GM Product Boss Says Company Will Turn a Profit From EVs; Doesn't Know When

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Profitability is right around the corner, but so far the sign marking the turn isn’t in sight. That seems to be the gist of comments made by Mark Reuss, General Motors’ executive vice president for product development, who recently claimed his company would be the first automaker to turn a profit selling cheaper electric vehicles.

Right now, the high cost of producing EVs makes it a money-losing proposition for automakers struggling to find an edge in the growing technology war. While Tesla might disagree with Reuss’ insinuation, the dedicated electric automaker has only ever posted a couple of slim quarterly profits, with revenue from its pricey EVs eaten up by expenditures elsewhere.

At a company like GM, piles of truck and SUV-generated cash allows for a model like the Chevrolet Bolt — a low-priced EV that beats the competition in range, but allegedly drains $8,000 to $9,000 from the company with each unit sold. That’s all going to change, said Reuss.

“That’s the mantra inside product development. That’s what all our engineers are all working toward,” Reuss told reporters at the reopening of the historic Durant-Dort Factory One in Flint, Michigan.

The automaker plans to seek EV profitability in two ways. First, by removing all the weight it can from the vehicle, reducing the number of battery cells needed to move the car. Secondly, by increasing production, thus lowering the cost of its in-house battery and motor technology. GM has a goal of selling 10 electrified models in EV-hungry China by 2020.

“We know the customers would like to drive electric cars but are unwilling to pay any more for them,” said Reuss. “That’s why we’re going to be the first company to sell electric vehicles that people can afford at a profit.”

Already, the Bolt sells in Europe under the Opel Ampera-e name, while the range-entended Chevrolet Volt has undergone a Buick makeover for Chinese customers. While the number of electrified GM products is on the rise, Reuss still wouldn’t chance a guess as to when the company might turn a profit on its EVs.

[Source: The Detroit Bureau] [Image: General Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
7 of 44 comments
  • Sjalabais Sjalabais on May 03, 2017

    GM can't meet demand in Norway: 4000 Opel Ampera-e have been sold before the car has been officially shown. Order one today, and you'll receive it in the fall of 2018...when it's certainly not fresh anymore.

    • See 4 previous
    • Shaker Shaker on May 05, 2017

      @28-Cars-Later Women stuck at home, being forbidden to drive. Fecundity by lack of yoga classes.

  • HotPotato HotPotato on May 06, 2017

    GM might to better to follow VW's plan: make a platform that can take any powertrain, and then sell the same car with whichever powertrain people want. That way you can use economies of scale, not shoddy interior plastics, to get costs down. Taking weight out is a good idea. But aluminum is a little expensive and a little tricky to work with, and carbon fiber is a lot expensive and a lot tricky to work with. (Witness the BMW i3, which doesn't really do anything better than the Fiat 500e but leases for four or five times the monthly payment, because...carbon fiber?)

  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
  • Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
  • 1995 SC No
  • Analoggrotto I hope the walls of Mary Barra's office are covered in crushed velvet.
Next