Ford CEO Jim Farley Says Large EVs Over $50K Aren’t Viable

[Sherminator98]

https://fordauthority.com/2025/03/ford-ceo-jim-farley-says-large-evs-over-50k-arent-viable/

[Joe771476]

You know, if Farley had asked me if Ford should go full tilt into EV's, I would have said no!  I would have suggested baby steps. If the CEO of Cracker Barrel had asked me if they should sterilize the decorum and paint the walls white and change the logo, I would have said no!  I would have saved Ford double-digit billions and Cracker Barrel 700 million. But nobody asked me!

[Sherminator98]

7 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

You know, if Farley had asked me if Ford should go full tilt into EV's, I would have said no!  I would have suggested baby steps. If the CEO of Cracker Barrel had asked me if they should sterilize the decorum and paint the walls white and change the logo, I would have said no!  I would have saved Ford double-digit billions and Cracker Barrel 700 million. But nobody asked me!

 

No one would ask for your option on anything, so you can forget that. 

[akirby]

7 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

You know, if Farley had asked me if Ford should go full tilt into EV's, I would have said no!  I would have suggested baby steps.

And if the pending government legislation requiring EVs had materialized you would have put Ford out of business.   Business decisions like this are not easy.

[rmc523]

8 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

You know, if Farley had asked me if Ford should go full tilt into EV's, I would have said no!  I would have suggested baby steps. If the CEO of Cracker Barrel had asked me if they should sterilize the decorum and paint the walls white and change the logo, I would have said no!  I would have saved Ford double-digit billions and Cracker Barrel 700 million. But nobody asked me!

 

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, akirby said:

And if the pending government legislation requiring EVs had materialized you would have put Ford out of business.   Business decisions like this are not easy.

This is why I try to give Ford credit. People always judge with hindsight, saying oh these brands are all so stupid for investing so heavily in EVs. Yet they forget when these decisions were being made, a lot of markets were pushing hard for a ban on new gasoline sales, I believe much of Europe was 2030-2035 for a ban on pure ICE sales. 

 

Brands thought they had no choice but to invest billions in EVs. Let's also try to remember that when Ford first released the mach-e and lightning, they were selling like gangbusters. I believe the waiting list for the lightning was something like 2-3 years at its peak. 

 

That obviously changed, but it's easy to see why Ford would have seen that at the time, and come to the conclusion that EV demand was higher than it actually was. 

 

Their plans are all over the place, but I respect their ability to recognize something isn't working, and pivot their strategy. A lot of companies don't do that. I fully believe the approach they have now, pushing smaller, affordable EVs and then EREV and hybrids for larger vehicles makes a ton of sense. There was a lot of pain in getting here, but I they have a stellar strategy in place now. 

[Rick73]

Farley is probably correct now, after first being wrong, but question remains of where is the sweet spot on EV pricing?  We hear $30k mentioned often more recently but who knows if that’s ideal starting point?  Only time will tell.
 

Just watched a video review of a sub $26,000 (20,000 pounds) Renault Twingo and one of the points made is that there are a growing number of small affordable EVs from European Legacy manufacturers that are now competing with Chinese EVs.  Sure, an A segment isn’t for everyone but this new Twingo appears extremely functional for those who either want to get from point A to B, and or want to reduce their CO2 footprint.  For the price I like it better than Fiat 500e.

 

Creative engineering seems to have resulted in adequate space for a tiny car powered by only 27.5 kWh LFP battery, yet gets 163 miles of range, excellent for a City car.  Low weight no doubt helps energy efficiency and thus contributes to lower costs.  I hope Ford’s new EV will also stand out with unexpected efficiency, just in a larger package.

 

For what it’s worth I like the Twingo being a 4-seater 4-door, rear seats that slide and fold, as well as the passenger’s front seat for long cargo, and also like rear doors that open into bodywork instead of rear wheel wells.  I cringe at that. ☹️

 

[Sherminator98]

18 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Farley is probably correct now, after first being wrong, but question remains of where is the sweet spot on EV pricing?  We hear $30k mentioned often more recently but who knows if that’s ideal starting point?  Only time will tell.
 

Just watched a video review of a sub $26,000 (20,000 pounds) Renault Twingo and one of the points made is that there are a growing number of small affordable EVs from European Legacy manufacturers that are now competing with Chinese EVs.  Sure, an A segment isn’t for everyone but this new Twingo appears extremely functional for those who either want to get from point A to B, and or want to reduce their CO2 footprint.  For the price I like it better than Fiat 500e.

 

Depends on what market your talking about-the C segment is the biggest in the world

 

The A class segment is pretty small in the EU-only 500K units or so, vs the B or C-CUV market that makes up about 5 million sales between the two of them. 

 

https://www.jato.com/resources/media-and-press-releases/european-new-car-market-growth-in-2024-driven-by-hybrids-and-chinese-brands

 

The new Twingo isn't a bad looking product for being a City car...I'll give it that much. 

 

Edited November 6 by Sherminator98

[Sherminator98]

42 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

This is why I try to give Ford credit. People always judge with hindsight, saying oh these brands are all so stupid for investing so heavily in EVs. Yet they forget when these decisions were being made, a lot of markets were pushing hard for a ban on new gasoline sales, I believe much of Europe was 2030-2035 for a ban on pure ICE sales. 

 

The other issue is that Auto makers thought that making EV products that where full sized Trucks would be the smart move to do-its the biggest segment sales wise (at least in the US) and people don't have issues dumping say $65-75K on them, it would be a home run-help in the CAFE dept and make a tidy profit at the same time, but unfortunately the physics and that market being pretty conservative doesn't help out in the sales department. 

 

Edited November 6 by Sherminator98

[DeluxeStang]

22 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

The other issue is that Auto makers thought that making EV products that where full sized Trucks would be the smart move to do-its the biggest segment sales wise (at least in the US) and people don't have issues dumping say $65-75K on them, it would be a home run-help in the CAFE dept and make a tidy profit at the same time, but unfortunately the physics and that market being pretty conservative doesn't help out in the sales department. 

 

Yeah, the line of thinking there was definitely "We make most of our money on large trucks and SUVs, so those will be our most profitable EVs". Definitely a mistake, but they've learned from it. 

 

That's another reason why these affordable EVs make so much sense. It's going to where the demand actually is. Younger people often seem to be far more accepting of EVs, and willing to buy them, but most of them can't afford a 70 grand truck. But they can afford a new car that's 25-30k.

 

Time will tell, but another part about this strategy that I find brilliant is it seems like Ford's not just stopping at affordability. Like these aren't just gonna be shitty cars that rely entirely on price to sell. It sounds like they're actually pushing for them to be fun, and interesting cars. 

 

That's the best part of this equation imo as an enthusiast myself. I've often said where Ford is the best car company in the world is with their affordable aspirational products. Dream cars, the kinds of cars people love, and have a strong emotional attachment to, but that are also obtainable, no-one does that better than Ford. 

 

So if these affordable EVs come out and they're these awesome looking, fun to drive, reliable, well equipped products, I think Ford's gonna run away with it. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Depends on what market your talking about-the C segment is the biggest in the world

 

The A class segment is pretty small in the EU-only 500K units or so, vs the B or C-CUV market that makes up about 5 million sales between the two of them. 

 

https://www.jato.com/resources/media-and-press-releases/european-new-car-market-growth-in-2024-driven-by-hybrids-and-chinese-brands

 

The new Twingo isn't a bad looking product for being a City car...I'll give it that much. 

 

The reviewer in video I watched said A Segment represents 5% of total market, but also questioned whether that 5% was limited by real demand or more by manufacturers who ignored the segment while pursuing more expensive vehicles with greater margins and profits.  Some people think it creates a self fulfilling prophecy.  If manufacturers don’t make great small cars because they don’t want to invest limited resources then buyers won’t show much interest in cheap models they do build.  It’s one down side to free markets — end user does not always get what they really want because of corporate pressure for higher profits.

 

Thanks for link.  Renault is a bigger player in Europe than I was aware of, per article.  It’s interesting that Twingo reviewer said car only took 2 years to complete from start.  If accurate that’s impressive.  I like the Twingo in large part because I always thought BEVs should have started on small side and moved upscale from there, but also know and accept that for Tesla to make electrification commonplace they needed to attract the rich with money to burn first, and then move downmarket.  Maybe $30k vehicles won’t be any more successful than $50k-plus-cars that few people are buying.  My personal guess is that cheaper will be better, and expect cars like Bolt to outsell more expensive models.

[akirby]

4 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

This is why I try to give Ford credit. People always judge with hindsight, saying oh these brands are all so stupid for investing so heavily in EVs. Yet they forget when these decisions were being made, a lot of markets were pushing hard for a ban on new gasoline sales, I believe much of Europe was 2030-2035 for a ban on pure ICE sales. 

 

Brands thought they had no choice but to invest billions in EVs. Let's also try to remember that when Ford first released the mach-e and lightning, they were selling like gangbusters. I believe the waiting list for the lightning was something like 2-3 years at its peak. 

 

That obviously changed, but it's easy to see why Ford would have seen that at the time, and come to the conclusion that EV demand was higher than it actually was. 

 

Their plans are all over the place, but I respect their ability to recognize something isn't working, and pivot their strategy. A lot of companies don't do that. I fully believe the approach they have now, pushing smaller, affordable EVs and then EREV and hybrids for larger vehicles makes a ton of sense. There was a lot of pain in getting here, but I they have a stellar strategy in place now. 

I do blame them for how they did it though.  Failed partnerships, failed 3 row SUVs, not doing more hybrids and killing Edge and Escape and having to import nautilus and Corsair from China.

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I do blame them for how they did it though.  Failed partnerships, failed 3 row SUVs, not doing more hybrids and killing Edge and Escape and having to import nautilus and Corsair from China.

I get where you're coming from. The vw partnership, although most of us on this forum don't seem to love the explorer or Capri as cars themselves, it seems like that partnership overall has been profitable and successful from people in the know. The Rivian partnership was a disappointment, unless I'm mistaken, nothing even came out of that. 

 

Canceling the Rivian based flagship Lincoln crossover was a mistake. It sounds like it was really promising and the kind of halo product that would have elevated the brand.

 

The 3 rows were definitely a mistake as well. In the interest of full transparency, those were always the kinds of products where I want to get behind it, but the more details we got, it just made no sense. Like hearing how radical and ugly the styling was thinking "Oh maybe that'll let them use a much smaller battery that results in a pretty affordable large EV. Then we got the info the starting price would have been about 60 grand and that just killed any appeal it had. 

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I do blame them for how they did it though.  Failed partnerships, failed 3 row SUVs, not doing more hybrids and killing Edge and Escape and having to import nautilus and Corsair from China.

As for edge and escape, I believe killing those is a mistake. I've said for years there's a way to reimagine offerings in these segments that would make them more aspirational, and profitable, and how Ford should go that route instead of just walking away. 

 

Like for a new edge, maybe giving it a boxier, more rugged look. I really like how the current nautilus looks from the side, and the overall proportions. I'd love to see Ford try to find plant capacity in N. America to build the edge here, keep the side metal stampings from the nautilus to save money, and because it looks really nice, and just redesign the front and rear clips with Ford special styling, maybe taking inspiration from the explorer or Mach-e to give it a slightly sportier, more assertive appearance. 

 

As for escape, this is where we differ. I know you want an escape with explorer like styling. Personally, considering how successful the mach-e has been, as one of the best selling non Tesla EVs in the states, I'd like to see that sort of sleek, sporty EV crossover, but riding on CE1 as a smaller, and more affordable vehicle than the mach-e. 

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I do blame them for how they did it though.  Failed partnerships, failed 3 row SUVs, not doing more hybrids and killing Edge and Escape and having to import nautilus and Corsair from China.

This is an example of the kind of sporty EV crossover I'd like to see the escape become. A radical departure from the blob it currently is, into a sleek, stylish, eye catching offering. The hood would probably need to be shorter than this Chinese ev to improve interior space, but you get the idea.

 

You could offer the bronco sport, including a hybrid model, with a off-road, rugged reputation and boxy styling. Then you could also offer an affordable EV crossover with softer, sleeker styling. Two highly differentiated products to cast a wide net.

Edited November 7 by DeluxeStang

[rmc523]

10 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

As for edge and escape, I believe killing those is a mistake. I've said for years there's a way to reimagine offerings in these segments that would make them more aspirational, and profitable, and how Ford should go that route instead of just walking away. 

 

Like for a new edge, maybe giving it a boxier, more rugged look. I really like how the current nautilus looks from the side, and the overall proportions. I'd love to see Ford try to find plant capacity in N. America to build the edge here, keep the side metal stampings from the nautilus to save money, and because it looks really nice, and just redesign the front and rear clips with Ford special styling, maybe taking inspiration from the explorer or Mach-e to give it a slightly sportier, more assertive appearance. 

 

As for escape, this is where we differ. I know you want an escape with explorer like styling. Personally, considering how successful the mach-e has been, as one of the best selling non Tesla EVs in the states, I'd like to see that sort of sleek, sporty EV crossover, but riding on CE1 as a smaller, and more affordable vehicle than the mach-e. 

 

So you want Ford/Lincoln to revert to badge engineering?

[DeluxeStang]

43 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

So you want Ford/Lincoln to revert to badge engineering?

Where it makes sense yes. I'll also add badge engineering is usually frowned upon when it's going from an affordable car to a luxury one. Going the other way, I see no reason why intelligent people would have an issue with that. 

 

Like what would they complain about lol? That the latest edge was too nice because it has a lot in common with a Lincoln?

[akirby]

3 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I see no reason why intelligent people would have an issue with that. 

First day on the internet? 😎

 

I agree the fastback profile would be good (that’s what Explorer has now).  

[DeluxeStang]

46 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

So you want Ford/Lincoln to revert to badge engineering?

I mean, what I'm proposing isn't super far off what Ford does with the expedition/navigator. The side metal is basically identical between the two, just with unique front and rear clips, and it literally prints ford money. 

 

The styling of the nautilus has been very well received, it's about the same size an edge would be if Ford kept it around, and using the same side metal castings would literally save tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars. 

 

The alternative would be to either walk away from the edge, or spend more money to come up with a design that will almost certainly be worse looking that what they already have. Why not just use what works? 

[Joe771476]

On 11/6/2025 at 6:20 AM, Sherminator98 said:

 

No one would ask for your option on anything, so you can forget that. 

You mean my opinion?  Anyway, I've sent suggestions into DOT's and municipalities regarding road safety issues and they've implemented all of them.

[akirby]

2 minutes ago, Joe771476 said:

You mean my opinion?  Anyway, I've sent suggestions into DOT's and municipalities regarding road safety issues and they've implemented all of them.

That has nothing to do with business decisions on EV products.  You see everything through your biased filter and ignore facts.

[Joe771476]

On 11/6/2025 at 6:34 AM, akirby said:

And if the pending government legislation requiring EVs had materialized you would have put Ford out of business.   Business decisions like this are not easy.

I knew the EV craze wouldn't last even if the tax credits were still in place. The quickest charge is 20 minutes. I can fill my gas tank in 5. These electric school bus mfrs. are closing leaving municipalities with no parts or repairs.  And if federal and state govts. can force mfrs. to make EV's and make consumers buy them, then we're on our way to socialism. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Where it makes sense yes. I'll also add badge engineering is usually frowned upon when it's going from an affordable car to a luxury one. Going the other way, I see no reason why intelligent people would have an issue with that. 

 

Like what would they complain about lol? That the latest edge was too nice because it has a lot in common with a Lincoln?

Your logic makes sense from a Ford buyer’s perspective but from the Lincoln buyer’s or owner’s not quite as much IMO.

[akirby]

10 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Your logic makes sense from a Ford buyer’s perspective but from the Lincoln buyer’s or owner’s not quite as much IMO.

What he described isn’t badge engineering though.  Aviator and Navigator and the previous Nautilus all shared side profiles and doors.  But everything else was different.

[akirby]

13 minutes ago, Joe771476 said:

I knew the EV craze wouldn't last even if the tax credits were still in place. The quickest charge is 20 minutes. I can fill my gas tank in 5. These electric school bus mfrs. are closing leaving municipalities with no parts or repairs.  And if federal and state govts. can force mfrs. to make EV's and make consumers buy them, then we're on our way to socialism. 

The laws to go 100% EV were in progress and could have easily passed whether they made sense or not.  And what you continually get wrong is that nobody wants EVs.  EV sales continue to increase and they’ll increase more as next gen batteries arrive with faster charge times and lower costs.