Deloitte, a leading professional services network, has published polling and analysis on the hurdles ahead of EV adoption globally.
Deloitte condensed its findings well in one of the first sentences of its analysis, “interest in electric vehicles grows, but worries about price, range, and charging time remain.” This survey is part of a series that Deloitte has conducted annually for over a decade now called the “Global Automotive Consumer Study.” In this year’s publication, the focus was on electric vehicles.
The first surprising piece of data is how much the United States lags in interest in electric vehicles. Deloitte found that only 8% of respondents were confident that EV was their next vehicle. However, this is an outlier compared to other recent surveys conducted in the U.S. Out of the nations polled by Deloitte, China led in interest in EVs, with over a quarter of respondents saying that their next vehicle would be electric.
Less surprising were the reasons respondents were interested in purchasing an EV. Despite the near-constant messaging from governments, media sites, and automakers alike, the cost of ownership was by far the most significant attractor for consumers. Significantly more swaying than concerns about the environment or concerns about personal health.
Shortly thereafter, Deloitte highlighted the top concerns of consumers if they were to buy an electric vehicle, and unsurprisingly, affordability was the number 1 concern across the board. In the U.S., other top concerns included driving range, charging time, public charging availability, and at-home charging availability. Globally, other than concerns regarding the upfront cost of the EV, charging time, driving range, and charging availability were also top concerns.
Only one country had responses that dramatically differed from the norm, China. Chinese respondents not only stated that the superior driving experience was the top attractor to EVs, but their biggest concern was safety regarding battery technology.
For those who live or have purchased an EV in the U.S., these results should be no surprise. The foremost EV seller in America, Tesla, no longer sells a vehicle below $40,000, and the vast majority of Tesla vehicles sell for much more. To make the problem even worse, traditional budget brands have not yet been able to bring down their prices to parity with gas offerings.
Ford’s F150 Lighting sells for thousands more than its gas counterpart. The first-ever Toyota EV offering, the BZ4X, is multiple times the cost of a base RAV4. And while the Chevy Bolt has become popular specifically for its affordability, it remains far more expensive than gas vehicles in its class.
The other area where EVs aren’t meeting customer expectations is in the driving range they are capable of. An astounding 19% of respondents stated that they would want a vehicle with a minimum range of 600 miles, while the plurality of respondents expected more than 300 miles of range. And while many may believe that these expectations are unfairly high compared to gas vehicles, perhaps this is also a messaging problem that automakers must solve in the coming year.
These results do come with the caveat that they varied quite considerably from market to market. Noticeably, Southeast Asian respondents needed the least amount of range, while respondents from Europe and the U.S. stated they needed the most.
On a more positive note, Deloitte was able to find areas where advancement in EV technology has finally been able to meet consumer expectations. The vast majority of respondents stated that they were willing to wait either between 10-20min or 20-40min for a complete charge, and over 40% of respondents stated they would be willing to wait a max of 20min.
While these expectations are high, they are finally within reach of many popular vehicles. Hyundai’s fastest charging vehicles will charge from 10-80% in 18min, while Teslas that plug into the newest generation Supercharger are charging to 80% in a similar timeframe.
For someone who spends their time immersed in the world of electric vehicles, such as myself, it can come across as a culture shock hearing about the concerns and motivators that are affecting the purchasing choices of the people that live around me. Still, perhaps it is an important exercise to step away from the keyboard and see what others really think. And for manufacturers, data like that collected by Deloitte can be a powerful tool showing where consumer attention is and what is affecting how they spend their money.
What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Investor's Corner
NASA taps SpaceX to launch the telescope that could unlock new worlds
NASA’s Roman Space Telescope heads to orbit this August aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with massive scientific ambitions.
SpaceX is set to play a central role in one of NASA’s most anticipated science missions in years. The company’s Falcon Heavy rocket, currently the most powerful operational launch vehicle in the world, will carry the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope into orbit on August 30 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Roman is now in final preparations inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility, where on June 26 technicians used a crane to lift the observatory into a specialized stand for fueling and pre-launch testing.
Roman is named after Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first chief of astronomy, whose career helped shape how the agency approaches space science.
NASA chose SpaceX Falcon Heavy because of Roman’s needs to reach a specific orbit far from Earth, well beyond where a standard Falcon 9 can deliver it. The Falcon Heavy, which first flew in 2018, has since become NASA’s go-to option for missions that need serious muscle without the cost and complexity of older launch systems.
Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)
Roman will carry a field of view at least 100 times wider than the Hubble Space Telescope, meaning it can photograph enormous swaths of the universe in a single shot rather than the narrow slices Hubble captures. That difference in scale is significant. While Hubble reshaped our understanding of the cosmos over 30 years, Roman is built to work faster and wider, surveying hundreds of millions of galaxies at once.
One of Roman’s most compelling capabilities is its potential to discover and photograph planets orbiting stars outside our solar system, and with enough precision to directly image planets that would otherwise be lost. That means scientists could study the atmosphere and surface characteristics of distant worlds rather than simply confirming they exist. Combined with Roman’s sweeping field of view, the telescope could detect thousands of exoplanets, and some of those planets may be in habitable zones where liquid water could exist. No telescope currently in operation has this level of power and capability. That capability alone could change what we know about other worlds, and perhaps finally answer the question: are we the only intelligent lifeforms in existence?
What Roman actually finds once it reaches orbit is an open question, and that is exactly what makes this launch worth watching.
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment
