This is what happens when all those leftover discounted models finally run out.
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
Rory said:
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
Maybe they’re including things like building new factories? Is the $1.2 billion just material and labor costs, or more? Numbers like these can be misleading; I’m not saying they’re inaccurate, but ‘losses per unit’ needs context.
@Noel
Headlines like this usually include capital expenses, which makes it less about actual per-unit loss.
Cameron said:
@Noel
Headlines like this usually include capital expenses, which makes it less about actual per-unit loss.
But if they sold fewer units, that would mean they’re not actually growing, right?
@Noel
It’s unlikely that major losses come from capex alone, as it’s spread over the life of assets (depreciation). More likely it’s R&D and low production levels dragging down cost efficiency.
Marcell said:
@Noel
It’s unlikely that major losses come from capex alone, as it’s spread over the life of assets (depreciation). More likely it’s R&D and low production levels dragging down cost efficiency.
Makes sense. With high production costs and Ford’s plans for 150k Lightnings annually, this level of loss isn’t surprising.
Marcell said:
@Noel
It’s unlikely that major losses come from capex alone, as it’s spread over the life of assets (depreciation). More likely it’s R&D and low production levels dragging down cost efficiency.
Actually, R&D is a capital expense.
@Bliss
Nope, R&D hits expenses immediately, unlike capex which is spread over time. So $1m of R&D hits right away.
Marcell said:
@Bliss
Nope, R&D hits expenses immediately, unlike capex which is spread over time. So $1m of R&D hits right away.
Tax law says it should be amortized over 5 years. Source.
@Bliss
Ford doesn’t report tax basis numbers; under GAAP, it’s expensed immediately.
Marcell said:
@Bliss
Ford doesn’t report tax basis numbers; under GAAP, it’s expensed immediately.
Fair point.
Rory said:
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
It’s operational costs—big factories built to scale up but running under capacity eat up revenue fast. Think of it like a taco truck that costs $50k to run monthly but sells only $10k worth of tacos instead of the $200k it’s capable of. Doesn’t mean you’re losing $16 per taco; you just aren’t hitting your production scale.
@Parker
This taco analogy helps a lot. Makes sense why they’re holding off on a second-gen Lightning.
Rory said:
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
They’re absorbing the high cost of capital expenditures without the production levels they planned for.
Rory said:
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
They’re likely including tooling and R&D in the per-unit cost, which would explain the high figure.
Rory said:
So, they sold 23,400 BEVs in Q3 and took a $1.2 billion hit, which works out to a loss of about $51k per EV sold. That seems…off?
They also wrote off a $400 million investment in the all-electric Expedition, which never made it to market.
EVs are still in their ‘Model T’ era; most people can’t afford one, and traditional transport is still king. In 50 years, this discussion might seem ridiculous. Remember the buggy whip makers?
Gale said:
EVs are still in their ‘Model T’ era; most people can’t afford one, and traditional transport is still king. In 50 years, this discussion might seem ridiculous. Remember the buggy whip makers?
Dealers may also be dragging their feet on selling BEVs, plus government incentives kept people waiting around.