas, 67-horsepower electric
Corolla: 132 hp
Cobalt SS 2.4 (which cost a lot less than $17155): 171 hp

Drive a slow ass, no handling Toyota and save nothing? Pffft!!!

LOL PRICELESS!!!!!!!

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

I saw on CNN a week or so ago that at current gas prices, the amount to make up the cost differential on a Prius in gas savings is 1.5 years. For an Aura... it s was some ridiculous amount. I want to say 17 years or something.

Then CNN was wrong. The Aura hybrid 'pays for itself' much quicker than the Prius, since the hybrid premium on the Aura is essentially wiped out by the tax incentive. The Aura basically has no pay back time, while the Prius takes about 3.5-5 years to pay for itself.

From a Motor Trend article comparing the Altima Hybrid (which is really a Toyota HSD with a Nissan engine), the Camry Hybrid and the Aura Greenline:

Each month, your Camry's Hybridness will have cost you about $48, your Altima's $32, and the Aura's will have actually deliver about 13 bucks into your pocket relative to its theoretical gas equivalent.

I myself don't really see the Aura as a hybrid, but the BAS systems is far cheaper to buy, and yields decent enough results that are real-world attainable. And you can't compare the Prius HSD to a mild-hybrid, not fairly anyway. When the Volt is out, we can compare the Prius to it, but it's a lopsided test to compare the Prius to an Aura GL. But, again, it's cool to hate American products these days.

From an article comparing the Prius to other hybrids, including SUV's like the Vue GL, on CNN.com:
The Prius does not have an exact non-hybrid equivalent to compare to. The Prius pays off within 2.1 years when compared against the Toyota Camry LE. But when compared against the Toyota Corolla LE it takes 13.6 years to pay off.

The rest of the hybrids take over 5 years to pay off. Some have abysmally long pay-off periods. The Toyota Highlander Hybrid Limited takes 15.5 years to pay off.

Save With Toyota's Prius? Buy Two Aveos Instead: Doron Levin