The Economist article

Green G

Member
Verified Owner
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2024
Messages
70
Cars
Lucid Air GT
Interesting article. Not exactly upbeat but insightful read nevertheless.

Think Tesla is in trouble? Pity even more its wannabe EV rivals

(You've been given free access to this article from The Economist as a gift. You can open the link five times within seven days. After that it will expire.)
 
The cars made by Rivian and Lucid are technologically unremarkable.
We have some competitors for Edmunds... this take is THE worst I have seen in any article concerning Lucid. Anybody doing this take is literally objectively wrong! Simply astonished at how anybody could find any rationale for that...
 
Excerpt:

As a result, many of the ev entrants lack unique selling features. The cars made by Rivian and Lucid are technologically unremarkable. Their good looks alone do not justify the hefty price tag. Rivian’s cheapest electric pickup costs around $70,000, half as much again as Ford’s f-150 Lightning without offering one-and-a-half as much car. In Europe the Lucid Air, a luxury saloon, is significantly pricier than comparable electric bmws or Mercedes. Fisker’s mass-market evs are also well designed but still cost more than Chinese rivals with similar features, partly because its asset-light outsourcing strategy does not work well for cheaper cars. Why anyone would buy a VinFast remains a mystery; reviews of its vf8 suv were damning, to put it charitably.

With demand for their products tepid many of the companies need more capital to keep going. On March 25th Lucid said it had managed to wangle another $1bn from its biggest investor, Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund. Many rivals are not so lucky. Rivian had $9.4bn in net cash at the end of 2023 but will need billions more to build its cheaper models. Gone are the days when moneymen would throw treasure at any firm with a plausible PowerPoint presentation and an artist’s impression of a sleek electric car. Having put up billions of dollars in the years leading up to 2021, only to see billions torched, they look askance at missed deadlines, disappointing new models and ever receding prospects of profits. Their second thoughts have not been dispelled by the recent slowdown in growth of ev sales in many countries. Incumbent carmakers have no interest in rescuing the insurgents. Mr Hummel of ubs thinks that most of the startups will simply disappear.

The likeliest to survive are the Chinese. One reason is that they appear to be the most innovative of the bunch. Nio’s upmarket evs come with the option of battery swapping and, in China at least, a vast network of stations to do it. Drivers can be on their way in minutes without getting out of the car. Bernstein, a broker, considers Xpeng one of the leaders in autonomous-driving technology
.
 
Infuriating article. It called Lucid's technology 'unremarkable', and made it sound like we forever going to the Saudis with a tin cup. Ugh!
 
You know who's not building really great EVs? The brits.

Now I know why.
Because the British cars are known for their electrical components being reliable... oh wait.

1712693632403.png
 
What a load
Excerpt:

As a result, many of the ev entrants lack unique selling features. The cars made by Rivian and Lucid are technologically unremarkable. Their good looks alone do not justify the hefty price tag. Rivian’s cheapest electric pickup costs around $70,000, half as much again as Ford’s f-150 Lightning without offering one-and-a-half as much car. In Europe the Lucid Air, a luxury saloon, is significantly pricier than comparable electric bmws or Mercedes. Fisker’s mass-market evs are also well designed but still cost more than Chinese rivals with similar features, partly because its asset-light outsourcing strategy does not work well for cheaper cars. Why anyone would buy a VinFast remains a mystery; reviews of its vf8 suv were damning, to put it charitably.

With demand for their products tepid many of the companies need more capital to keep going. On March 25th Lucid said it had managed to wangle another $1bn from its biggest investor, Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund. Many rivals are not so lucky. Rivian had $9.4bn in net cash at the end of 2023 but will need billions more to build its cheaper models. Gone are the days when moneymen would throw treasure at any firm with a plausible PowerPoint presentation and an artist’s impression of a sleek electric car. Having put up billions of dollars in the years leading up to 2021, only to see billions torched, they look askance at missed deadlines, disappointing new models and ever receding prospects of profits. Their second thoughts have not been dispelled by the recent slowdown in growth of ev sales in many countries. Incumbent carmakers have no interest in rescuing the insurgents. Mr Hummel of ubs thinks that most of the startups will simply disappear.

The likeliest to survive are the Chinese. One reason is that they appear to be the most innovative of the bunch. Nio’s upmarket evs come with the option of battery swapping and, in China at least, a vast network of stations to do it. Drivers can be on their way in minutes without getting out of the car. Bernstein, a broker, considers Xpeng one of the leaders in autonomous-driving technology
.
What a huge load of a horseshit.
Whoever wrote this "article" must have an array of a yellow buck teeth. The Economist brain hygiene is on par with their dental hygiene.
 
You know who's not building really great EVs? The brits.

Now I know why.
While I agree with the sentiment about the content of the article I just want to remind you that Rawlinson would actually be considered British.

There are no great EV companies but there are some very good British EV engineers around.
 
I only read the excerpt so do not know their perspective on Tesla. The Economist is often unremarkable in its opinions and just as frequently wrong. There is no guarantee that any company will survive if they do not innovate and reinvent themselves and access to capital for nascent industries is essential. As for the comment about Lucid technology being unremarkable, perhaps they should read the recent Top Gear article and maybe even drive an Air. The quality of journalism at The Economist is suboptimal based on its account of EVs.
 
You know who's not building really great EVs? The brits.

Now I know why.
which british EV is your reference?
I love my IPace, great car, great tech, great performance, great ride. the only complaint is that it is a slow charger at L# units, since 98% of the time I charge at home it is a minor complaint.
 
While I agree with the sentiment about the content of the article I just want to remind you that Rawlinson would actually be considered British
Re Rawlinson, he's an exception, show me a one bad tooth and I'll buy another Lucid :)
 
Re Rawlinson, he's an exception, show me a one bad tooth and I'll buy another Lucid :)
I actually did find a picture online that showed him having a singular yellow teeth, but I won't post it to avoid wasting your money 🤣
 
Infuriating article. It called Lucid's technology 'unremarkable', and made it sound like we forever going to the Saudis with a tin cup. Ugh!
Lucid is so far ahead of most of the ev market to call them unremarkable is ridiculous. Right now they are concentrated on quality not quantity. The new stuff in the pipeline will make lucid the leader in quality ev market. The gravity. The 2 door sports car, and the affordable commuter car will set the bar so high no other ev maker will ever reach. Wait till gravity gets released and everyone sees the quality and the range there wont be anyone to compare it to. Lucid has a very bright future. Get your sunglasses ready your gonna need them!
 
I agree with the above stated sentiments and I didn’t post this to annoy anyone. I find The Economist a very comprehensive magazine and very informative. That said, writing about EV’s is not their forté. It’s a magazine for data junkies and reading one of their main articles can take long time as most of the material is very dense. This article was written with data for others to consume and nowhere does it reflect the driving experience of the author.

I didn’t spend 140k because I wanted to invest in a failing company; I did it because I wanted to drive an awesome car and from a hardware perspective haven’t doubted that for a second. I love driving this car. The author clearly hasn’t driven one (tbh likely hasn’t even seen one).
Elon is having his ass kicked by the Chinese and that will only get worse. Lucid has gone for a different market segment and that strategy has a long incubation time. If there was no market for it, a lot of German cars wouldn’t be driving around. Will Lucid ever equal Mercedes? Unlikely, but it could envelop a niche segment of EV enthusiasts who want a drivers car. A true driving machine.
 
While I agree with the sentiment about the content of the article I just want to remind you that Rawlinson would actually be considered British.

There are no great EV companies but there are some very good British EV engineers around.
Yeah, I know - but it was funnier the way I said it. :p i have nothing against brits, lol.
 
Back
Top