John's Stuff - Personal Log 1285

June 14, 2024 - June 22, 2024

Last Updated: Mon. 11/04/2024

6-22-2024
Trip Planning, you should. He didn't: "First road trip in the BZ4X. 240 miles round trip started at 100% 255 miles with A/C or 271 without. On the way home realized we weren’t going to make it..." That doesn't surprise me at all. People instinctively push it, figuring they'll be just fine. Not understanding how efficiency actually works is a problem though. He went on to later state that some of that travel was at 80 mph with A/C to counter 100°F temperatures. That's an extreme those basic estimates don't cover. For me, I couldn't imagine arriving home with only 15 miles left. How would he figure 240 miles total? You always end up putting a few more on. Road trips involve getting stuff from unplanned locations, like the need for food. Anywho, this was the advice I provided: Trip planning means you decide ahead at what point you should start looking for a charger and how long that stop will be. The goal is to nail down arrival time & SOC (state-of-charge). An app like ARBP can do that remarkably well. Google seems to be really on their game adding charger information too. Seeing expectations plotted on a map really helps the process, allowing for some flexibility & convenience... like taking advantage of faster charging-speed from lower SOC and a warmed battery. Also, take advantage of the app for the charging location. Seeing active use prior to the trip provides rough indication of having something available later when you are in that area.

6-22-2024 Being Competitive. It is only a matter of time before the EVs from China arrive. The threat of large tariffs is only a temporary strategy, just enough to buy us time to get our act together. Some automakers will. Some will not. This was that sentiment shared today: "Very sad that we are squandering this opportunity." It came from an article where "You should have bought a Tesla" advice now falls on deaf ears. In fact, rhetoric about Toyota has pretty much vanished entirely at this point. Tesla has troubles and China has plans. This is how I jumped into that discussion:

Let's not overlook enablers. Priority in China was not to obsess with size, range, power or speed. Their focus was on the technology itself. Small, gutless vehicles with limited miles and slow charging were perfectly acceptable. Loud voices from enthusiasts pushed to make Cybertruck a reality... which has turned out to be a profound waste of resources & opportunity for Tesla. So much attention to was put on a niche offering, time was squandered on what should have been delivered... a vehicle for the masses... like Model 2.

Now, it's a scramble for legacy automakers to address the new competition with different priorities. They won't be struggling with audience though. They have their own loyal customers already to appeal to, an advantage they have over both Tesla and brands from China. It comes down to messaging, what are they actually trying to sell?

We can see concerns related to range subside as NEVI projects finally ramp up and as reliability problems are addressed, especially as NACS rollout raises awareness. We can also see concern related to software fade away as upgrades are deployed. That means finding something appeal to those shopping the showroom floor (which has become website viewing for more and more consumers), a draw away from ICE choices.
That problem of "American cars failed to remain competitive" from back in the 70's and 80's is doomed to repeat again unless assertive measures are taken. What trait should become the "big sell" to make those purchases happen? How can they be competitive?

6-22-2024
Messaging, Prius. What should messaging be from an automaker who fiercely campaigned against BEV in favor of PHEV, only to reverse course and abandon PHEV in favor of BEV, then years later decide to bring back PHEV in conjunction with BEV? Plans from GM is to now pick up where they left off, delivering a new PHEV in 2027. Messages from GM are not worth much. They never were. By the time Volt was rolled out, Two-Mode had confirmed "over promise, under deliver" was alive & well. Trouble was, no one had any idea what the purpose of Volt really was. EREV highlighted the mystery, leaving you wondering how that technology even fit into the automaker's portfolio. We knew from the start Toyota would be spreading hybrid technology across their fleet. Branding made that undeniable. Prius was the first to deliver THS... Toyota Hybrid System. When the second-generation rolled out, it was renamed to HSD... Hybrid Synergy Drive. That made it generic, allowing other automakers to license use of it without Toyota branding. Remember how if Prius was too small, there was the option of Highlander hybrid or Camry hybrid instead, all those yeas ago? That master-plan is still at play, offering far more choices now. Toyota has spread hybrid models across the entire fleet and is aggressively phasing out traditional models. What will GM do with their new PHEV, especially knowing Ford is taking a greater interest in their PHEV offerings? So whether or not Toyota is considered competition, the other Detroit automaker will clearly be pursuing that market opportunity. Clarity of purpose from Prius helped. We got a message of hybrid spread & advancement. What... if anything... will GM convey?

6-21-2024 Messaging, EV Miles. After waiting over a day to see if anyone else would call out this grossly incorrect statement, I got really annoyed: "Introduced for the 2011 model year, the Volt offered 40 miles of all-electric driving, enough to cover the daily transportation needs of the vast majority of Americans." Misleading about Prius was par for course. It was the vehicle Volt enthusiasts hated from the beginning and hate even more now. But to outright lie about Volt itself is another matter. It only took me a matter of minutes to confirm each of the range estimates. The government fuel-economy website contains easy to search EPA values. 40 miles was what enthusiasts had hyped for years. When rollout finally happened, revealing Volt had clearly fallen short, they did everything they could to downplay importance. It's ironic how that very topic came back and in such a dishonest manner. That isn't journalism. It's propaganda. Ugh. This is what I posted in the comments:

The article started with that and continued on stating a "40 mile" range three more times, even though the first generation never actually delivered it. The first two years had an EV rating of 35 miles and the following three were 38 miles. Like while Volt was for sale, hype about EV was the focus. Efficiency after the battery was drained got completely ignored. Reality didn't matter. It was as self-inflicted messaging problem.

Originally promoted as delivering "230 MPG" with an extensive campaign to emphasize gas saving, focus abruptly shifted over to EV miles instead. That's how we got the "range anxiety" term. Misrepresentation emerged from that. Enthusiasts claimed Volt would operate as a series hybrid, despite its charge-depleted mode sending propulsion thrust directly to the wheels.
It turned into a messaging nightmare. Owners would proudly drive over 1,000 miles between refilling the gas tank, yet do everything possible to avoid having the engine start. Promotion focused exclusively on EV miles. Why not just purchase a BEV instead? Who the technology was intended for got lost in the hope for more EV miles.

6-21-2024
Messaging, Prius. No matter what the context, history of Prius is rarely ever accurate. In fact, most of the time it follows the narrative of weak initial sales. The reality that production was limited and distribution restricted to quotas didn't matter. No mention of people typically having to wait at least 6 months for delivery is never mentioned. Demand was high, despite so many misconceptions and the lack of awareness, you'd never no it. That was all without tax-credits too. They didn't start until January 1, 2006 and the allocation of 60,000 was used up in less than 9 months. That's why claims like this really annoy: "Toyota revealed its first hybrid in 2004 as the Prius." I was beside myself. The article had crossed a very profound line from being off by so many years. This is what I posted about that nonsense: "That is a strange attempt to rewrite history. Toyota revealed Prius in October 1997, a retaliation from being snubbed by the PNGV project. It wasn't a prototype well ahead of the Big 3 either; it was a production-ready vehicle. Sales began December 1997. The first upgrade was rolled out August 2000. The next upgrade came October 2003.

6-21-2024
Messaging, Volt. The vehicle itself was actually rather nice... as a means of proving there was much opportunity. Time squandered. Headway lost. Attention faded. My words to summarize what had happened were, ending with a question: Volt was a great conquest vehicle, worthy of engineering kudos and a shiny example of what not to do when trying to reach the masses. Specs were overkill, an expensive design that was fast & powerful leading to inefficient EV & HV driving. Enthusiasts loved it. Loyal GM customers simply weren't interested. That made the decision to move on to BEV easy from a profit & sales perspective, but not a good idea with regard to market need. Seeing renewed PHEV efforts from GM add to that history of audience uncertainty. Who will GM target now that Equinox EV is rolling out and a new Bolt EV is on the way?

6-20-2024
Messaging, Leadership. It started with an idea from a car enthusiast executive, Bob Lutz. He thrived on speed & power while detesting accountants. It was a recipe for trouble. His Two-Mode project proved it. Focus wasn't on actually being green or even appealing to the masses. He wanted to built a niche. When failure of the hybrid became undeniable, attention shifted to delivering some type of plug-in hybrid. Ultimately, that's how the Chevy Volt came about. All these years later, that still stands out as his favorite project. Today, an article was published featuring that "auto legend" highlighting that vehicle. It was an interesting write-up, some inaccuracies and some obvious omissions. The fact that the technology never targeted the automakers own customers and sales were always a struggle never got mentioned. It was all about somehow successfully proving Toyota was wrong. Falling short of so many goals was simply ignored. There was only a note about being discontinued in 2019. Needless to say, I had much to say about what was portrayed as leadership even though it had no impact to the status quo. In fact, dealers favored gas-guzzlers even more by Volt's end.

6-19-2024
It's a Hybrid. Ugh. This says it all: "Since getting my Kia EV6 in January, people ask me about it. I say I got it because it is great for road trips. They all say, "Oh, so it's a hybrid, then?" These are environmentally conscious people. I'm glad for the opportunity to share what EVs can do, but I was surprised at the same responses every time." Stuff like that is how the "know your audience" advice has become my mantra. People tend to not be well informed and don't critically think. All you get is a quick reply that doesn't relate to what you were trying to convey. In other words, they assume. Fortunately, I have advice for dealing with an audience like that. This was what I suggested: Respond with "No, it's a plug-in." Since the message we want to convey is use of electricity from plug-charged batteries, it doesn't make any difference whether you drive a PHEV or BEV. It opens the door too; you then get an opportunity to promote the benefits of using that electricity. They will recognize there's more to it than what a regular hybrid offers.

6-18-2024
Competition from China. I found this particular statement interesting: "Seal EV sells for around $48,500 (45,000 euros) in Europe with up to 354 miles (570 km) WLTP range." That provided some interesting perspective. Rather than being far less expensive... fulfilling the impression of being dirt cheap... it is instead just another offering in the mix. With pricing (which obviously includes steep tariffs) and that range (EPA would be less), it doesn't stand out. BYD Seal will be just another EV to choose from there. Here, who knows. I highly suspect GM will play the conquest game again. The reality of Equinox not actually being an Equinox does present problems. That EV doesn't share anything with its traditional counterpart beyond name. Will dealerships take advantage of that recognition with loyal GM customers or will they simply cater to those from elsewhere seeking opportunity? That later means no change to the status quo, the very problem GM struggled with from Volt & Bolt sales. We'll see. Added pressure of China targeting those same opportunity seekers adds an interesting twist.

6-17-2024
Propaganda Videos. There is a new source for them now. They are churning out new videos on almost a daily basis, all pretty much conveying the same message... long live the combustion engine. Arguments are weak, misleading, outdated... you know the story. Information is presented as well thought out reasons why EVs are struggling and really don't have long-term potential. It is utter nonsense if you take time to do any research yourself. Most people don't though, so this type of undermining campaign tends to reinforce the anti-EV narrative. Knowing I will get banned if I push too much, I refrain from posting much in the comments. I still do though, since the algorithm for filling your feed bases input on activity like that. I don't want to miss out on whatever it deems important. That tends to be more useful than just following everything pushing propagandas. It's hard to watch those videos sometimes too. They are so bad. Being able to quickly read through the entire transcript helps. I can ensure I don't overlook a detail that way. Anywho, this is how I responded to one such source fighting to retain the status quo: Slowdown in sales is just a plateau, a normal predictable outcome related to new technology adoption. Sales will increase later as newer offerings become available. New models will include improvements, like LFP battery chemistry which is fire resistant. With regard to "cheaper to run", never mentioning common level-2 home charging is an extremely misleading omission. That provides roughly 200 miles of range overnight, at discounted rates when enrolled for off-peak charging.

6-16-2024 Labels, Messaging. I waited 2 days before replying with: It has been intriguing to witness the same mistakes of the past being repeated here. The fear long ago with the rise of "HEV" came from Volt enthusiasts.

They saw the potential Toyota's simplistic designed offered, an easy step to create a viable PHEV. In fact, that's how "EREV" came about. It was an attempt to differentiate Volt from the upcoming choices of series-parallel plug-in hybrids. Problem was, the definition of EREV kept changing when it was revealed to be more of a marketing gimmick than anything that actually made a difference.

Those enthusiast feeling threatened by a supposed weaker offering resulted in the lack of any clear messaging... exactly what's happening now with BEV. Ordinary consumers see "electrified" as anything using a battery, which makes marketing a choice of PHEV over HEV a very easy one. It's just the adding a plug and increasing battery size... KISS.
Again, that "prove me wrong" effort is such a waste. You're missing opportunity fighting other plug-in supporters rather than recognizing the target audience... those shopping the showroom floor, looking for something to replace their ICE with.

6-14-2024 Labels, Bitter Reminder. Having watched him fight a senseless battle and getting a solid confirmation some are still willing to argue semantics, recognition of audience was well proven. There are some who really don't have a good grasp on purpose. That's why I always pushed in the past for stating goals and knowing audience. If you don't have clarity for both, that missed opportunity will eventually become an intolerable burden. No matter what you do, having burned those bridges will result in costly recovery. Trying to wrap up this nonsense, I referred to his what-about attempt. He cherry-picked Tundra as an example of inefficiency. I forced that to become a consideration of the bigger picture, the entire fleet rather than just a single vehicle starting with the bitter reminder of Toyota effort to transform all of their passenger vehicles to hybrid: The article topic is leadership perception. What actually reaches ordinary consumers enough to move the base forward... 100% of Tundra being hybrid or a small number of sales (3.4%) being F-150 being electric and the rest ICE still? That "leading the way" is a representation of who appeals to ordinary consumers, reaching beyond enthusiasts. Hybrids broke the status quo and welcome "electric" driving.

6-14-2024
Labels, Trolling. I wondered. His name seemed familiar. I checked. He joined that forum just 2 days before. His content was an obvious provoke. Since the old daily blog for Volt no longer exists, I couldn't confirm. So, I fired back with: "Yup, missing opportunity by wasting time fighting a battle that doesn't actually achieve anything." There was nothing for him to gain from such a blatant attack on hybrid potential. But knowing the bitterness GM enthusiasts had felt about Toyota back then and now seeing a resurgence of interest, it made sense that someone trying to draw attention to what really matters... which Toyota emerges as a leader... would be too much to bare. He needed something he could claim as a victory, even if it meant resorting to posting like a troll.

6-22-2024	Trip Planning, you should. He didn't: "First road trip in the BZ4X. 240 miles round trip started at 100% 255 miles with A/C or 271 without. On the way home realized we weren’t going to make it..." That doesn't surprise me at all. People instinctively push it, figuring they'll be just fine. Not understanding how efficiency actually works is a problem though. He went on to later state that some of that travel was at 80 mph with A/C to counter 100°F temperatures. That's an extreme those basic estimates don't cover. For me, I couldn't imagine arriving home with only 15 miles left. How would he figure 240 miles total? You always end up putting a few more on. Road trips involve getting stuff from unplanned locations, like the need for food. Anywho, this was the advice I provided: Trip planning means you decide ahead at what point you should start looking for a charger and how long that stop will be. The goal is to nail down arrival time & SOC (state-of-charge). An app like ARBP can do that remarkably well. Google seems to be really on their game adding charger information too. Seeing expectations plotted on a map really helps the process, allowing for some flexibility & convenience... like taking advantage of faster charging-speed from lower SOC and a warmed battery. Also, take advantage of the app for the charging location. Seeing active use prior to the trip provides rough indication of having something available later when you are in that area.
6-22-2024	Being Competitive. It is only a matter of time before the EVs from China arrive. The threat of large tariffs is only a temporary strategy, just enough to buy us time to get our act together. Some automakers will. Some will not. This was that sentiment shared today: "Very sad that we are squandering this opportunity." It came from an article where "You should have bought a Tesla" advice now falls on deaf ears. In fact, rhetoric about Toyota has pretty much vanished entirely at this point. Tesla has troubles and China has plans. This is how I jumped into that discussion: Let's not overlook enablers. Priority in China was not to obsess with size, range, power or speed. Their focus was on the technology itself. Small, gutless vehicles with limited miles and slow charging were perfectly acceptable. Loud voices from enthusiasts pushed to make Cybertruck a reality... which has turned out to be a profound waste of resources & opportunity for Tesla. So much attention to was put on a niche offering, time was squandered on what should have been delivered... a vehicle for the masses... like Model 2. Now, it's a scramble for legacy automakers to address the new competition with different priorities. They won't be struggling with audience though. They have their own loyal customers already to appeal to, an advantage they have over both Tesla and brands from China. It comes down to messaging, what are they actually trying to sell? We can see concerns related to range subside as NEVI projects finally ramp up and as reliability problems are addressed, especially as NACS rollout raises awareness. We can also see concern related to software fade away as upgrades are deployed. That means finding something appeal to those shopping the showroom floor (which has become website viewing for more and more consumers), a draw away from ICE choices. That problem of "American cars failed to remain competitive" from back in the 70's and 80's is doomed to repeat again unless assertive measures are taken. What trait should become the "big sell" to make those purchases happen? How can they be competitive?
6-22-2024	Messaging, Prius. What should messaging be from an automaker who fiercely campaigned against BEV in favor of PHEV, only to reverse course and abandon PHEV in favor of BEV, then years later decide to bring back PHEV in conjunction with BEV? Plans from GM is to now pick up where they left off, delivering a new PHEV in 2027. Messages from GM are not worth much. They never were. By the time Volt was rolled out, Two-Mode had confirmed "over promise, under deliver" was alive & well. Trouble was, no one had any idea what the purpose of Volt really was. EREV highlighted the mystery, leaving you wondering how that technology even fit into the automaker's portfolio. We knew from the start Toyota would be spreading hybrid technology across their fleet. Branding made that undeniable. Prius was the first to deliver THS... Toyota Hybrid System. When the second-generation rolled out, it was renamed to HSD... Hybrid Synergy Drive. That made it generic, allowing other automakers to license use of it without Toyota branding. Remember how if Prius was too small, there was the option of Highlander hybrid or Camry hybrid instead, all those yeas ago? That master-plan is still at play, offering far more choices now. Toyota has spread hybrid models across the entire fleet and is aggressively phasing out traditional models. What will GM do with their new PHEV, especially knowing Ford is taking a greater interest in their PHEV offerings? So whether or not Toyota is considered competition, the other Detroit automaker will clearly be pursuing that market opportunity. Clarity of purpose from Prius helped. We got a message of hybrid spread & advancement. What... if anything... will GM convey?
6-21-2024	Messaging, EV Miles. After waiting over a day to see if anyone else would call out this grossly incorrect statement, I got really annoyed: "Introduced for the 2011 model year, the Volt offered 40 miles of all-electric driving, enough to cover the daily transportation needs of the vast majority of Americans." Misleading about Prius was par for course. It was the vehicle Volt enthusiasts hated from the beginning and hate even more now. But to outright lie about Volt itself is another matter. It only took me a matter of minutes to confirm each of the range estimates. The government fuel-economy website contains easy to search EPA values. 40 miles was what enthusiasts had hyped for years. When rollout finally happened, revealing Volt had clearly fallen short, they did everything they could to downplay importance. It's ironic how that very topic came back and in such a dishonest manner. That isn't journalism. It's propaganda. Ugh. This is what I posted in the comments: The article started with that and continued on stating a "40 mile" range three more times, even though the first generation never actually delivered it. The first two years had an EV rating of 35 miles and the following three were 38 miles. Like while Volt was for sale, hype about EV was the focus. Efficiency after the battery was drained got completely ignored. Reality didn't matter. It was as self-inflicted messaging problem. Originally promoted as delivering "230 MPG" with an extensive campaign to emphasize gas saving, focus abruptly shifted over to EV miles instead. That's how we got the "range anxiety" term. Misrepresentation emerged from that. Enthusiasts claimed Volt would operate as a series hybrid, despite its charge-depleted mode sending propulsion thrust directly to the wheels. It turned into a messaging nightmare. Owners would proudly drive over 1,000 miles between refilling the gas tank, yet do everything possible to avoid having the engine start. Promotion focused exclusively on EV miles. Why not just purchase a BEV instead? Who the technology was intended for got lost in the hope for more EV miles.
6-21-2024	Messaging, Prius. No matter what the context, history of Prius is rarely ever accurate. In fact, most of the time it follows the narrative of weak initial sales. The reality that production was limited and distribution restricted to quotas didn't matter. No mention of people typically having to wait at least 6 months for delivery is never mentioned. Demand was high, despite so many misconceptions and the lack of awareness, you'd never no it. That was all without tax-credits too. They didn't start until January 1, 2006 and the allocation of 60,000 was used up in less than 9 months. That's why claims like this really annoy: "Toyota revealed its first hybrid in 2004 as the Prius." I was beside myself. The article had crossed a very profound line from being off by so many years. This is what I posted about that nonsense: "That is a strange attempt to rewrite history. Toyota revealed Prius in October 1997, a retaliation from being snubbed by the PNGV project. It wasn't a prototype well ahead of the Big 3 either; it was a production-ready vehicle. Sales began December 1997. The first upgrade was rolled out August 2000. The next upgrade came October 2003.
6-21-2024	Messaging, Volt. The vehicle itself was actually rather nice... as a means of proving there was much opportunity. Time squandered. Headway lost. Attention faded. My words to summarize what had happened were, ending with a question: Volt was a great conquest vehicle, worthy of engineering kudos and a shiny example of what not to do when trying to reach the masses. Specs were overkill, an expensive design that was fast & powerful leading to inefficient EV & HV driving. Enthusiasts loved it. Loyal GM customers simply weren't interested. That made the decision to move on to BEV easy from a profit & sales perspective, but not a good idea with regard to market need. Seeing renewed PHEV efforts from GM add to that history of audience uncertainty. Who will GM target now that Equinox EV is rolling out and a new Bolt EV is on the way?
6-20-2024	Messaging, Leadership. It started with an idea from a car enthusiast executive, Bob Lutz. He thrived on speed & power while detesting accountants. It was a recipe for trouble. His Two-Mode project proved it. Focus wasn't on actually being green or even appealing to the masses. He wanted to built a niche. When failure of the hybrid became undeniable, attention shifted to delivering some type of plug-in hybrid. Ultimately, that's how the Chevy Volt came about. All these years later, that still stands out as his favorite project. Today, an article was published featuring that "auto legend" highlighting that vehicle. It was an interesting write-up, some inaccuracies and some obvious omissions. The fact that the technology never targeted the automakers own customers and sales were always a struggle never got mentioned. It was all about somehow successfully proving Toyota was wrong. Falling short of so many goals was simply ignored. There was only a note about being discontinued in 2019. Needless to say, I had much to say about what was portrayed as leadership even though it had no impact to the status quo. In fact, dealers favored gas-guzzlers even more by Volt's end.
6-19-2024	It's a Hybrid. Ugh. This says it all: "Since getting my Kia EV6 in January, people ask me about it. I say I got it because it is great for road trips. They all say, "Oh, so it's a hybrid, then?" These are environmentally conscious people. I'm glad for the opportunity to share what EVs can do, but I was surprised at the same responses every time." Stuff like that is how the "know your audience" advice has become my mantra. People tend to not be well informed and don't critically think. All you get is a quick reply that doesn't relate to what you were trying to convey. In other words, they assume. Fortunately, I have advice for dealing with an audience like that. This was what I suggested: Respond with "No, it's a plug-in." Since the message we want to convey is use of electricity from plug-charged batteries, it doesn't make any difference whether you drive a PHEV or BEV. It opens the door too; you then get an opportunity to promote the benefits of using that electricity. They will recognize there's more to it than what a regular hybrid offers.
6-18-2024	Competition from China. I found this particular statement interesting: "Seal EV sells for around $48,500 (45,000 euros) in Europe with up to 354 miles (570 km) WLTP range." That provided some interesting perspective. Rather than being far less expensive... fulfilling the impression of being dirt cheap... it is instead just another offering in the mix. With pricing (which obviously includes steep tariffs) and that range (EPA would be less), it doesn't stand out. BYD Seal will be just another EV to choose from there. Here, who knows. I highly suspect GM will play the conquest game again. The reality of Equinox not actually being an Equinox does present problems. That EV doesn't share anything with its traditional counterpart beyond name. Will dealerships take advantage of that recognition with loyal GM customers or will they simply cater to those from elsewhere seeking opportunity? That later means no change to the status quo, the very problem GM struggled with from Volt & Bolt sales. We'll see. Added pressure of China targeting those same opportunity seekers adds an interesting twist.
6-17-2024	Propaganda Videos. There is a new source for them now. They are churning out new videos on almost a daily basis, all pretty much conveying the same message... long live the combustion engine. Arguments are weak, misleading, outdated... you know the story. Information is presented as well thought out reasons why EVs are struggling and really don't have long-term potential. It is utter nonsense if you take time to do any research yourself. Most people don't though, so this type of undermining campaign tends to reinforce the anti-EV narrative. Knowing I will get banned if I push too much, I refrain from posting much in the comments. I still do though, since the algorithm for filling your feed bases input on activity like that. I don't want to miss out on whatever it deems important. That tends to be more useful than just following everything pushing propagandas. It's hard to watch those videos sometimes too. They are so bad. Being able to quickly read through the entire transcript helps. I can ensure I don't overlook a detail that way. Anywho, this is how I responded to one such source fighting to retain the status quo: Slowdown in sales is just a plateau, a normal predictable outcome related to new technology adoption. Sales will increase later as newer offerings become available. New models will include improvements, like LFP battery chemistry which is fire resistant. With regard to "cheaper to run", never mentioning common level-2 home charging is an extremely misleading omission. That provides roughly 200 miles of range overnight, at discounted rates when enrolled for off-peak charging.
6-16-2024	Labels, Messaging. I waited 2 days before replying with: It has been intriguing to witness the same mistakes of the past being repeated here. The fear long ago with the rise of "HEV" came from Volt enthusiasts. They saw the potential Toyota's simplistic designed offered, an easy step to create a viable PHEV. In fact, that's how "EREV" came about. It was an attempt to differentiate Volt from the upcoming choices of series-parallel plug-in hybrids. Problem was, the definition of EREV kept changing when it was revealed to be more of a marketing gimmick than anything that actually made a difference. Those enthusiast feeling threatened by a supposed weaker offering resulted in the lack of any clear messaging... exactly what's happening now with BEV. Ordinary consumers see "electrified" as anything using a battery, which makes marketing a choice of PHEV over HEV a very easy one. It's just the adding a plug and increasing battery size... KISS. Again, that "prove me wrong" effort is such a waste. You're missing opportunity fighting other plug-in supporters rather than recognizing the target audience... those shopping the showroom floor, looking for something to replace their ICE with.
6-14-2024	Labels, Bitter Reminder. Having watched him fight a senseless battle and getting a solid confirmation some are still willing to argue semantics, recognition of audience was well proven. There are some who really don't have a good grasp on purpose. That's why I always pushed in the past for stating goals and knowing audience. If you don't have clarity for both, that missed opportunity will eventually become an intolerable burden. No matter what you do, having burned those bridges will result in costly recovery. Trying to wrap up this nonsense, I referred to his what-about attempt. He cherry-picked Tundra as an example of inefficiency. I forced that to become a consideration of the bigger picture, the entire fleet rather than just a single vehicle starting with the bitter reminder of Toyota effort to transform all of their passenger vehicles to hybrid: The article topic is leadership perception. What actually reaches ordinary consumers enough to move the base forward... 100% of Tundra being hybrid or a small number of sales (3.4%) being F-150 being electric and the rest ICE still? That "leading the way" is a representation of who appeals to ordinary consumers, reaching beyond enthusiasts. Hybrids broke the status quo and welcome "electric" driving.
6-14-2024	Labels, Trolling. I wondered. His name seemed familiar. I checked. He joined that forum just 2 days before. His content was an obvious provoke. Since the old daily blog for Volt no longer exists, I couldn't confirm. So, I fired back with: "Yup, missing opportunity by wasting time fighting a battle that doesn't actually achieve anything." There was nothing for him to gain from such a blatant attack on hybrid potential. But knowing the bitterness GM enthusiasts had felt about Toyota back then and now seeing a resurgence of interest, it made sense that someone trying to draw attention to what really matters... which Toyota emerges as a leader... would be too much to bare. He needed something he could claim as a victory, even if it meant resorting to posting like a troll.