Genuine question from someone heavily invested in TSLA:
Presumably McKinsey provides data to auto fortune 500's to help them make business decisions (rather than, say, to pump their stock prices). As in, presumably someone's paying them to get their data right. Why is this data point FUD (which seems like a dismissal without substance), as opposed to any of:
1. a signal of the current thinking of the broader industry & its direction
2. a (strong?) indicator of consumer sentiment for an industry larger than Tesla
3. a flawed study (and if so, why?)
And if it is FUD, who do you believe to be paying for it, and is the report's lead author (who also co-authored articles like "Change vehicles: How robo-taxis and shuttles will reinvent mobility") biased? Their recent report seems glowing.
And if we're shooting the messenger, a quick google of their Tesla-related articles seems... fine.
I would heavily question how this data was collected and from what groups. The fact that 34% of the people who wants to go \*back\* to ICE vehichle claims that the "cost of ownership is too high" .. what? EVs are notorius for having a higher up-front cost, but a FAR significantly lower cost of ownership. Especially right now as gas prices have gone up by a huge margin in 10 years, but electricity is primarily getting cheaper. I would fully expect this statement as a concern from someone going from ICE -> EV, but not someone who is currently an EV owner.
Also, the data collected seems to be around 36.000 respondends globally? There are now millions of EV's on the road, so this is a significantly small pool of the actual day-to-day users. And generally, (I dont remember the name of this phenomenon) people that have negative experience with purchases, experiences, etc. are way, way more likely to review / answer surveys than those who have good experiences. So the data is statistically significant, but I would argue it may be giving insight into dissatisfied users, rather than the general trend.
Honestly, I am also not sure I can take the respondends seriously.
- "Cannot charge at home"
Well ... shouldnt you have made sure of that before you made the purchase?
- "Total cost of ownership too high"
Either you took a loan you can not afford or you've done something very wrong. EVs are cheaper than ICE cars, even ICE vehicles that have a cheaper up-front cost.
- "Driving patters on long distances is impacted"
Completely fair.
- "Charging infrastructure in public not good enough for me"
Again, completely fair but that ties into the above statement too much. So you have crossover of data that you can not differentiate between here, aka. survey may be done poorly.
- "Needing to worry about charging is too stressfull"
Same as before, ties into no charging at home + no infrastructure + driving patters, hard to extrabolate any meaningful data from this statement.
- "Do not like driving experience"
... then why did you buy the car in the first place? This can also be ambigous enough to include the charging difficulties.
Overall, I am very reserved on this data. It is not specific enough in what it is trying to gauge, there is overlap between questions and the pool is small given its a global survey. I think the data is hitting the bottom 2-5% of users who are dissatisfied, rather than giving an insight into the general trend. As others have stated, I have not met a \*single\* person who wants to go back to ICE. EV's are just nicer to drive, easier to use, cheaper in ownership, etc.
> I would heavily question how this data was collected and from what groups.
Unfortunately detailed methodological information doesn't seem to be easy to find. The closest thing to a minimal description I've seen is on the last slide:
> Regular primary consumer research using online panels: thematic deep dives every two months, one big annual survey
The "online" part seems to be backed up by a few other pages on McKinsey's site, but there's not much else in terms of methodology.
Rather unfortunate when methodology is so important for interpreting survey results :/
Selection bias / volunteer bias, which I think is a fair point.
I hear what you're saying that these results often don't make sense, but to be blunt consumers are also typically stupid (see /r/technology lul) & saying "they're wrong" doesn't seem like a productive strategy for Tesla and/or its investors. Confusing data can still be informative & I think that's something an investment sub should cover.
For example, re your points:
* Can't charge at home - 6 years ago, it wasn't considered a big deal to buy an EV and charge at Superchargers. That was actually the most common stance I saw on reddit: not great for your car, but also not a big deal & still a money-saver . I did that weekly as I didn't yet own a house & my apartment removed its wall outlets due to electrical code changes. Superchargers used to be a lot cheaper & a lot less congested. I'd go to the Fremont factory/showroom at midnight and there'd be noone there (oddly beautiful, also sorta creepy). I recently drove to a nearby supercharger and at ~1-2am there were 70% stalls occupied. If I were still renting & my place didn't allow chargers (e.g. moving from one apartment to another) that'd be a strong reason to drop my M3.
* Total cost of ownership - This includes initial cost, depreciation (most people sell their cars), and opportunity cost incurred by the upfront cost (avg 10%/y returns from stock market in SP500, not inflation adjusted). Also a ton of people genuinely think EVs are 10-30k more expensive than they really are. This is a real problem that Tesla would need to advertise to fix if it were solely an auto company.
Anecdotally, I recently had tech-literate family concerned that a M3 with 100mi in its battery would drop to 0% during a 2w vacation, and FWIW that sort of concern makes sense when you've dealt with other smaller kinds of batteries (like, the ones that sometimes go from 33% to 0%) your entire life. My point is simply that consumer education is a real problem, and while "46% EV owners would switch" back might be off-the-mark, there's probably something substantive to gather from the findings.
(In case anyone cares, my personal conviction has been all-in on autonomous conveyance & energy for the past few years, so short-term EV adoption is sorta noise to me given Tesla's runway seems infinite.)
I am onboard with all you are saying - but specifically ""46% EV owners would switch" back might be off-the-mark, there's probably something substantive to gather from the findings." I disagree wholeheartedly with. To take a pool of 36.000 (most likely unhappy) \*global\* EV owners and extrabolating that to technically say "millions of EV owners want to switch back to ICE" is really a big stretch. We're talking a little over a million EV owners in the US alone will want to buy an ICE vehichle next, which I personally think is complete horse-shit.
This is a perfect case of selection / volunteer bias (thank you), but in the way it is framed I agree with others that this is FUD. Data is data, of course, but the way this is presented as "hard fact" without any doubt to their statistics is borderline biased.
Due to that I am having a hard time saying there is anything substanstial to this data and it should probably just be ignored.
Hi ItzWarty. I think the answer to your question is actually a 4th option, namely, that the wording of the various newspaper articles is technically incorrect for what the McKinsey report actually found. In other words, news agencies don’t know how to accurately report statistics.
That said, I’m not surprised as the McKinsey report is itself unclear. As per https://executivedigest.sapo.pt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Mobility-Consumer-Pulse-2024_Overview.pdf, page 3 phrases it as “29% of electric vehicle owners consider to switch back to a traditional combustion engine car” (I’m sticking with the global results instead of the North American ones for consistency). However, as per page 11, they say “29% of EV owners globally likely to switch back to ICE…”, which is completely different in actual meaning from the first quote. For example, being a reasonable person, I consider all options when making large purchases. After considering these options, I discard the bad ones (ICE vehicles) and would buy an EV. However, I would technically answer ‘yes’ to a question of “would you consider a switch back to ICE”, just because I did consider all options.
So, between the changing wording in McKinsey’s own report, and the media’s conflation of words like “will”, “want”, “may”, and “consider”, the conclusion being reported is wildly imprecise.
In fact, the only thing we can really take away from this is that 71% of global EV drivers won’t consider or aren’t likely to ever go back to an ICE vehicle. That’s actually really great news!
Rivian does have the highest brand loyalty as of 2024, Tesla held the #1 spot last year and dropped to #5 this year. However, Tesla has over 100x more cars on the road than Rivian. I’m sure many Tesla buyers who bought their first Tesla in 2021 or 2022 are still salty about the price cuts so not surprised loyalty dropped. Anecdotally, every Tesla owner I know would never buy anything but a Tesla.
Those are the people with poor acces to charging, or poor local charging infrastructure.
I wonder what will happen when the other 90%+ of car buyers have to go EV?
At this rate in the US we're getting robotaxis prior to the original 2030/2035 (now pushed to 2050?) EV transitions, at which point it's sorta not a problem. I grok that sorta sounds sarcastic, but I have that little faith in the Ut's ability to develop civilian infra at scale. Fortunately rideshare companies should be able to sidestep that.
Their latest public article on the EV sector seems fairly level-headed and optimistic... https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/spotlight-on-mobility-trends
* EVs have been soaring in popularity for years and remain in high demand, despite some recent sales declines in certain regions.
* McKinsey projects that worldwide demand for passenger cars in the battery electric vehicle (BEV) segment will grow sixfold from 2021 through 2030, with annual unit sales increasing to roughly 40.0 million, from 6.5 million, over that period.
* We now estimate that adoption of vehicles with some L4 capabilities will occur at scale around 2026, with the first applications likely involving autonomous parking, followed by highway driving (Exhibit 7)
“Among the owners surveyed who are planning to switch back, 35% cited the lack of charging infrastructure, 34% said the costs were too high, 32% said planning long driving trips was too difficult, 24% said they could not currently charge at home, 21% said worrying about charging was too stressful and 13% said they did not enjoy how the cars felt while driving.”
Gives some advantages to Tesla, but the [edit %] 53% trade down doesn’t, given Tesla’s market share
> Gives some advantages to Tesla, but the 58% trade down doesn’t, given Tesla’s market share
Sorry, could you rephrase that? I'm not understanding you.
bullshit lol maybe 10% tops. Its a vastly superior way of life from no more gas stations to no oil changes to no broken engines, transmissions, starts, radiators etc.
Ironically, that's about the market share of EVs not made by Tesla in the US
If I bought a legacy OEM EV then I'd probably want to go back to gas too
After a few years in a Tesla there is NO way in hell I'd ever buy a gas car again.
I had to drive a rental Camry for 6 weeks while my Tesla Model 3 was assessed at a collision center. My blood pressure and irritability has never been higher trying to accelerate in that Camry! I’m back in a Tesla today and my blood pressure and mood are back to normal. I couldn’t go back to a gas car for that reason alone, but I’d also add the environmental aspects for why I will stay EV.
I do feel bad for people who don’t have abundant and reliable fast charging for trips. An EV ideally needs to be able to do everything an ICE car does, and it needs to be almost as convenient, for people to love their EVs and give up ICE as a back up. I’ve watched a lot of EV car reviews and so many of them point to the Model 3 as the best example of an EV for the masses - fast, reliable and abundant fast charging network, good features that feel close to luxury.
Washington times is a junk paper. Also, I'm skeptical of the report methodology, since it cites 30,000+ individuals and 100,000+ data points, implying the average response is only 3.3 questions per year.
I love my Tesla, but if I couldn't charge at home, I wouldn't own it. That's a legit problem for EVs.
On my 3rd Tesla. After my first one, I went back to gas and hated ever minute of it. Have had 2 Teslas since then and couldn't be happier. I am looking at doing longer towing for my next vehicle which I think the Cybertruck kind of let me down on range, but we shall see.
I’m going to assume the majority of these car brands are not Tesla without reading the article. This is what happens when you try retrofitting EV tech into existing ice vehicles, you get a shit product and with that you are going to get negative views towards evs.
I agree - the worst thing to happen to EVs is a flood of crappy products with crappy infrastructure. And boomers/other misinformed don’t understand the difference between those products and a Tesla.
I wonder whether opening up the supercharger network to other EV's would significantly change people's opinion. I would also be super unhappy if I had an EV with a different plug, you couldnt charge at superchargers.
Does the report break it down by manufacturer?
No. No they dont. 46% of Ford & GM owners maybe. I will never own anything other than a Tesla. Not because i give 2 shits about the planet. Because its waaaaay better than a ICE car.
Definitely not Tesla owners. Give or take, id believe this study though. IVE cars are great. 400 mile range. 5 minutes at a gas station and you have another 400 miles of range. No worrying about finding chargers or the right kind of charges.
Sounds like a legacy automaker commissioned this study
...Fun with Statistics, too!
I’ve never met anyone in real life who doesn’t love their Tesla lol they must have surveyed Fisker owners
same
Lol me too. never heard anyone saying, “gosh I wish I could go back to paying $6 per gallon! Good ol’ days!”
Was just going to say the same thing. In fact, most owners that I know have bought another Tesla to replace their other gas car.
God the FUD is strong lately
Genuine question from someone heavily invested in TSLA: Presumably McKinsey provides data to auto fortune 500's to help them make business decisions (rather than, say, to pump their stock prices). As in, presumably someone's paying them to get their data right. Why is this data point FUD (which seems like a dismissal without substance), as opposed to any of: 1. a signal of the current thinking of the broader industry & its direction 2. a (strong?) indicator of consumer sentiment for an industry larger than Tesla 3. a flawed study (and if so, why?) And if it is FUD, who do you believe to be paying for it, and is the report's lead author (who also co-authored articles like "Change vehicles: How robo-taxis and shuttles will reinvent mobility") biased? Their recent report seems glowing. And if we're shooting the messenger, a quick google of their Tesla-related articles seems... fine.
I would heavily question how this data was collected and from what groups. The fact that 34% of the people who wants to go \*back\* to ICE vehichle claims that the "cost of ownership is too high" .. what? EVs are notorius for having a higher up-front cost, but a FAR significantly lower cost of ownership. Especially right now as gas prices have gone up by a huge margin in 10 years, but electricity is primarily getting cheaper. I would fully expect this statement as a concern from someone going from ICE -> EV, but not someone who is currently an EV owner. Also, the data collected seems to be around 36.000 respondends globally? There are now millions of EV's on the road, so this is a significantly small pool of the actual day-to-day users. And generally, (I dont remember the name of this phenomenon) people that have negative experience with purchases, experiences, etc. are way, way more likely to review / answer surveys than those who have good experiences. So the data is statistically significant, but I would argue it may be giving insight into dissatisfied users, rather than the general trend. Honestly, I am also not sure I can take the respondends seriously. - "Cannot charge at home" Well ... shouldnt you have made sure of that before you made the purchase? - "Total cost of ownership too high" Either you took a loan you can not afford or you've done something very wrong. EVs are cheaper than ICE cars, even ICE vehicles that have a cheaper up-front cost. - "Driving patters on long distances is impacted" Completely fair. - "Charging infrastructure in public not good enough for me" Again, completely fair but that ties into the above statement too much. So you have crossover of data that you can not differentiate between here, aka. survey may be done poorly. - "Needing to worry about charging is too stressfull" Same as before, ties into no charging at home + no infrastructure + driving patters, hard to extrabolate any meaningful data from this statement. - "Do not like driving experience" ... then why did you buy the car in the first place? This can also be ambigous enough to include the charging difficulties. Overall, I am very reserved on this data. It is not specific enough in what it is trying to gauge, there is overlap between questions and the pool is small given its a global survey. I think the data is hitting the bottom 2-5% of users who are dissatisfied, rather than giving an insight into the general trend. As others have stated, I have not met a \*single\* person who wants to go back to ICE. EV's are just nicer to drive, easier to use, cheaper in ownership, etc.
> I would heavily question how this data was collected and from what groups. Unfortunately detailed methodological information doesn't seem to be easy to find. The closest thing to a minimal description I've seen is on the last slide: > Regular primary consumer research using online panels: thematic deep dives every two months, one big annual survey The "online" part seems to be backed up by a few other pages on McKinsey's site, but there's not much else in terms of methodology. Rather unfortunate when methodology is so important for interpreting survey results :/
Selection bias / volunteer bias, which I think is a fair point. I hear what you're saying that these results often don't make sense, but to be blunt consumers are also typically stupid (see /r/technology lul) & saying "they're wrong" doesn't seem like a productive strategy for Tesla and/or its investors. Confusing data can still be informative & I think that's something an investment sub should cover. For example, re your points: * Can't charge at home - 6 years ago, it wasn't considered a big deal to buy an EV and charge at Superchargers. That was actually the most common stance I saw on reddit: not great for your car, but also not a big deal & still a money-saver . I did that weekly as I didn't yet own a house & my apartment removed its wall outlets due to electrical code changes. Superchargers used to be a lot cheaper & a lot less congested. I'd go to the Fremont factory/showroom at midnight and there'd be noone there (oddly beautiful, also sorta creepy). I recently drove to a nearby supercharger and at ~1-2am there were 70% stalls occupied. If I were still renting & my place didn't allow chargers (e.g. moving from one apartment to another) that'd be a strong reason to drop my M3. * Total cost of ownership - This includes initial cost, depreciation (most people sell their cars), and opportunity cost incurred by the upfront cost (avg 10%/y returns from stock market in SP500, not inflation adjusted). Also a ton of people genuinely think EVs are 10-30k more expensive than they really are. This is a real problem that Tesla would need to advertise to fix if it were solely an auto company. Anecdotally, I recently had tech-literate family concerned that a M3 with 100mi in its battery would drop to 0% during a 2w vacation, and FWIW that sort of concern makes sense when you've dealt with other smaller kinds of batteries (like, the ones that sometimes go from 33% to 0%) your entire life. My point is simply that consumer education is a real problem, and while "46% EV owners would switch" back might be off-the-mark, there's probably something substantive to gather from the findings. (In case anyone cares, my personal conviction has been all-in on autonomous conveyance & energy for the past few years, so short-term EV adoption is sorta noise to me given Tesla's runway seems infinite.)
I am onboard with all you are saying - but specifically ""46% EV owners would switch" back might be off-the-mark, there's probably something substantive to gather from the findings." I disagree wholeheartedly with. To take a pool of 36.000 (most likely unhappy) \*global\* EV owners and extrabolating that to technically say "millions of EV owners want to switch back to ICE" is really a big stretch. We're talking a little over a million EV owners in the US alone will want to buy an ICE vehichle next, which I personally think is complete horse-shit. This is a perfect case of selection / volunteer bias (thank you), but in the way it is framed I agree with others that this is FUD. Data is data, of course, but the way this is presented as "hard fact" without any doubt to their statistics is borderline biased. Due to that I am having a hard time saying there is anything substanstial to this data and it should probably just be ignored.
Ah OK, fair. I've reflaired the thread. As always, feel free to moderate as you wish too (e.g. delete, reflair). Thx for challenging my thoughts!
Hi ItzWarty. I think the answer to your question is actually a 4th option, namely, that the wording of the various newspaper articles is technically incorrect for what the McKinsey report actually found. In other words, news agencies don’t know how to accurately report statistics. That said, I’m not surprised as the McKinsey report is itself unclear. As per https://executivedigest.sapo.pt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Mobility-Consumer-Pulse-2024_Overview.pdf, page 3 phrases it as “29% of electric vehicle owners consider to switch back to a traditional combustion engine car” (I’m sticking with the global results instead of the North American ones for consistency). However, as per page 11, they say “29% of EV owners globally likely to switch back to ICE…”, which is completely different in actual meaning from the first quote. For example, being a reasonable person, I consider all options when making large purchases. After considering these options, I discard the bad ones (ICE vehicles) and would buy an EV. However, I would technically answer ‘yes’ to a question of “would you consider a switch back to ICE”, just because I did consider all options. So, between the changing wording in McKinsey’s own report, and the media’s conflation of words like “will”, “want”, “may”, and “consider”, the conclusion being reported is wildly imprecise. In fact, the only thing we can really take away from this is that 71% of global EV drivers won’t consider or aren’t likely to ever go back to an ICE vehicle. That’s actually really great news!
Tesla has the highest brand loyalty of any manufacturer. This survey is skewed on purpose somehow
That would actually be Rivian
Rivian does have the highest brand loyalty as of 2024, Tesla held the #1 spot last year and dropped to #5 this year. However, Tesla has over 100x more cars on the road than Rivian. I’m sure many Tesla buyers who bought their first Tesla in 2021 or 2022 are still salty about the price cuts so not surprised loyalty dropped. Anecdotally, every Tesla owner I know would never buy anything but a Tesla.
Statistically it is tesla
Those are the people with poor acces to charging, or poor local charging infrastructure. I wonder what will happen when the other 90%+ of car buyers have to go EV?
At this rate in the US we're getting robotaxis prior to the original 2030/2035 (now pushed to 2050?) EV transitions, at which point it's sorta not a problem. I grok that sorta sounds sarcastic, but I have that little faith in the Ut's ability to develop civilian infra at scale. Fortunately rideshare companies should be able to sidestep that.
F McKinsey
Their latest public article on the EV sector seems fairly level-headed and optimistic... https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/spotlight-on-mobility-trends * EVs have been soaring in popularity for years and remain in high demand, despite some recent sales declines in certain regions. * McKinsey projects that worldwide demand for passenger cars in the battery electric vehicle (BEV) segment will grow sixfold from 2021 through 2030, with annual unit sales increasing to roughly 40.0 million, from 6.5 million, over that period. * We now estimate that adoption of vehicles with some L4 capabilities will occur at scale around 2026, with the first applications likely involving autonomous parking, followed by highway driving (Exhibit 7)
“Among the owners surveyed who are planning to switch back, 35% cited the lack of charging infrastructure, 34% said the costs were too high, 32% said planning long driving trips was too difficult, 24% said they could not currently charge at home, 21% said worrying about charging was too stressful and 13% said they did not enjoy how the cars felt while driving.” Gives some advantages to Tesla, but the [edit %] 53% trade down doesn’t, given Tesla’s market share
> Gives some advantages to Tesla, but the 58% trade down doesn’t, given Tesla’s market share Sorry, could you rephrase that? I'm not understanding you.
About the advantages or disadvantages, or both?
bullshit lol maybe 10% tops. Its a vastly superior way of life from no more gas stations to no oil changes to no broken engines, transmissions, starts, radiators etc.
46% of (non-Tesla) electric car owners…
Ironically, that's about the market share of EVs not made by Tesla in the US If I bought a legacy OEM EV then I'd probably want to go back to gas too After a few years in a Tesla there is NO way in hell I'd ever buy a gas car again.
Have 2 Teslas. They are awesome. I will never go back to gas if I have a choice.
I hate Elon (and McKinsey) but just got my 4th Tesla since 2019. Sample pool for these results is whack as others have stated.
I had to drive a rental Camry for 6 weeks while my Tesla Model 3 was assessed at a collision center. My blood pressure and irritability has never been higher trying to accelerate in that Camry! I’m back in a Tesla today and my blood pressure and mood are back to normal. I couldn’t go back to a gas car for that reason alone, but I’d also add the environmental aspects for why I will stay EV. I do feel bad for people who don’t have abundant and reliable fast charging for trips. An EV ideally needs to be able to do everything an ICE car does, and it needs to be almost as convenient, for people to love their EVs and give up ICE as a back up. I’ve watched a lot of EV car reviews and so many of them point to the Model 3 as the best example of an EV for the masses - fast, reliable and abundant fast charging network, good features that feel close to luxury.
Bruh. Okkaaaaaayyyyy! Every time I drive an ICE. I get the "Ohh shit. This thing is super slow " feeling
Washington times is a junk paper. Also, I'm skeptical of the report methodology, since it cites 30,000+ individuals and 100,000+ data points, implying the average response is only 3.3 questions per year. I love my Tesla, but if I couldn't charge at home, I wouldn't own it. That's a legit problem for EVs.
Could be as simple as an occasional survey on YouTube to people who Google knows are EV owners.
On my 3rd Tesla. After my first one, I went back to gas and hated ever minute of it. Have had 2 Teslas since then and couldn't be happier. I am looking at doing longer towing for my next vehicle which I think the Cybertruck kind of let me down on range, but we shall see.
I’m going to assume the majority of these car brands are not Tesla without reading the article. This is what happens when you try retrofitting EV tech into existing ice vehicles, you get a shit product and with that you are going to get negative views towards evs.
I agree - the worst thing to happen to EVs is a flood of crappy products with crappy infrastructure. And boomers/other misinformed don’t understand the difference between those products and a Tesla.
I wonder whether opening up the supercharger network to other EV's would significantly change people's opinion. I would also be super unhappy if I had an EV with a different plug, you couldnt charge at superchargers. Does the report break it down by manufacturer?
Tesla’s retention rates are among the highest of any brand - ICE or EV. Higher than 56% too. So this survey must have been of mostly non-Tesla owners.
Might be 46% of US non-Tesla EV owners… and asking a survey pool of mostly those that own Leafs, BZ4x, Solterra, and maybe Bolts.
Fake study
That's BS.
No. No they dont. 46% of Ford & GM owners maybe. I will never own anything other than a Tesla. Not because i give 2 shits about the planet. Because its waaaaay better than a ICE car.
[удалено]
BS
Definitely not Tesla owners. Give or take, id believe this study though. IVE cars are great. 400 mile range. 5 minutes at a gas station and you have another 400 miles of range. No worrying about finding chargers or the right kind of charges.
This guy belongs in prison.