Same Approach.  When I pointed out how Toyota is taking the same approach it did with the original Prius, I got this: "Except they were all-in on the Prius. This continues to be a half-assed, overpriced and under-ranged vehicle only made for 'look at us, we make an EV' purposes."  I was obviously quite annoyed and fired off this in return:  Assuming history is not helpful.  That first Prius got a mid-cycle update, very much like bZ4X is getting now.  It was based upon feedback from initial rollout.  That upgrade then resembles the type of improvements we are getting now.... which means there are a few more years of real-world data gathering still.  Success of Prius was not recognized until the second-generation.  In fact, most enthusiasts completely dismissed first it as having any sort of potential, declaring it a pointless effort.  They were wrong, very wrong.  Sales of that second were so strong, the effort to spread that technology across the fleet was easy to justify.  In short, enthusiast impatience blinded them to the potential... just like what we are seeing now.

Transitional Planning.  Sometimes, you end up going back & forth with someone for awhile before finally getting some constructive dialog.  This was encouraging: "You still haven't explained how limiting plugin production below demand has helped their business."  That isn't an argument or a dismissal.  It was a request for feedback, wanting to know how producing a limited number of RAV4 Prime is a good idea.  He dismissed the slow approach with bZ4X, not recognizing the approach taken with Prius decades ago.  My guess is he's completely unaware of what actually happened back then, hence not seeing the repeat.  Anywho, I was game for keeping an exchange of market observations alive:  There's nothing more to explain.  Doing everything possible to avoid the Osborne Effect should be obvious.  By Toyota rolling out a variety of PHEV and each getting time to settle (about 2 years), they will be well positioned to significantly ramp-up with greatly reduced risk.  Think about how the market will be turned upside-down when new ICE inventory starts to pile up and the resale value for used ICE tanks.

New Denial.  Up until the end of Volt production, most enthusiasts absolutely refused to acknowledge anything from Two-Mode became part of Volt.  They wanted to portray GM's ambitions are revolutionary, not evolutionary.  Truth eventually got the best of them.  They couldn't deny that past... a past that also recognized Volt-2 as a second-generation, an improvement upon the much-praised first-generation.  Now in a bizarre twist, that history is being abandoned: "The 2nd generation drive units were introduced 8 years after the bailout, share no components with first gen Volt."  That was what I got in reply to GM not actually all of that technology.  The revelation of control being in the hands of an automotive group in China must be devastating.  What I discovered that, it was vindicating.  Too many of GM's choices over the years seem too restrictive.  They made no sense for any development intended to be spread across the fleet.  I'm glad others now have a chance to let that news sink in.  There are consequences... in this case, literally "grave" consequences.  Volt died as a result.  Will it really be brought back from the dead?  With this new denial, that would present major challenges.  The same problem of audience & purpose will haunt any effort.  I put it this way:  That's a good example of not recognizing the significance of IP.  My suggestion is to start the research process by searching for: Buick Velite 6

Volt Comeback.  Absence of any transition plan and an on-going series of problems with Ultium rollout (in addition from Bolt fallout) has stirred talk of Volt coming back from GM's CEO.  That has former owner's posting comment like this: "The second generation Volt powertrain was absolutely amazing.  I'm mystified that GM hasn't used it in other vehicles."  I know why.  The most obvious was GM had no clue what they wanted to do with the technology.  That's why it floundered in place for so many years, never moving beyond conquest sales.  GM didn't want to impact their ICE business.  Since they didn't have a transitional technology... hybrids... the very thing they mocked as a "stop gap" for years... they are now in that very position they were hoping to avoid.  Many believed a bridge wasn't necessary, that an interim stet could be skipped.  Call it risky.  Call it foolish.  It is becoming all too apparent that something is necessary.  That massive ramp-up to achieve 400,000 sales in 2024 is looking really bad.  It is yet another "over promise, under deliver" problem.  So what do I do.  I mad the bad situation even worse by pointing out:  GM doesn't own its IP.  That's controlled by the SAIC group in China.  It was part of the bailout recovery deal no one seemed to recognize the significance of.

Understanding Patience.  When it comes to patience, you're basically doomed online.  Most there have little to none.  They draw conclusions based on very little data and expect perfection upon delivery.  I say most, since Tesla fanboys are quite the opposite.  That means no matter what the topic, someone will clash.  Fortunately, certain arguments are becoming easier to overcome as time progress.  I was able to chime in about Solterra, now that Subaru has released info on their 2024 model:  This update contradicts claims of those saying Toyota was not investing in EVs, that their effort was to show that hybrids were a better choice.  Naysayers downplayed Toyota's continuous improvement approach. Rolling out both software & hardware upgrades so quickly wasn't supposed to happen.  Now for the 2024 models (Solterra & bZ4X), they get a larger, more capable battery-heater along with a valve upgrade for improved coolant distribution... overwhelming evidence of continuous improvement.  Toyota collected real-world data and used feedback from early-adopters to improve their rollout for their showroom shoppers.  It is exactly what happened with Prius 2 decades ago.  That "time to work the bugs out" is an expectation their customers have.  Enthusiasts don't have that kind of patience.

Chess, Not Checkers.  An overly simplistic view of the market is quite common.  People without business backgrounds have a very difficult time seeing how challenging rollouts can get.  They don't recognize diversity.  They don't realize what people don't know or how intimidating some things can be.  I asked the following: "The joke is on who?  Measuring long-term well being based on short-term gain is unwise.  The game is chess, not checkers."  The response back was a vastly superior attack on Toyota.  Ugh.  It was so bad, it no quote from it was worthy of attention.  I simply fired back with:  What's obvious is the clues being dismissed.  This is advanced business now, the complex topics.  Enthusiasts think the market is much further along than it actually.  They turn a blind-eye to the absence of transition plans, assuming simplicity. They believe all it takes is a "if we provide it, they will buy it" attitude.  Look at how that approach blew up in Hertz's face.  They took a naive jump head first into EV rentals.  Those aware of how rollouts to ordinary consumers play out and how much extra preparation you must do to deal with the poorly informed knew it was a disaster in the making.  Toyota's effort to spread PHEV & BEV offerings prior to ramp-up allows them to study customer interest.  When the time comes, they can divert resources to where they can be best used.  Growth isn't easy when it requires acceptance from an entirely new audience and nothing about advanced business says the shortest/fastest path to success is the best choice.  In fact, most of the time it is the opposite.

In short, having a plug is better.

Recognizing Economics.  Enthusiasts don't.  That's why today's discussion topic on VW's rollout of a next-gen Golf PHEV is so baffling to them.  Absence of any type of bridge technology is still not important to them.  They think the audience will just bow down and wait for BEV production.  Sales must continue.  In their minds, Toyota is doomed for preparing for the paradigm-shift... not recognizing a transition will take place.  It won't be an abrupt change... hence, shift.  Ugh.  Imagine if it was that simple, that the ICE would simply stop being sold and BEV would appear in its place.  That's so naive.  But then again, posts about how simple it is to provide level-2 for everyone are too.  They don't want to take the situation seriously.  So, I many of my replies are really just posts for lurkers who do:  Attempting to evade the fact doesn't change it.  Toyota's PHEV design holds a great deal of potential for profit & competitiveness, while at the same time delivering an EV drive experience like a BEV.  It's a fact that really troubles BEV purists, especially those who see legacy automakers without a means of transition.  How will they deal with a surge in demand... profitably, without screwing over their dealers.  Toyota will have a fleet of hybrids easily adaptable to carry a larger battery-pack and offer a plug.  That will work out well with battery supply strained and BEV production maxed out.  Think about how cutthroat the market will become.  The game switches from the pointless engineering arguments enthusiasts have to economics of business.  That's why VW is covering all the bases by having a PHEV in the mix.

Misquoting Toyota.  He never actually made such a statement: "Toyoda said at a business meeting this month that he sees full battery electric vehicles only reaching 30% market share — at maturity. WHAT?!?!"  Yet, that is what the article was based upon.  What he really said was related to only Toyota's production and only for 2030.  This is just like the "lithium shortage" propaganda.  Toyota provided a short-term outlook and antagonists made it imply long-term.  Something similar happened well over a decade ago with cost.  When Toyota brought that up as a short-term barrier, antagonists spun that to make it seem like Toyota was holding back due to fire risk.  Basically, it comes down to FUD.  That is what stirs attention and generates lots of comments.  When you are a for-profit organization, that type of misrepresentation provides lots of revenue... which makes implying what was said, rather than providing the actual quote with context, a very appealing alternative.  Grrr.

Golf PHEV.  This is an interesting twist from the big legacy automaker competing with Toyota... a new PHEV model of Golf.  The old one wasn't worth any attention, especially since even VW didn't promote it.  This next-gen version though delivers a 62-mile WLTP rating.  Needless to say, that's trolling material.  They didn't take long to throw out bait either.  I was all to happy to jump into that battle.  This is what did it for me: "GM apparently out hybrided Toyota with their Volt offering.  GM moved on to the Bolt and Toyota turned its back on the possibility of fresh hybrid designs."  That was simply too good to pass up.  I fired back with:  That fantasy fell apart long ago when Volt enthusiasts figured out that Toyota had delivered both better EV and better HV efficiency.  The second-generation design made it profitable & competitive, by increasing power significantly through the use of a clutch.  Now, we see that technology well-proven, spread to RAV4, C-HR and Crown.  We also see a much-liked fresh hybrid design in the new Prius, a packaging improvement to completely conceal the battery-pack.  Looking at the potential Corolla Cross and Sienna have for becoming PHEV, the GM fantasy would have difficulty coming back from the dead.  Seeing VW deliver a 19.7 kWh capacity battery in such a small vehicle, with both 11 kW AC and 50 kW DC charging raises the ante.  Toyota shattered GM's dream of a plug-in hybrid SUV.  Knowing that Equinox EV will be hampered even in the best of circumstances, it's difficult to imagine what spin will come from this.  After all, the "never plug in" propaganda never anticipated this move from VW.

Hybrid Dismissal.  The fact that some hybrids offer a plug with enough EV capacity to cover most daily driving means nothing to a BEV purist.  In one of their own words: "No there not a ev a pure electric vehicle (bev) is but hybrid vehicles are complicated ice vehicles with a tiny battery nothing else it's Toyota spin."  Back in the days of Volt, it took a long time to confirm absence of understanding.  Some truly didn't know how Toyota's design actually worked.  Some didn't even know how Volt itself worked either.  That resulted in a lot of fighting, then a lot of denial.  Eventually, most discovered the truth and gave up.  I found it fascinating to confirm that misunderstanding.  It's how my videos evolved.  As their naive was exposed, I provided content to reinforce that overlooked detail.  We're not in that stage yet with BEV, but there certainly is an overlap that can be brought to attention... which is exactly what I'm doing now:  Denial that there are PHEV models... Prius, RAV4, Crown and C-HR is not the best way to promote BEV progress.  Those plug-in hybrids are capable of all-electric daily drives.  I had one for 6 years... complete with heat-pump... prior to getting a BEV.  Most of my commute were entirely without gas.  The fact that you don't want to accept such a reality, that you would rather fight a technology helping to bridge us to BEV for everyone, tells us what?

Their Silence.  The narrative of "kicking & screaming" got replace by being "behind" when bZ4X was rolled out.  Antagonists could no longer claim Toyota had no EV interest.  Portraying them as the antithesis required a new strategy.  This is the latest attempt, reviving a bit of the old narrative: "Fuel economy rules are only going to get more restrictive.  Plus you're now seeing zero emissions requirements.  Toyota is going to be dragged kick and screaming into reality."  That tells us absolutely nothing about the situation to come for Toyota; however, it reveals a weakness from others.  Those that are selling EVs now plan to do what?  We still have no clue.  They tell us about rollout of new EV choices without any mention of how they will deal with the paradigm-shift those sales will cause.  What exactly will their dealers sell when EV demand is high but supply is low?  ICE production will continue.  Profit from inventory is what sustains business.  Sales of low-volume, little-to-no profit EVs is a problem for sustainability.  Absence of a transition plan could be raising serious concern; instead, we hear nothing.  I was more than happy to point that out:  Talking points, like use of "kicking & screaming", are clearly just distractions.  Notice how the legacy automakers who declared "all in" still don't have any type of plan, no milestones, no accountability, not even any consequences for their vague promises.  Their silence is a red flag.