US carmakers should be terrified, including Lucid

[prgarg]

Chinese cars are unavailable in the USA because to 100% tariffs and a ban on cars with Chinese-made software.
A disassembly of Chinese cars shows no miracles of engineering. Lower MSRP is mainly due to a low-cost labor force, low cost of capital, and a well-oiled and competent supply chain.
I can't imagine any president, current or future, allowing Chinese cars in any time soon, unless they were built in the USA with US-made software, like Volvo and Polestar.
Or built and programmed in the EU, like Smart and Lotus.

Exactly. RJ Scaringe explains it very well in the last On with Kara Swisher episode, posted yesterday on this thread.

 

[tmichael]

These are recent explosions resulting in at least nine deaths. These are faulty replacement airbags.

Correct. Illegally imported and used by shady repair shops. I’m not supporting the practice, but I don’t think it is representative of Chinese manufacturing, such as iPhones, etc.

 

[DeaneG]

That's only going to lead to American manufacturers getting even more behind the curve. Protectionism never protected anybody in the long run.

Agreed, but it's going to be tough to find a competitively low-cost labor pool in the US.

 

[DeaneG]

Correct. Illegally imported and used by shady repair shops. I’m not supporting the practice, but I don’t think it is representative of Chinese manufacturing, such as iPhones, etc.

It hasn't been that long since trusted Japanese-made Takata airbags were killing people.

 

[borski]

Lucid has a chance to create a dominant midsize SUV in the US if they price it correctly. I believe the Chinese EVs will have a very hard time penetrating the US market for the reasons SavageGeese laid out (safety standards, service and parts, etc). But they will probably be the dominant EV globally for a long time.

Sadly, Norway is buying very few Lucids currently. It’s remarkable to me that the Lucid Air, which just won the cold weather range test in Norway again, didn’t sell at all in December, like not a single car. Despite its range performance and general acceptance of the top luxury EV sedan in the US, how is it doing so poorly globally? Is this because of price? Or is Volvo BMW and Chinese competition that much better? Would be great to understand this if someone knows the reasoning.

Two things: price and size. Norway buys small vehicles, and they don’t tend to buy luxury vehicles.

The midsize should sell well in Norway. The Gravity and Air will find fewer buyers simply because it’s a different market.

 

[borski]

That's only going to lead to American manufacturers getting even more behind the curve. Protectionism never protected anybody in the long run.

No, but in the short term, it absolutely can buy time. Nobody is suggesting it stays this way forever.

 

[Smorgasbord]

That's only going to lead to American manufacturers getting even more behind the curve. Protectionism never protected anybody in the long run.

Unfortunately, as RJ Scaringe stated pretty clearly in the Kara Swisher interview, the Chinese companies have two advantages right from the start:
1) Much lower Capex costs. The government gives them land and buildings, and even the equipment is often paid for by the government.
2) Much lower labor costs, driven by labor policies that are more favorable to employers.

High tariffs have encouraged Japanese, Korean, and European OEMs to set up factories and build cars in the US. And when that happens, Scaringe points out, the OEMs lose those 2 big advantages and the playing field is more level.

It's one thing for companies to compete against each other, but when individual US companies have to compete with a whole country's government, it's much much harder to win. And without getting too political, the party that favors companies over labor in the US is also against "government picking winners and losers," which means the US won't do what China is doing. They even killed the EV tax credit, which was one US government effort to help get the country onto the inevitable winning transportation technology.

Here's an archived Bloomberg article on what Chinese OEMs are doing in Europe:

https://archive.vn/2026.01.30-183212/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-30/one-in-10-cars-sold-in-europe-is-now-made-by-a-chinese-brand

1 out ot 10 cars is Chinese in Europe now.

 

[tarator]

No, but in the short term, it absolutely can buy time. Nobody is suggesting it stays this way forever.

So, is anybody actually doing anything with the time bought? It doesn't seem so.

 

[Saksak]

No, but in the short term, it absolutely can buy time. Nobody is suggesting it stays this way forever.

100% agree that it can buy time. The question is, what are we doing with that time?

What I see is we are pulling back on EV’s and doubling down on ICE vehicles and infrastructure. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is going full steam ahead on EV and electric.

Are we really buying time or are we shutting out the rest of the world because we can’t keep up? Are we moving forward, or are we closing our eyes and trying to remain happy in our land of dinosaurs?

 

[tarator]

Unfortunately, as RJ Scaringe stated pretty clearly in the Kara Swisher interview, the Chinese companies have two advantages right from the start:
1) Much lower Capex costs. The government gives them land and buildings, and even the equipment is often paid for by the government.
2) Much lower labor costs, driven by labor policies that are more favorable to employers.

High tariffs have encouraged Japanese, Korean, and European OEMs to set up factories and build cars in the US. And when that happens, Scaringe points out, the OEMs lose those 2 big advantages and the playing field is more level.

It's one thing for companies to compete against each other, but when individual US companies have to compete with a whole country's government, it's much much harder to win. And without getting too political, the party that favors companies over labor in the US is also against "government picking winners and losers," which means the US won't do what China is doing. They even killed the EV tax credit, which was one US government effort to help get the country onto the inevitable winning transportation technology.

Without getting too political either, the US was so successful after WW2 because instead of picking winners and losers, was HEAVILY investing in science and research and letting the outcomes of that research "pick" the winners and losers. Of course, that's all in the past now, because some people hate science.

 

[borski]

So, is anybody actually doing anything with the time bought? It doesn't seem so.

Well, Lucid, Rivian, and others are certainly trying. But yes, we’re certainly not investing in it as we should.

Those two things are unrelated though. Buying time is useful. Wasting that time is not.

 

[borski]

100% agree that it can buy time. The question is, what are we doing with that time?

What I see is we are pulling back on EV’s and doubling down on ICE vehicles and infrastructure. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is going full steam ahead on EV and electric.

Are we really buying time or are we shutting out the rest of the world because we can’t keep up? Are we moving forward, or are we closing our eyes and trying to remain happy in our land of dinosaurs?

You won’t find me disagreeing. I am not happy with what we are doing with the time we’ve bought.

But it does buy time. We just appear to be very willing to waste all of that time we bought.

 

[borski]

Without getting too political either, the US was so successful after WW2 because instead of picking winners and losers, was HEAVILY investing in science and research and letting the outcomes of that research "pick" the winners and losers. Of course, that's all in the past now, because some people hate science.

I would be perfectly fine with this approach again. In fact, I miss it.

 

[BSheppard]

That's only going to lead to American manufacturers getting even more behind the curve. Protectionism never protected anybody in the long run.

Agreed and it only supports the lack of innovation that we have seen in the major American Car makers for years

 

[hmp10]

Are we really buying time or are we shutting out the rest of the world because we can’t keep up? Are we moving forward, or are we closing our eyes and trying to remain happy in our land of dinosaurs?

We could keep up if we wanted to. The sad fact is that we are choosing not to and, at least in some quarters, reveling in our pull back.

I didn't really understand how deep this impulse now runs in this country until COVID hit. The U.S. had been one the pioneering nations in public health care standards and pharmaceutical research. We developed major vaccines and rendered polio, smallpox, measles, and other once-common diseases almost extinct. We developed sophisticated epidemiological data tracking. We developed quarantine, containment, and masking protocols that held many pandemics at bay.

But when COVID hit, the U.S. went absolutely berserk in trying to toss overboard every tool this country had developed to foster public health care in a crisis. And today we see our once-revered CDC under the thumb of an outright crank.

A measles outbreak has just been confirmed at Ave Maria University (an ultra-conservative outfit) near where we live. Almost instantly, the neighborhood NextDoor.com thread reporting the outbreak was overwhelmed with bitching and taunting ridicule about Anthony Fauci.

The Department of Energy has launched a new mascot named "Coalie" to head a campaign aimed at educating school children on the friendly glories of coal energy.

The inmates are running the asylum in this country, and we're gong to be paying the price for years to come while the rest of the world moves on into the future.

 

[scal_air]

It's impossible to separate politics from what has happened to the US EV industry. As others have pointed out, we have happily (and stupidly) relinquished our lead in EV manufacturing by not only removing subsidies but replacing it with outright antagonism towards it and clean energy in general. It was easy for China to capitalize in a race where our participants were forced to run backwards. Tariffs are necessary to keep the US EV industry from collapsing completely - that's how far ahead the competition leads us.

Many people have mentioned price as the main determinant why Norway has not purchased Lucid vehicles. My impression is that they purchase their fair share of luxury cars. Why not Lucid? Ask American distilleries why Canada isn't buying their products. It's not because of price...

 

[scal_air]

....The Department of Energy has launched a new mascot named "Coalie" to head a campaign aimed at educating school children on the friendly glories of coal energy...

And thank goodness the current administration is is implementing significant deregulation of U.S. nuclear power plants to accelerate sector growth, cutting hundreds of pages of safety and security requirements... I mean what could go wrong? /s

 

[Smorgasbord]

Without getting too political either, the US was so successful after WW2 because instead of picking winners and losers, was HEAVILY investing in science and research and letting the outcomes of that research "pick" the winners and losers. Of course, that's all in the past now, because some people hate science.

Well, the government did have incentives for people and companies after WWII, and I'd argue they were larger and broader than the recent EV incentives. From the GI Bill to accelerated depreciation and other tax incentives, to even the Marshall Plan, which helped other countries out as they purchased US made products.

 

[martinjlm]

So, is anybody actually doing anything with the time bought? It doesn't seem so.

I think Ford and GM are. Both have done two things, only one of which gets widely reported in "mainstream" news.

1. They've stepped back and completely re-racked their electrification strategies. GM's strategy is to continue to develop EV in key product segments. Product releases will be slower than they would have been in a "100% Zero Emissions Vehicles by 2035" world but that may be a good thing. They also re-injected the prospects of hybrid products in segments where hybrids make the most sense. Ford has partitioned their ICE / Hybrid / and EV product sectors and identified locations for development as well as manufacture. Louisville, KY will be the production center for a portfolio of EVs developed along a Universal Electric Vehicle (UEV) platform and a production process similar to Tesla's "Unboxed" process.
2. Having assessed the impact of these changes on their overall operations, both companies have taken multi-billion dollar write-offs to their financials. These are unrecoverable costs of stopping some elements of their development and manufacturing system conversion and absorbing the losses.

Guess which gets reported in the media and which doesn't.

And what about Stellantis North America?

 

[illopp00]

Lucid has a chance to create a dominant midsize SUV in the US if they price it correctly. I believe the Chinese EVs will have a very hard time penetrating the US market for the reasons SavageGeese laid out (safety standards, service and parts, etc). But they will probably be the dominant EV globally for a long time.

Sadly, Norway is buying very few Lucids currently. It’s remarkable to me that the Lucid Air, which just won the cold weather range test in Norway again, didn’t sell at all in December, like not a single car. Despite its range performance and general acceptance of the top luxury EV sedan in the US, how is it doing so poorly globally? Is this because of price? Or is Volvo BMW and Chinese competition that much better? Would be great to understand this if someone knows the reasoning.

It's inversely tarrified and import costs make it 20% more expensive than the EU homeland competition and even more expensive than NIO who is already in Norway and established....