There is a fundamental truth you have to understand about car companies:They do not exist to make cars. They exist to make money. That distinction, analyst Kevin Tynan tells me, is why they’re not really interested in making affordable electric vehicles.

Perhaps that’s an oversimplification. Tynan is the director of research at an auto-dealer-focused investment bank, the Presidio Group, with decades of experience as an analyst at firms like Bloomberg Intelligence. What he means isn’t that automakers have no interest in affordable products. It’s that their interest begins and ends with winning customers who will eventually buy more expensive, higher-margin products.

One of the auto industry’s dirtiest secrets is that at scale, it doesn’t cost that much more to make a bigger, more expensive than a smaller and cheaper one. But they can charge you a lot more for the former, which makes this a game of profit margins and not just profits. In recent years especially, that’s a big part of why your new car choices have skewed so heavily toward bigger crossovers, SUVs and trucks.

  • ccunning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    28 days ago

    But isn’t it the weight that does more damage to the roads that the taxes are intended to pay for?

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      the weight does damage yes, but the lionshare of road damage is caused by shipping trucks because they are magnitudes heavier than a civilian vehicle while loaded. It’s the reason truck weigh stations exist

      • ccunning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        28 days ago

        …and a weight based tax would put the lion’s share of the tax burden on shipping trucks.

        I think we’re in agreement here?

    • WHYAREWEALLCAPS@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      Do you think an electric car that weighs 1000lbs more than similar ICE cars is doing that much more damage to the road? And compare the damage cars, suvs, etc, would do versus box trucks, tractor-trailers, etc. There is no comparison to the damages between the two classes of vehicles. While true, an SUV will do more damage to the road than an econobox hatchback, even combined they don’t equal the damage a fully loaded tractor-trailer will do.

      • ccunning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        28 days ago

        I’m not sure your point here. It sounds argumentative but in fact I think we agree?

        I think the damage is proportional to the weight so taxing based on weight makes sense.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          Their point is even if there’s a 1000 lb. difference here or there, it’s not gonna make any significant difference to road wear.

          Only when you get to 40-80k lb. commercial vehicles does it make a significant difference.

          It also does not compensate at all for the fact that some small EVs weigh 3500lbs. while a Chevy Suburban weighs 6k lbs.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      No, EV taxes are intended to compensate for loss of road taxes that are imposed on gasoline. The problem is it’s a flat fee. So if you’re like me and live in Texas and drive a normal-sized 3600lb. Model 3, you pay the same (patently-insane) fee as a 9k Hummer EV.

      I just didn’t renew my registration. Cops around here don’t do shit anyway.