If the electric car failed because of a lack of consumer demand, then can someone explain to me...?

Question

why did GM force people to give back all of the electric cars that they had leased, and then had them destroyed? If you had no alterior motives, wouldn't you just sell them off to make some extra cash?

Answer 1

Ford and Toyota found ways to sell a small number of their evs.

There is obviously more consumer demand for quiet, smell free, smooth, high torque, easy to maintain, cheap & convenient to refuel vehicles than for large ugly military tank/truck poor handling, hard to park that they chose to foist on the public.

but given the cost of getting into the car business we have to take what we are given by GM and be thankfull. hence the Tesla at £100,000, http://www.teslamotors.com even if it will outperform a ferrari

What do GM care what fuel source their cars use, they should use the best technical and economic solution available? what do they owe the oil companies? Surely it should be the other way around.

Answer 2

i have to.... gulp.... agreee...with....bob... on this one.

you people actually think that just because there is a piece of paper giving immunity to gm from lawsuits it will be o.k.?

what about the third or fourth owner who never heard about the deal, let alone read it?

further, it has to keep special parts in inventory just for that very low production car for 10 years (gm internal policy).

after that, where are you going to get them?

ever try finding a part for a 47 nash?

(ever even heard of such a car?)

it was a business desision. no different than axing the impala ss, camaro or oldsmobile.

they attempted it, found they couldn't make money and pulled them. pure and simple.

Answer 3

So people are claiming the GM would be liable for not providing spare parts to old cars?  I'm sorry, but I'm an attorney, and I'm telling you that that theory is a bit ridiculous.  

Car companies have firesales to get rid of unpopular vehicles all of the time.  That doesn't create extra liability, nor does it encourage them to destroy existing inventories.

If I had to guess, I would guess an oil company (Exxon?) was willing to pay more to see the vehicles destroyed then have members of the public experimenting with them.

Answer 4

As long as they existed GM had responsibility to their owners for spare parts, etc.  And legal responsibility as well.  Taking them back was obviously the right business decision.  And no doubt planned when they first built them and set up the lease structure.

From Wiki,

"Over 100 people offered to purchase the electric cars and waive such liability as they were able under American consumer product laws. GM consistently refused offers to purchase or re-lease any EV1s, stating that they would be subject to ongoing product liability from both the purchasers and any future owners, and that their internal customer support policies would require them to provide service and replacement parts for the EV1s for at least ten years.[10] GM's suppliers stopped making replacement parts because of low demand, making it impossible to repair the vehicles.[11] Of particular concern to the company was the likelihood that each leased car's battery packs would require replacement at 25-35,000 mile intervals, and that the very low volumes involved would necessitate the corporation's subsidy of spare parts to private owners, perhaps on an indefinite basis."

So many "conspiracies" are just simple economics.  There were about 1000 cars.  Assuming they could have sold them all (probably not) for $10,000, that would have been 10 million dollars (high end estimate).  Not worth it.

Answer 5

yea i have to agree.  GM couldve just sold them and made some sort of profit from those sales and save themselves the criticism they face now.  Bob does have a point about the liability of GM having to possibly deal with the parts for the EV but when a consumer says they will waive liability that means they will not hold GM responsible for WHATEVER happens to the EV whether its a crash or a battery failure.  if people wanted batteries they couldve gotten them from Electric car enthusiast and yes there isnt much out there but if someone is willing to go through the trouble just to obtain an electric car then they wouldnt mind going through the trouble of finding one and getting the battery themselves right?

Answer 6

Big oil and the auto industry are buds.   The cars were destroyed because it is joe "backyarder" that invents.  It wasn't a car company that invented the car...or aircraft companies for planes.  Just some dudes in their barn or shed messin around.

   So with the elec car and the quasi-billions outlaid for oil already....the oil companies did not want to lose a piece of the pie if they can help it.  So why give out known alternative technology to those backyarders if you don't have to.  The less they know the better and the greater the time lag before they catch up.  If the oil co. and auto co. could control our thinking, don't you think that they would stop us from thinking - and keep us in the dark like mushrooms and continue to feel us the bull?   Darn tootin.

  As for the liability thing.  Nah.  What about the Corvair, the Vega, the Pinto(explodes on impact)

Answer 7

*Go....... Joe.......... Go!* Keep asking these obvious but crucial questions!

Answer 8

True.

Answer 9

I agree, I would have sold them as is and with no guarantees or warranties.

Answer 10

Probably because it would cost a huge amount to maintain a parts and repair infrastructure in place for such a low production number vehicle.

Answer 11

That's a good question. Seems like the only reason they wouldn't is if there was something seriously wrong with it that someone would want to sue over.

Answer 12

Yes, GM could have stopped supporting those models and claimed immunity from any liability lawsuits.

But then they also needed to focus their business on gasoline vehicles and any residual electric vehicles running around would have raised queries about why not EV ? so it was better to try and eliminate all those EV's.

Such decisions happen in high level management meets and there are many aspiring candidates there who want to impress their bosses of their "intelligence" in increasing companies profits and "strategic vision", unfortunately people with great presentation skills are not always great strategic and visionary thinkers.

Answer 13

i would go to the store room and ask him about the problem.if i`m wrong plz. forgive.in INDIA we will do like that

Answer 14

Because they did not want the comercial liability of maintaining repair facilities and a parts inventory for vehicles that had no hope of ever being profitable.

Answer 15

Electric cars cost way to much. the average person can't afford one. that's why it "failed""

Answer 16

I can see one liability that the owner of the car cannot waive, and that is the liability to third parties in the case of an accident.

It is my understanding that the battery packs in the EV were quite dangerous in an accident.

As I recall Ford Motor Company lost hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits over gas tanks that caught fire in accicents because of faulty design..

It woul not surprise me if the attorneys for GM advised them to get the EV vehicles off the road until they could design safer battery packs, or risk lawsuits as the result of the inevitable accidents that could cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees and damages.

Answer 17

Having worked in law for 25 years, I think that GM probably had more dollars at risk from potentially being involved in lawsuits over the electric cars than selling the cars could ever have generated in revenue.

As others have noted, only a small number of the cars were produced, but it would have cost GM a fortune (with no economies of scale to offest the cost) to keep parts and supplies available.  

I also doubt that many dealers had an interest in spending money to train qualified mechanics to maintain the one or two cars that might have been in their territory or to pay money to stock an inventory of already obsolete parts for the cars.  It would have been a public relations nightmare for them too.