There’s a unifying message among the leading anti-electric vehicle voices. Whether they work for car dealerships, car companies or in Congress, the message is the same. They are not anti-EV, they claim. They are pro-choice. Pro-freedom. Against the EV “mandate.”
They’re not opposed to what’s new and disruptive, they claim. They just want “choice” for the American car buyer.
It’s the most agreeable, dignified messaging for the cause. It’s also baloney. Here’s why.
(Welcome to Power Moves, an InsideEVs column on the winners and losers of the EV race. Every other week, I explore how one of the world’s most vital industries is navigating its biggest shake-up ever.)
Gas Fans Have Choices. EV Fans Don’t
Today’s internal-combustion car market is as mature as any 100-year-old industry would be. If you’re looking for a gas car, you’re spoiled for choice. With hundreds of options and overlapping coverage in every segment, it’s hard to imagine feeling choice-constrained. EV buyers, meanwhile, have far fewer options.
You can buy three-row gas SUVs from just about any dealership you bump into. General Motors sells eight of them on its own. The Hyundai Motor Group sells four. Toyota and Lexus offer six nameplates. Ford and Lincoln sell four, too. Shop for any size crossover, truck or SUV and you’re similarly spoiled.
Nearly every buyer will be dazzled by a dizzying array of options. The exceptions are if you are shopping for a sedan, small car, or an electric vehicle, in which case you’ll get one or two options from most brands. Ford won’t sell you a sedan, and only offers two EVs.
And while both it and General Motors will offer you a gas truck in any configuration you like—single cab long bed, crew cab short bed, rear-wheel-drive, four-wheel-drive, V-8 or V-6—both offer only one body style for their electric trucks, which are all-wheel-drive only.
If you want a sedan that’s electric, boy, are you hosed. The only one that gets produced in significant numbers here is the Telsa Model 3. It’s clear, then, that buyers have countless options in most segments, but limited choices for EVs and small cars.
“Consumer Choice” Has Never Been A Priority
It’s no coincidence that buyers of cheap, small cars and cutting-edge electric vehicles are similarly constrained. Over the past decade in particular, most car companies operating in America have gotten drunk on big, gas-powered trucks and SUVs, and their high profit margins. Small cars aren’t profitable enough to be the focus, and if EVs can get there, it’ll take years.
Skeptics will argue it’s because consumers don’t want these vehicles, but I’d answer that with a question: What do you think drives consumer desires?
The natural answer is that customers want products that fulfill their needs. But any rigorous study of the American auto industry will dispel that fiction. To prove it, let’s look at two trends.
First, let’s look at the country’s newfound obsession with all-wheel drive. In 2022, a staggering 59% of all vehicles sold came with either all- or four-wheel drive, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. In 1992, that figure was 11%. Thatyear, light trucks (including SUVs) accounted for 36% of all U.S. auto sales. By 2022, trucks and SUVs made up 80% of the market.
Did consumer needs drive this? To some extent, sure. Starting in the 1990s, many Americans moved on from the staid wagons and minivans their parents drove to make SUVs the de-facto family vehicle. The proliferation of more efficient all-wheel-drive systems and more affordable crossovers allowed some buyers who struggled with winter weather or off-road performance to get a vehicle better suited to their needs. But it’s hard to imagine that, if 59% of buyers in 1992 wanted all-wheel-drive, only a fifth of them actually purchased it.
Clearly, the number of people asking for, and even aware of, all-wheel-drive vehicles skyrocketed. Some of it was surely organic. But having grown up during the period when this trend took root, I can tell you that automakers were marketing the hell out of all-wheel-drive. First it was brands like Subaru and Audi, then others rushed in. The blitz happened alongside the new push to sell everyone on Earth an SUV.
This wasn’t an accident. Large vehicles with four-wheel-drive or all-wheel-drive command higher price tags, face lighter emissions standards and are far more profitable to build. That’s why every commercial for the past 20 years has featured an everyday family vehicle blasting up a snowy mountain or plunging deep into the woods. The number of people who need this capability may have grown slightly, but the number of people who want it has skyrocketed.
Who can blame them? Watch the commercials and you’d think a four-wheel-drive truck is the only way to protect your children during a light dusting of snow or the occasional rainstorm. It’s why everyone in Ohio, where I’m from, insists on all-wheel drive. They don’t think about how all-wheel drive won’t help you stop, or that it only helps you turn if you’re on power. They don’t know that winter tires are a far bigger factor in winter performance, for a simple reason: Car companies don’t sell tires, and so they don’t market them.
Because marketing is the force that drives this all. The average consumer has no real understanding of the competitive automotive landscape. They absorb information passively from commercials, then walk into the dealer of their favorite brand and ask the salesman what to buy. They are pushed not towards what they need, but towards what is profitable and easy to sell.
EVs are not yet profitable for most companies as battery costs remain high, and they are not easy to sell at dealerships built for internal-combustion sales. Most legacy automakers have not figured out how to make EVs compelling enough to sell at a profit, and many dealers make a majority of their profit servicing high-maintenance gas vehicles. Both parties would rather sell you a gas vehicle.
You can see, then, why their argument that “consumers just don’t want EVs” is baloney. People haven’t had enough great choices yet, and they aren’t really receiving help to make the switch if they are interested.
Cars like the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y have decimated their segment benchmarks. After 40 years of waiting for someone to dethrone the BMW 3 Series in the premium compact segment, Tesla obliterated it completely. The Model Y was the best-selling car in the world in 2023, and sold at a profit. Across the board, EV sales are experiencing exponential growth. Gas car sales, meanwhile, peaked in 2017.
So when a company makes a blobby, uncompetitive EV and sells it at a ridiculous price through dealers that would rather sell you a gas truck, then of course sales struggle. Of course automakers and dealers need to throw cash on the hood to get it out the door.
But is that because consumers don’t want EVs, or because most automakers haven’t figured out how to make people want their EVs?
Customers will buy what’s put on sale for them. If “choice” ruled the day, the industry may never have moved on from big, gas-guzzling V-8 engines in the 1960s. Fuel economy and emissions regulations forced them to evolve; now, it seems that the uncrossable line is moving on from gas entirely.
This Isn’t About Choice, Anyway
Clearly, the choice argument is an excuse for companies that haven’t figured out how to meet the moment. But even if you still believe it, it doesn’t matter. Because the push towards EVs isn’t about giving everyone more options. It’s about phasing out a damaging, poisonous technology in favor of a cleaner one.
It’s not about the freedom to buy V-8s, but the freedom to live in a world where children don’t contract asthma from fossil fuel emissions, and one where we can live sustainably on this planet.
Automakers don’t want to think about that, and they don’t want you to think about that. I say that’s fair enough. They’re profit-maximizers. Their role in society is to extract profit by selling goods. They don’t want you to think about externalities, because if you think about externalities, you won’t like the fact that big vehicles pollute the planet, make our cities more dangerous to pedestrians, clog our infrastructure and generally impose extra costs on everyone, especially the driver.
No wonder it’s hard for them to sell EVs. The benefits of electric cars stand in direct contrast to everything they have sold you to date. They have sold you the myth that a loud, grumbly car is an object deserving of desire and indicative of power, and now must pivot to selling quiet, smooth vehicles that are much, much quicker. They have sold trucks on the vision of towing a 10,000-lb trailer across the country, and now must convince you that a reasonably sized battery with low running costs is a better alternative. They have marketed based on the joys of excess and noise, and now they must make what is reasonable and good sound sexy. For the first time in decades, they are having to actually educate their buyers, and adapt to new infrastructure.
Tesla has figured out how to do this. So has Rivian and, to a lesser extent, General Motors, BMW and Porsche. But most automakers are still in their early days. Many of the EVs they’ve built have been underbaked, overpriced and poorly marketed. Nobody wants to own those failures. Nobody wants to admit that they’re scared of the future. It’s easier to blame the buyer.
Contact the author: Mack.Hogan@insideevs.com.
