AD #2951 – Honda Buying Tesla EV Credits; Citroen Says Polestar Logo Too Similar; German Startup Develops Unique EV

November 3rd, 2020 at 11:39am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #2951 – Honda Buying Tesla EV Credits; Citroen Says Polestar Logo Too Similar; German Startup Develops Unique EV” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 9:34

0:07 Honda Has to Buy Tesla EV Credits
0:55 Tesla Confirms FSD for Canada & Norway
2:25 Does Future Hold Just Two Vehicle Segments?
4:22 Citroen Goes After Polestar for Its Chevron Logo
5:46 Ford Offers Brand Neutral Commercial Vehicle App
6:18 Mercedes Adds Air Suspension to V-Class
6:56 Renault Refreshes the Trafic Van
7:47 German Startup Develops Unique EV

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Hyundai and Intrepid Control Systems.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website: WardsAuto.com

38 Comments to “AD #2951 – Honda Buying Tesla EV Credits; Citroen Says Polestar Logo Too Similar; German Startup Develops Unique EV”

  1. Kerri Says:

    Being an all electric vehicle company, Tesla should not receive ANY EV credits, let alone being able to sell them off.

  2. 1949view Says:

    Why do the Chinese have to be the ones to build a low-end vehicle? Anybody remember the Model-T; how about the Ford Falcon or Maverick? Chrysler succeeded with the K-car? Why can’t a domestic manufacturer build a budget-conscious, no-frills, utilitarian vehicle without all the electronics? I understand the high cost of safety requirements imposed by government, but still believe there would be a market for a low-end, domestically-produced family car.

  3. Rey Says:

    Kerri is butt hurt of Tesla credits?
    Elon better check those credits cash or checks that they are not fake money or bouncing checks,TSLA shorters and naysayers say they are not real money

  4. Kit Gerhart Says:

    It seems to me, that the biggest reason transaction prices are increasing, is that people are buying big trucks, rather than mid-size and smaller cars. You can buy a decently equipped Accord or Camry for an MSRP in the mid 20s, but people are buying huge pickup trucks and various size SUVs instead.

  5. Mike Says:

    If we’re discussing trademark infringement, the Electric Brands folks need to review the Bugatti logo. EB = Ettore Bugatti as we all know.

  6. Lambo2015 Says:

    Sean; Thanks you answered my question from yesterdays show about who the first manufacturer would be to develop a skateboard platform with interchangeable bodies.. This German Unique EV seems to be on the right track, Very cool concept.

  7. Ron Paris Says:

    Astonishing that neither Charlie Chesbrough nor any other member of the AAH panel cited the most obvious reason for MSRP creep. Auto manufacturers are forced to pour billions of dollars into developing electric and self driving vehicles for which there is virtually no market. What they do have to sell is conventional ICE vehicles and in order to stay in business they are forced to keep inflating the prices of products that provide their only stream of revenue and offset their escalating costs.

  8. Bob Wilson Says:

    “Electric Brands. … 10 to 30 kWh. The vehicles can hold up to 24 battery modules, which each come in at 1.25 kWh … Electric Brands says that the overall weight, about 1,000 pounds”

    When something sounds too good to be true …

  9. George Ricci Says:

    “Tesla warns that drivers must constantly pay attention and keep their hands on the wheel at all times.” Yet in the video the driver never touches the steering wheel.

  10. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Sean, by “luxury and used” as the only segments, are you predicting that Chevy, Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and other “mainstream” brands will all be dropped, and only Cadillac, Lincoln, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, etc., and the “premium only” brands like Mercedes, BMW, etc. will continue to exist?

  11. Lambo2015 Says:

    4 Yea my own auto insight is that transaction prices are up due to the kinds of vehicles being purchased in addition to what Charlie said about supply and demand and accessories. But the low interest rates help. If a 2% interest rate is offered on a $40,000 vehicle when rates go up to 6% that same payment only gets you $35,500. People financing are always limited by the payment not the cost of the vehicle.

  12. Kevin A Says:

    As more companies start selling BEVs, the demand for and value of the credits has to decrease. Maybe someday, Tesla will have to buy an ICE company (Bugatti?) just to have a place to sell the credits!

  13. ChuckGrenci Says:

    @5 Mike, good catch and I was just getting ready to post same; beat me to it. :)

    What is the limit to Tesla’s EV credits; how many, at maximum, could it sell. Just wondering.

  14. Lambo2015 Says:

    7 You are also right that it cost money to buy these carbon credits and develop EVs and that money has to come from somewhere. Where you ask? the only place they do make money.. Selling EVs. Spot on there Ron

  15. Lambo2015 Says:

    14 I meant to say ICEs not EVS is where they make the money.

  16. Albemarle Says:

    The little Honda e is very popular in Europe despite its high price and short range. It is Honda that is restricting sales. So management will buy credits from others rather than lower the EV price, increase sales and build a market?

    It’s become obvious that the auto industry is focussed on engineering and design excellence. Admin and marketing is left to the slow and ignorant.

  17. Joe C. Says:

    4 & 11 spot on. the mix of vehicles being sold has changed over the past few years. Consumers are buying CUV’s, SUV’s and pickups’s and cars are out of favor. I bet the average transaction price would go down if the price of gas would go up.

  18. Larry D. Says:

    1 and others like you. WHen you do not have a CLUE, DO NOT SPEAK.

    Tesla has EVERY RIGHT to those credits, and it is the FAIR and RIGHT thing to do.

    If the other makers want, they can CLEAN UP THEIR ACT, ie make EVs, and then they will not need any credits.

    Go study economics. I am disappointed that you did not ask that Cheeseburger economist to explain it to the unwashed masses here.

  19. Larry D. Says:

    As for the $37,000 average transaction price, I do not find it high AT ALL, it is still VERY AFFORDABLE by millions of people.

    THrowing a number out does not show anything. THe CORRECT way to size it is to ask, HOW MANY WEEKS of the average person’s income does it take to buy the average car? And you will find out cars in the US are STILL infinitely more affordable than cars in almost every other nation.

    I remember a colleague who started in 1979 as a tenure-track engineeering professor with the modest salary of $19,000 for the NINE month acad year (add 3 months summer salary to that), and bought a $9,300 VOLVO GL 240 I believe.

    The same fellow today makes close to $300,000 for 9 months JUST from the U, and extra $ when he consults etc. How much does an equivalent VOlvo cost today??? He almost had to work half a year in 1979 to buy that utter POS, and today he just has to work a couple months, only he never bought a VOlvo again, and with GOOD REASON.

  20. GM Veteran Says:

    In the future, if there are only two vehicle classes (luxury and used) because vehicle prices have climbed so high, where will the used vehicles come from? Former new car buyers will have to buy used, which means that even more used vehicles will be needed to satisfy demand. And for those who can only afford a low priced car, will they be forced to buy a used luxury car with 300,000 miles on it just so that they can fit it into their budget? This prediction makes no sense at all. Mr. Chesbrough needs to crunch some more numbers and it will soon be clear that this concept is crazy.

  21. GM Veteran Says:

    Does anyone else find it odd that Renault will launch a new version of the Trafic next year (2021) and only offer diesel powertrain options? With the increasingly stringent pollution regulations (which came up in the Honda-Tesla story), it seems very odd that they don’t offer a PHEV version or a pure EV version.

  22. GM Veteran Says:

    And, here is a question for the engineers and tech gurus in our group. How will the in-wheel hub motors affect tire changes? Does the wheel disconnect from the hub motor and come off the vehicle to be changed as they are now? Or, will the technician have to take the entire wheel and motor assembly off to change the tire or find a leak? Just curious how this will play out. Truck wheel and tire combos are pretty heavy now for technicians to wrangle. Can’t imagine having to deal with the added weight of the motor too.

  23. Lambo2015 Says:

    19 Its not a matter of affordability its the fact that autos are the second largest purchase for most people and has the highest depreciation. As (you) have pointed out many times in your not so eloquent way by saying “only fools buy new”. These high transaction prices just make buying a new car a big losing proposition. I doubt the average American gives two winks about the affordability of cars in other countries so saying they are more affordable here means nothing.

  24. Larry D. Says:

    13 The amount of credits produced by a clean vehicle maker depends mainly on how many it sells. That is the reason Tesla can make billions of its credit, while all the other BEV makers in the US and Europe cannot, becuse their sales are far inferior to Tesla.

    In addition, Tesla makes only 100% clean vehicles, while many other makers who sell a few BEVs also sell millions of dirty vehicles, and their own credits from the few BEVs they sell are probably not enough so they have to buy credits from the clean makers.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    21 It seemed odd to me too, that the new Trafic would be diesel only. Apparently that’s still the way to go, for now, in that market, which is low cost small commercial vans. I think they make passenger versions, but most are sold as cargo vans.

  26. Lambo2015 Says:

    24 Yes! So again, it gives the false impression that BEVs have a market and demand. When really what Tesla has is carbon credits. Tesla Would still not be profitable if it were not for these credits. So basically they are operating at a loss and are subsidised by all the other manufacturers that are making cars people actually want (ICEs) and we all no pay more for our ICE vehicles because carbon credits need to be purchased from manufacturers like Tesla. Essentially Everyone is paying to keep Tesla afloat via carbon credits. As we continue to buy what we want it inadvertently supports EVs.

  27. Phred Says:

    Remember the push to eliminate Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Plymouth by government beancounters in the name of “right sizing” the industry?? Sounds like the same failed view.

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    19 New cars are affordable by millions of people, but they are not affordable by even more millions of people.

    Here’s a little about the relative “affordability” of cars over time, limited to three sporty cars, no sedans or SUVs. They ignore some obvious differences in overall cost of driving, like huge improvements in fuel economy and lifespan of cars, over the years they discuss.

    https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2014/03/07/have-cars-really-grown-more-expensive-since-1965

  29. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27 I don’t think governments had anything to do with Plymouth being dropped in 2000 or 2001. Except for Prowler, all of the Plymouths had nearly identical Dodge versions. The PT Cruiser was originally intended to be a Plymouth, but didn’t need to be. From what I’ve heard, after the Daimler takeover, the new management wanted Plymouth to go away, because it didn’t serve any purpose.

  30. Joe G Says:

    20- I do indeed believe in the two class luxury/exotic new vehicle and used vehicle theory in the future. I was able to afford a new base model vehicle five years ago but the same vehicle is now out of my consideration. Increasing expenses have out-stripped my barely increasing pay (and this year less than last year while working HARDER and MORE hours). Vehicles for me will have to be used from now on. Most of my co-workers are in the same financial position here at the CAR DEALERSHIP. We have been outpriced of the products our business sells. Only those 300K salary folks or business owners can actually afford new. The 50-100K salary buyer can get the loan but should not drive off in that $700 a month payment. There will be used veicles to meet demand because luxury purchasers are a fickle lot. They trade in after two years for the latest thing, or lease to be able to do so.

  31. Stephen Says:

    Cheap credit is whats driving new car sales. Without that low monthly fee (and some credit profit), car makers would be in deep crap. As we can see from the Pandemics impact on incentives and dealer stock, cars are literally being sold at a fantasy sticker price and manufacturer discounts means the price is much lower. Pushing to meat volume sales is distorting the cars eventual sales price and credit sales means some of that loss is then recouped over monthly income.
    As to making a cheaper car, its not gov regs (although you could always allow cars to not require ABS, seatbelts,crash protection,safety glass, headlight standards and hope you are never in an accident), most of the regs have long being designed in and such costs are not driving ever higher sticker prices-its customers wanting – big screens (rather than dials), fancy internet in car entertainment systems, stick on trims to make the neighbour jealous, soft-touch plastics, big wheels with fancy alloys etc etc. When the Japanese arrived in the US, they met the standards with less warranty claims, built it cheaper and added radios etc that were optional extras on detroit cars. The solution to make cheaper cars is – cut wages and expect the same output, cut regs and sure its only the dead -injured who might sue and win, convince customers that extra kit costs extra (witness the germans who charge for every option and customers who complain about penny pinching) or cut car makers so there is more volume sold by each car maker (less car choices then).

  32. Bruce Says:

    Please settle a debate I am having with a friend who has a 2020 Subaru Forester. She thinks she can get better gas mileage on the highway by not using the adaptive cruise control. I disagree. Who do you think is right?

  33. Kit Gerhart Says:

    32 She should get better mpg with the adaptive cruise, especially if she tailgates a big truck. Even just following another car, she should get at least as good of mileage with adaptive cruse as regular cruise, at the same speed.

  34. Drew Says:

    I get better fuel economy with my right foot than with my cruise control… adaptive or not. The reason is that I instinctively adjust throttle sooner the the ACC, with less energy-sapping use of brakes. For example, I can see and react smoother to the vehicle that is cutting in front of me. I can also make a tight pass, whereas the ACC will decelerate. My brain also recognizes slower traffic quicker than ACC, so I am not schizophrenic with the throttle and brakes.

    While I rate my ACC system very highly, there is no replacement for an alert and attentive human driver.

  35. Lambo2015 Says:

    32 I could see that being possible to get better mileage without using adaptive cruise. Especially if she doesn’t drive looking ahead. Meaning if she is doing 70 in the right lane coming up on a truck going 60 and doesn’t change lanes to pass prior to the system slowing her down. Then the cruise will slow her to 60 she then changes lanes and the system accelerates back to 70. That up and down in speed will be less efficient than keeping a constant speed. So I assume she keeps the same speed until she is close enough to change lanes maybe far later than the ACC would and can go around the truck without slowing down.
    Also I found with ACC that it leaves a large enough gap from the car ahead that people will slide in front of you pushing you further and further back soon your going 55 in the left lane and everyone is just passing you on the right cutting in front and your ACC slows you down to maintain that distance..
    ACC does require some maneuvers to be done in advance simply because the system is maintaining the proper safe distance that no one on the road really does.
    On a very open road light traffic and looking far enough ahead to anticipate passes she should get better mileage with ACC but I doubt that’s the case.

  36. Kit Gerhart Says:

    35 I rarely use adaptive cruise control, for some of the reasons you mention. It definitely would get worse mpg, and worse brake life, if I let it do its think at a stop light. If a light changes in front of me, I will let off the gas far sooner than the ACC will, and I’ll use less brake. On the highway, generally, if there are hills, you get better mpg if you speed up downhill and slow down uphill, very annoying to most people who might be following.

    I, personally, use constant speed cruise control a lot, and ACC rarely.

  37. MERKUR DRIVER Says:

    I use ACC for long highway trips. I may or may not get better fuel economy but it is much more relaxing to let ACC do the work and worth any minor reduction in fuel economy, which I have never noted. Locally and rush hour I use my foot.

  38. Brett Cammack Says:

    #9

    I think it’s a Hobson’s choice. If the driver’s hands were on the wheel, the naysayers would claim the car wasn’t driving itself. If the driver’s hands aren’t on the wheel, then it’s setting a “bad example” and contrary to Tesla’s recommendations.