BMW CEO Apologizes For Telling The Truth About EVs

by Bertel Schmitt

Published: April 30th, 2011

bmw ceo apologizes for telling the truth about evs

On April 18th, BMW CEO Jim O’Donnell met in New York with reporters, amongst them TTAC’s Jack Baruth. At the meeting, O’Donnell opined that the U.S. government should end the $7,500 tax credit for EVs. “I believe in a free economy. I think we should abolish all tax credits,” O’Donnell said, noting that it was his personal opinion.

O’Donnell also said that “from a practicality point of view, EVs won’t work for most people. For at least 90 percent and maybe more of the population, an EV won’t work at the current battery range.” What else is new? A 10 percent market share for EVs usually is regarded as widely optimistic. And we all know that German automakers are not particularly excited about electrification. The quote wasn’t newsworthy, and did not rate a mention in Jack’s report about the meeting.

Interestingly, the meeting had been the kick-off for BMW’s ActiveE EV lease program. If a CEO says that a new product is not all things to all people, he usually gets praises for being candid. This apparently does not apply in the world of faith-based motorization.

The Detroit News picked up the quote. From the DetN, a firestorm raged through the plug-in blogosphere. O’Donnell’s remarks were treated as anti-electric racism. Autobloggreen demanded an apology. AllCarsElectric rapped O’Donnell for forgetting “to not say horrible things about your product.” Treehugger said the 90 percent remark was “a pretty oversimplified statement, to say the least.” The rest of the firestorm in the blogosphere … was the usual copypasting.

Two days ago, O’Donnell committed a cardinal sin in the corporate propaganda business. He violated the rule that says “if you stepped into the shit, don’t parade around the house.” The incident had been long forgotten, and filed away in the cabinet of memorable EV quotes. Like Volkwagen’s Christian Klinger’s “the electric car is not a request from the customer, the electric car is a request from the government.” Or the much more diplomatic “Maybe 90% wouldn’t choose [an EV] as a first vehicle, but they may choose it as a second vehicle,” by Chevy Volt spokesman Rob Peterson.

Instead of letting it go and rot in the cabinet of EV quotes, O’Donnell issued an apology. Since when does a BMW CEO apologize? He sure did. In a statement, O’Donnell said:

“On April 18th, I had a conversation reported in the Detroit News that has caused a great deal of concern over the past week. I realize I could have been clearer in my comments and I sincerely apologize if I have offended the strong network of electric vehicle advocates whose support has been deeply meaningful to us at BMW.”

“We also understand that we are a country of diverse living and driving conditions and that electric vehicles may not be the natural choice for all drivers, many of whom will want to choose other advanced technology vehicles. “

“I am sorry for the confusion and concern I have caused. While I clearly should have chosen my words more carefully, rest assured, BMW is fully behind electric vehicles and all of the ongoing innovation in this area. We live in a diverse world and our company is working very hard on meeting the needs of our wide range of customers all over the world.”

Now THAT created a firestorm. The DetN basks in the glory of feeding BMW crow, which their CEO ate. From Fiskerkarmablog to Electriccarnews, all are happy to hear that O’Donnell apologized for saying the truth. We live in a strange world where you have to say that you are sorry that you did not lie.

#BertelSchmitt #BMW #ElectricVehicles #EV #Germany #O'Donell

Bertel Schmitt

Bertel Schmitt comes back to journalism after taking a 35 year break in advertising and marketing. He ran and owned advertising agencies in Duesseldorf, Germany, and New York City. Volkswagen A.G. was Bertel's most important corporate account. Schmitt's advertising and marketing career touched many corners of the industry with a special focus on automotive products and services. Since 2004, he lives in Japan and China with his wife <a href="http://www.tomokoandbertel.com"> Tomoko </a>. Bertel Schmitt is a founding board member of the <a href="http://www.offshoresuperseries.com"> Offshore Super Series </a>, an American offshore powerboat racing organization. He is co-owner of the racing team Typhoon.

More by Bertel Schmitt

Comments

Join the conversation

6 of 67 comments

Bodegabob on May 02, 2011

Ooooh, one of these things! I love these things. If your EV has an effective all-weather range of 70 miles or so you had better not have a commute longer than 10 miles. There are contingencies to every commute. Say you forget your laptop half way to work and need to turn around to get it. Say that you find out you need to make a special trip to the doctor's office when you find out your kid was sent there from school. You can still make an EV work in these cases, but you'd better not be using it anywhere close to its capabilities just for steady-state commuting duty. So I think an EV remains a very nice lifestyle statement for people who like to buy products that make them feel good about themselves and superior to others.

Like Reply
- See 2 previous
- Luke42 on May 02, 2011
  
  It sounds like an EV won't work for you. That's fine! It doesn't need to be a one-size-fits-all solution, and if EVs work for some people, it'll be a win. Transportation never needed to be a one-size-fits-all endeavor, though the unusual versatility of gasoline-powered cars has gotten a lot of people to think that it has to be. An EV will work for my family. We fit the label of an "Urban multi-car Family". Our town is 5 miles on a side, but it's quite dense because the farmland surrounding it is incredibly productive and valuable. In all of the time we've lived here, we've never driven more than 70 miles in a day -- unless we're on a roadtrip. An EV will work just fine for the bulk of our daily and yearly driving, and we can keep an old gasser around (or rent one) for the few days a year we go on road trips or haul heavy objects. I'd sure like to get off of the oil-price roller coaster for our daily non-discretionary driving, so when our Prius is up for replacement in a couple of years, a LEAF, the Ford Focus EV, and the Volt (if the price comes down a bit) will all be on our shopping list. Alas, our 2nd car (a Ford Ranger), our "everything the Prius can't do" vehicle, is up replacement. That's proving to be a real challenge, because most family cars intended for the American market aren't designed with my needs in mind. Maybe a Subaru something-or-other (with good roof racks and a trailer hitch), or one of those European cars that Ford and Fiat are bringing to the US market will fill the slot slot.
  
  Like
- Ubermensch on May 02, 2011
  
  "So I think an EV remains a very nice lifestyle statement for people who like to buy products that make them feel good about themselves and superior to others." The same could be said for a whole host of other cars like Hummers and Escalades. Just because a vehicle isn't rational for you doesn't mean it may not be rational for others. Assuming values based other's purchases says more about you than it does about them.
  
  Like
- Luke42 on May 02, 2011
  
  @Ubermensch It depends on the context. I helped a family member purchase, finance, and register an F-150 4x4, because it's the right tool for the job. Her work takes her to remote parts of the US and she travels thousands of miles per year over unimproved roads in 4 wheel drive. Considering the amount of survival gear and work-tools that she takes with her, it is simply the correct tool for the job. I'm proud Prius driver, and a proud co-owner of this F-150. A shiny hummer in the mall parking lot with no mud on it is another story entirely. Also, the spotless F-150 Office Worker Editions that park in the parking deck near my office are just silly. OTOH, some of my co-workers live on farms and drive their farm truck in to the office. That's not quite as silly, especially since a lot of them have to plow their own driveways on their way to work, and it's really easy to see the difference. The farm trucks have trailer hitches, plow attachments, dents, and mud on them. The spotless pickup truck that lives in suburbia really stands out; it's a machine that isn't being used for its intended purpose and is, by definition, a waste. The money, the fuel, and a perfectly good machine are all things that should be put to work doing something useful. (I guess I shouldn't complain too much, because the F-150 I co-own was one of those Office Worker Editions with almost a hundred thousand easy miles on it. The owner use it to commute to a while collar job and to do some occasional light towing. Compared to the kind of use it's getting from the off-road desert work, that thing was brand new when we bought it, and it cost a lot less than a new truck.) The Right Tool for the Right Job. Both sides of that statement are important -- and the second part is the hard part.
  
  Like
Mike Kelley on May 02, 2011

So-called "green" power is much more subsidized than conventional electricity: http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/energy-subsidies.jpg

Like Reply
- Luke42 on May 02, 2011
  
  That's related to the fact that efficiency is the best alternative fuel, at least on the first pass. Once those ducks are in a row, then you can evaluate PV or wind. Or not, I guess, if you don't care about the externalities incurred by using fossile fuels. But, even then, efficiency will save you money. (Unless you start keeping score with your buddies and you like to win, in which case it may not save you money.) The problem is convincing people to care about insulation, efficient household appliances, and efficient transportation.
  
  Like