News
Tesla vs The Big Three – An uneven contest
Elon Musk has said many times that his ultimate goal is to increase the adoption of electric vehicles, a goal that’s advanced with every EV that rolls off a dealer’s lot, even if it’s not a Tesla. “The biggest impact that Tesla will have is not the cars that we make ourselves, but the fact that we show that you can make compelling electric cars that people want to buy,” he said in Revenge of the Electric Car.
When it comes to making compelling electric cars, the company has succeeded spectacularly. But when it comes to inspiring the industry leaders to sell their own EVs in substantial numbers, that isn’t happening. Spokesmen for the major automakers (especially when speaking to the EV media) say things like, “the future is electric,” and “we intend to stay at the forefront of technology,” but when it comes to action, the playbook is: sell just enough EVs to satisfy government regulators, while keeping the focus on profitable trucks and SUVs.
A recent article in CleanTechnica takes a look at the lineup of plug-in models offered by the Big Three (Ford, GM, and Fiat Chrysler). The current roster consists of 3 pure electric vehicles (EVs) and 5 plug-in hybrids (PHEVs). Of the 3 EVs, only one, the Chevy Bolt, is truly an attractive option. The Fiat 500e is a compliance car that’s only available in two states, and Fiat Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne has asked the public not to buy it. The Ford Focus EV was introduced in 2011, and not updated until 2015 – it sold a grand total of 901 units in 2016.
However, the handwriting is on the garage wall. Plug-in vehicle sales have increased every month for the last 20 months, Tesla’s Model 3 has accumulated somewhere around 400,000 advance orders sight unseen, and battery prices are falling rapidly – several industry observers have predicted that EVs will reach cost parity with legacy vehicles in about 5 years. So, is Detroit raising its game, and preparing to expand its portfolio of electric models?

Fiat 500e [Credit: Car and Driver]
Well, sort of. In January, Ford announced that it plans to introduce 13 new electrified vehicles over the next five years. However, it offered specifics for only 7, and only one of these is an electric vehicle for the US market: “an all-new fully electric small SUV, coming by 2020, engineered to deliver an estimated range of at least 300 miles.” The other 6 include hybrids and an electric commercial van to be sold in Europe.
Ford representatives have made it clear that the company will be taking a gradual, go-slow approach to electrification. CleanTechnica’s Loren McDonald spoke with Brett Hinds, Ford’s Chief Engineer of Electrified Powertrain Systems, in early January, and was left with the impression that the automaker feels little urgency about upgrading its electric vehicles. When McDonald mentioned that industry experts expect EV ranges to increase to 300 miles in 5-7 years, and that battery charging rates are also expected to improve, he was told that “Ford just doesn’t see it that way.” (Yes, this directly contradicts Ford’s official announcement quoted above – the major automakers often make contradictory statements about their electrification plans.)
More recently, Ford replaced CEO Mark Fields with Jim Hackett, the head of its Smart Mobility division, a move that is believed to signal more emphasis on electric and autonomous vehicles. Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford confirmed this, telling Bloomberg in an interview that the CEO switch “is about EVs, and it’s about AVs [autonomous vehicles].” However, he seemed to acknowledge that the focus would remain on short-term profits (read: trucks). “Wherever we go, we have to make sure that the returns are great for our shareholders,” said Ford. When asked if he could foresee a future in which EVs would generate the kind of margins the company makes on the F-150 pickup, he thought silently for a moment, then changed the subject.
The voltage level is much higher over at GM, where the new Chevy Bolt has been earning rave reviews, and making respectable sales – it moved 1,566 units in May, #5 in the US plug-in ranking. However, the rollout has been slow – the Bolt went on sale in December 2016, but it still isn’t available in all 50 states.
“I wouldn’t necessarily call it a slow rollout; it was a phased rollout,” Chevrolet spokesman Jim Cain told Bloomberg. “In terms of sales, I think we’re right on plan.” And that’s kind of the point. As Elon Musk and others have pointed out, GM doesn’t seem to have any desire to sell the Bolt in mass-market quantities – it’s likely to limit production to 25,000 or so per year.
Ironically, the considerable media buzz around the Bolt seemed to disappear as soon as it actually went on the market. “The little car hasn’t captured any of Tesla’s Silicon Valley street cred, and it hasn’t whipped up any of the cultish following that still benefits the Toyota Prius,” writes Bloomberg’s Kyle Stock.
GM’s future electrification plans are vague. In February, GM CEO Mary Barra told CNET’s RoadShow that the Bolt platform will be the basis for a range of future EVs, but no details have been forthcoming.
And then there is Fiat Chrysler, the only automaker that has always been honest about its lack of interest in EVs. CEO Sergio Marchionne has said that the company loses about $14,000 on each unit of its Fiat 500e, and famously asked consumers not to buy it. The little electric runabout has garnered excellent reviews, can be leased for as little as $100 a month, and has been selling a surprising 600 or 700 per month, despite being available only in California and Oregon. Chrysler recently launched a plug-in hybrid version of its extremely popular Pacifica minivan, but it’s too early to tell how it will do.
One glaring problem is that the Big Three continue to put out lackluster designs for their electric cars. Diarmuid O’Connell, Tesla’s vice president of business development had said, “In essence, they’ve delivered little more than appliances. Now, appliances are useful. But… they tend to be unemotional.” Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk, goes one step further, pointing out that an electric car shouldn’t “feel like a weird-mobile.”
On the other hand, the issue with the majors’ plug-in models has never been quality – almost all who’ve driven them, including this writer, agree that they are excellent automobiles. What remains puzzling is the companies’ willingness to market them. The automakers do almost no advertising for them, and most (not all) of their dealers do their utmost to steer customers away from them. Meanwhile, the companies continue to lobby to have fuel economy and emissions standards watered down.
A recent article in Plug-in Future, “How the Major Global Automobile Manufacturers Fell Asleep at the Wheel” notes a cling-to-the-past cultural dynamic. “Part of it comes down to mentality and culture. Senior executives in automobile companies tend to be [oftentimes] male mechanical engineers who… [enjoy] tinkering around with old cars and tractors. It’s what they do; it’s what they love and their careers have been about perfecting the highly complex internal combustion engine. And now you are telling them to get rid of that engine and replace it with a simple electric drive and a battery to power it. No wonder they are resistant… Changing such a culture is very difficult.”
So what gives? Is it short-sightedness? Fear of the future? Plain old stupidity? Not likely. Sure, they might be stuck in their ways but we’re talking about highly informed veterans of the auto business, who have access to all the same articles, statistics and reports that you and I do (much more, actually).
What’s really happening here is a phenomenon called The Innovator’s Dilemma (the title of a 1997 book by Clayton Christensen, and yes, I believe most auto industry execs have read it). Incumbent corporations can’t keep up with disruptive technological changes, because their shareholders demand quarterly profits. They can experiment with new technologies, but they can’t pursue them whole-heartedly, because that would mean cannibalizing their proven profit centers (to sell an electric car, you have to explain why it’s better than a gas car). Once a new technology improves to the point that it can offer similar capabilities (range, charging time) to the old at a similar price, the incumbents’ market can disappear surprisingly quickly – remember Kodak, Blockbuster, and Blackberry.
by Charles Morris
This story was originally published on EVANNEX
News
Elon Musk gets brash response from Ryanair CEO, who thanks him for booking increase
Elon Musk got a brash response from Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary, who said in a press conference on Wednesday afternoon that the Tesla frontman’s criticism of the airline not equipping Starlink has increased bookings for the next few months.
The two have had a continuing feud over the past several weeks after Musk criticized the airline for not using Starlink for its flights, which would enable fast, free, and reliable Wi-Fi on its aircraft.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk trolls budget airline after it refuses Starlink on its planes
Musk said earlier this week that he was entertaining the idea of purchasing Ryanair and putting someone named Ryan in charge, which would oust O’Leary from his position.
However, the barbs continued today, as O’Leary held a press conference, aiming to dispel any beliefs about Starlink and its use case for Ryanair flights, which are typically short in length.
O’Leary said in the press conference today:
“The Starlink people believe that 90% of our passengers would happily pay for wifi access. Our experience tells us less than 10% would pay; He (Elon) called me a retar*ed twat. He would have to join the back of a very, very long queue of people that already think I’m a retar*ed twat, including my four teenage children.”
He then went on to say that, due to Musk’s publicity, bookings for Ryanair flights have increased over the past few days, up 2 to 3 percent:
“But we do want to thank him for the wonderful boost in publicity. Our bookings are up 2-3% in the last few days. So thank you to Mr. Musk, but he’s wrong on the fuel drag. Non-European citizens cannot own a majority of European airlines, but if he wants to invest in Ryanair, we think it would be a very good investment.”
O’Leary didn’t end there, as he called Musk’s social media platform X a “cesspit,” and said he has no concern over becoming a member of it. However, Ryanair has been very active on X for several years, gaining notoriety for being comical and lighthearted.
🚨 Ryanair CEO’s comments on X and Starlink today at the planned presser.
Strange comments here, it just feels like it’s time to end all this crap https://t.co/NYeG95bM82
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 21, 2026
The public spat between the two has definitely benefited Ryanair, and many are calling for it to end, especially those who support Musk, as they see it as a distraction.
Nevertheless, it is likely going to end with no real movement either way, and is more than likely just a bit of hilarity between the two parties that will end in the coming days.
News
Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlines expectations for Cybercab production
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlined expectations for Cybercab production as the vehicle is officially set to start rolling off manufacturing lines at the company’s Giga Texas factory in less than 100 days.
Cybercab is specifically designed and catered to Tesla’s self-driving platform and Robotaxi ride-hailing service. The company has been pushing hard to meet its self-set expectations for rolling out an effective self-driving suite, and with the Cybercab coming in under 100 days, it now needs to push for Unsupervised Self-Driving in the same time frame.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is set to go unsupervised
This is especially pertinent because the Cybercab is expected to be built without a steering wheel or pedals, and although some executives have said they would build the car with those things if it were necessary.
However, Musk has maintained that the Cybercab will not have either of those things: it will have two seats and a screen, and that’s it.
With production scheduled for less than 100 days, Musk broke down what people should expect from the initial manufacturing phases, being cautiously optimistic about what the early stages will likely entail:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
Musk knows better than most about the challenges of ramping up production of vehicles. With the Model 3, Musk routinely refers to it as “production hell.” The Cybertruck, because of its polarizing design and stainless steel exterior, also presented challenges to Tesla.
With the important caveat that initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve.
The speed of the production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are.
For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 20, 2026
The Cybercab definitely presents an easier production process for Tesla, and the company plans to build millions of units per year.
Musk said back in October 2024:
“We’re aiming for at least 2 million units a year of Cybercab. That will be in more than one factory, but I think it’s at least 2 million units a year, maybe 4 million ultimately.”
When April comes, we will find out exactly how things will move forward with Cybercab production.
News
Tesla reveals awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive, but it’s ending soon
Tesla has revealed an awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive to help consumers make the jump to one of its affordable mass-market vehicles, but it’s ending soon.
Tesla is offering one free upgrade on eligible inventory of the Model 3 and Model Y until February 2.
This would help buyers receive the most expensive paid option on the vehicle at no additional cost, meaning white interior or a more premium paint option will be free of charge if you take delivery on or before February 2.
Tesla states on its website for the offer:
“Only for limited inventory while supplies last. Price displayed on inventory listings already deducts the cost of the free option.”
Tesla says its one free upgrade offer on eligible U.S. inventory for the Model 3 and Model Y ends February 2.
With this incentive, buyers receive the most expensive paid option on the vehicle at no additional cost (up to $2k in savings). pic.twitter.com/IhoiURrsDI
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) January 21, 2026
This latest incentive is just another advantage Tesla has by selling its vehicles directly and not using some sort of dealership model that relies on approvals from higher-ups. It is important to note that these programs are offered to help stimulate demand and push vehicles into customers’ hands.
It is not the only incentive Tesla is currently offering, either. In fact, there is a much larger incentive program that Tesla is working on, and it has to do with Full Self-Driving transfers, which could result in even more sales for the company through Q1.
Tesla is ending its FSD Transfer program on March 31, as it plans to transition to a Subscription-only basis with the self-driving suite for anyone who has not already purchased it outright.
This could help drive some on-the-fence buyers to new vehicles, but it remains to be seen. Given the timing of the program’s demise, it appears Tesla is hoping to use it to add additional sales and bolster a strong Q1 2026.
Interior and exterior paint colors can add up to $2,000 if you choose the most premium Ultra Red body color, or an additional $1,000 for the Black and White interior option. The discount, while small, could help get someone their preferred design configuration, instead of settling for something that is not quite what they want.
