backtop


Print 76 comment(s) - last by Chaser.. on Jul 22 at 12:31 PM

Leaf EV sales market is expanding

For a long time the big problem for Nissan and many electric vehicle makers was the fact that electric vehicles simply weren't popular due to high pricing, range anxiety or any variety of other reasons. Nissan is now fighting the opposite problem with demand surging in new markets without the inventory to satisfy interested consumers.

Nissan director of electric vehicle sales Erik Gottfried says that he recently flew to Texas to meet with dealers that are clamoring for more Leaf electric vehicles.

"They really want more Leafs in Dallas," Gottfried says. "I assured them that we're doing everything we can to get them more inventory. But it's taking some time. It will be late fall before we can produce enough to satisfy everybody."

Nissan is now selling approximately 2,000 Leaf electric vehicles each month which is about four times the volume it was selling about a year ago. To meet this new demand, Nissan is slowly ramping up production of the Leaf at its manufacturing facility in Tennessee.


"We're going to be short on inventory all through the summer," Gottfried says he has been telling dealers. "

Since its introduction, the Leaf has been most popular on the West Coast in areas such as San Francisco and Seattle. However, the market has expanded sales are exploding in St. Louis, Atlanta, Chicago, and Raleigh. Atlanta is now the third-largest market for the Leaf electric vehicle and had only nine days of supply in June.

A year ago, California made up 37% of Leaf cells. Now, the state only accounts for 27% of sales due to significant growth in other markets.
 
Nissan credits its price cut of about $6,000 earlier this year for the increased sales.

Source: Autonews



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By Motoman on 7/16/2013 7:03:08 PM , Rating: 2
I rent. Got no kids. Didn't take any school loans. Chose to use my IRA to pay off bills when the company I worked for closed up shop - and paid enormous tax penalties because of it.

When someone buys an EV and gets that ludicrous tax break, meant to prop up a product that's incapable of competiting on it's own merits, the tax revenue per capita decreases for that frivolous credit - effectively putting more burden on everyone else. If you buy an EV and get that ridiculous tax break, and I don't, I'm paying more taxes than you are. Period. Pretty simple math.

At least tuition tax credit, or kid credits, or whatever, have some kind of basis in something valid. I never got a tuition credit, but frankly I wouldn't be upset with someone else that did.

But a tax credit for buying an EV? Please. The one and only reason that tax credit exists is because EVs are a product that can't compete based on their own merits. Ergo, they should just fail in the marketplace...until such time as such a product *can* be made that *can* compete on it's own merits.

The EV tax credit is a Smug Subsidy. Have fun smelling your farts while paying less than your fair share of tax. Don't worry - the rest of us will apparently make up for your shortfall.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By flyingpants1 on 7/17/2013 2:26:52 AM , Rating: 2
It's meant to keep EVs afloat until prices drop. It worked.


By Jeffk464 on 7/17/2013 11:18:53 AM , Rating: 2
Yup, same as with the prius which is now profitable. I think Tesla would have no problem selling the same number of cars without the tax credit. People seem to love the car and are willing to pay a price premium to get one.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By Reclaimer77 on 7/17/2013 11:59:36 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
It's meant to keep EVs afloat until prices drop. It worked.


Why is it the Government's responsibility to keep "EV's afloat"?

There are hundreds of technologies and products out there that could benefit our lives, yet have little to no market penetration because of cost barriers. Should the Government just arbitrarily pick winners and losers there and fund them?

The amount of Government manipulation into the automotive industry is what's probably bothering me more than anything. Direct market manipulation by Government has never succeeded, historically, and always has far-reaching unforeseen consequences.


By flyingpants1 on 7/21/2013 9:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
It's not their responsibility, it's just something they did, because each ICE car shoots out poisonous gas everywhere it goes, and it's more than reasonable because other countries subsidize technology too, whether it be the oil industry or the EV industry... And I am sorry.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By tayb on 7/17/2013 9:41:41 AM , Rating: 2
What an excellent argument!

quote:
At least tuition tax credit, or kid credits, or whatever, have some kind of basis in something valid.


You know what that "some kind of something or whatever" thing is? It's called an incentive. It's an incentive to buy a house, an incentive to go to school, or an incentive to have kids. You could even call it a reward. I don't really care. Point is you either have a problem with all tax credits/incentives or none of them at all.

quote:
But a tax credit for buying an EV? Please. The one and only reason that tax credit exists is because EVs are a product that can't compete based on their own merits. Ergo, they should just fail in the marketplace...until such time as such a product *can* be made that *can* compete on it's own merits.


A tax credit for buying a house? Please. The one and only reason that tax credit exists is because buying a house is not a great financial decision as opposed to renting. Ergo, home builders should just fail in the marketplace... until such time as a house is cheap enough that it is a stronger financial alternative to renting.

Or... simply replace "buying a house" with "going to school" or "having a child." Your argument is ridiculous and is void of all logic or reason. You just don't like fuel efficient vehicles, for whatever ridiculous reason. Probably because reporters on Fox News told you not to.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By ZmaxDP on 7/17/2013 1:53:05 PM , Rating: 2
What what WHAT??? Woooosh... (That is the sound of your credibility going out the window...)

Buying a house is a far better financial decision than renting in a lot of situations. Maybe not all, but in a vast majority of the US it is. Takeout the interest tax break, still a better decision. WAY better. We just had a renter buy a rental property from us. Purchasing the house at today's interest rates in the Dallas market ignoring any tax implications and assuming they'll only be able to sell at the same value they purchased at resulted in an almost 22 thousand dollar net gain in their personal accounts over three years compared to renting on a home costing 90K. So, financially speaking, that is 7333.33 better decision per year. That comes from the reduced price per month (about 11K over three years) and the equity gained (the other 11K). If the market improves over the next three years, it looks even better. The home would actually have to loose about 20% of its value for the end result in three years to be break-even between renting.

So, yeah, I don't know what world/continent/state/city you live in - but to globally state that home ownership needs tax incentives to justify it financially seems just nuts to me. That's 22K that family can invest in their kid's college education, or into their 401Ks, or into a new EV (just kidding!).

Leasing makes a lot of sense on items that depreciate like cars, boats, etc... On anything that holds or improves it's value historically over time - it almost never makes sense to lease as you're only assisting someone else in building their wealth - not yourself. The only thing that typically sways that needle is interest rates and available capital. If you have high enough interest rates and insufficient capital to purchase the item outright, then there are points at which rental/leasing makes sense for value holding assests as well - however with current interest rates as low as they are I can't think of a single example where this is currently true.


By topkill on 7/19/2013 9:43:24 AM , Rating: 2
You're making his point for him! It's a better decision BECAUSE of the financial incentives of the tax break!

GEEZ! Do you people even think about the things you say before you post them? For god's sake man, use your head for a minute.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By euclidean on 7/17/2013 10:24:29 AM , Rating: 2
So what does that mean about the subsidies for Oil/Gas? Based on this statement, should we not get rid of those and let Oil/Gas stand up on it's own?


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By Reclaimer77 on 7/17/2013 11:06:01 AM , Rating: 2
Can we stop regurgitating this FUD?

There are no direct oil/gas subsidies like there is for EV's. There ARE tax breaks that are the same and any other business would qualify for, however.

Furthermore oil/gas tax revenues are responsible for tens of billions of dollars a year, EVERY year, in state and Federal government revenues. Far far outstripping the pennies on the dollar that your "subsidies" cover. Unlike EV's which have yet to make a single positive contribution to tax revenues or the general populace.

Your entire post is a straw man, a factually bankrupt one at that. Oil isn't subsidized by the Government to boost sales, and it IS standing on it's own and has been for over a hundred years.


RE: Smells like artificial shortages
By Spuke on 7/17/2013 12:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can we stop regurgitating this FUD?
X2, I really tire of the lies and spin. We get enough from our government.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki