SnoMan wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2006 17:28:46 -0700, "Bret Ludwig" >
> wrote:
>
> >You are very very very naive. Each car cost much less than 100k to
> >produce. The total R&D amortized out per vehicle may have been that,
> >but since over 1000 vehicles were produced, that would put the program
> >cost at $100,000,000. I seriously doubt GM spent that much.
>
>
> Your are the one nieve. It cost atleast 100K a car to make them back
> them and likley more as that stuff was pricey then to build with. If
> it had been possible to make a profit, GM would have built them but
> the timing and costs were all wrong. Today, 70% of the cost of
> building of a new vehicle is labor costs with health insurance along
> adding about 1500 a car and climbing. No way you could build a cheap
> all electric one today either. (not at GM's labor costs)

$1500 a car for health insurance? I would like to see them prove that.
I think it's hooey.
But, the expensive parts of the electric car are the batteries, and GM
would buy, not build these, from overseas probably. High labor is an
argument FOR building high build cost low volume high margin producr,
and let's face it, if a sleb will pay $100K for a electric car they
will probably pay $125K.

GM's luxury and sports cars are underpriced anyway. The top Corvette
should be in Ferrari territory pricewise or Corvette isn't to be taken
seriously (which it isn't).