Around mid 2022, reviews of towing tests revealed that Lightning’s range dropped to 100 miles  the appeal for Lightning seemed to flat line overnight as a whole bunch of interested buyers suddenly realised that Lightning wouldn’t do what they were expecting, regularly towing something.   Unlike selling a BEV Utility, many truck buyers see the above as a fatal flaw with owning a BEV pickup, so I wonder how many buyers are going to be pissed all over again when Ford brings out its midsized  BEV pickup with a proportionately smaller battery.   This may also be a double whammy for Ford if existing Lightning buyers decide to downsize to the newer smaller BEV pickup, so is Ford about to trade one set of sales numbers for another?   This is where a corporate like Ford runs into real trouble, rational thinking and deciding that buyers only need a limited battery can be a fatal flaw, particularly if the competition offers more. So I’m betting there will be an optional long range battery that may become the default for many buyers and there goes the impressive, low price…

Read the posts above……

If you were paying attention you’d see that what they’re doing has not been done by Tesla.

He means currently and he’s already working on the solution.  It would be different if he just said oh well we can’t do it.

This isn't how I see it. Openly saying our rivals have advantages over us in certain areas, we need to do better, isn't shitting on your company, it's wanting your company to be the best it can be. The Chinese brands are objectively the best brands at the moment when it comes to EVs, specifically affordable EVs, it's not even up for debate.    But he's doing something about it. It would be one thing if he was just saying "Yeah we suck, oh well, nothing we can do about it" that would piss me off. But what he's actually saying is "Our competition has an advantage here, here, and here, here's the changes we're making as a company to close that gap". He's identifying the problem, and making decisions to rectify in. 

You can show your adversaries respect without taking a shit on your own company and thus your employees.  Farley has done this multiple times.  If Ford is “no match” for the Chinese, he should step down since he has been in charge for five years.  

As Farley told us in that video a while back and I pointed out that he was basically saying they're going to copy Tesla's approach, they are doing it exactly how Tesla does it. Not saying it's a bad thing or that it's wrong to lift some things from someone that is doing it better than you (and open sources it so you can), but calling it a revolutionary or risky or brand new/untried is absurd.

I believe prices have import tariffs.  Models like the Mirage-sized Seagull is probably considered too small by 21st century US standards though. Not sure if Ford would go this route in North America, but it would make sense everywhere else around the world.   The popular Atto 3 on the other hand is BYD's BEV crossover that's roughly the same size as a Corolla Cross; in Australia it costs about as much as a Corolla Cross hybrid. Converted to USD, the Atto 3 prices in Australia ranges from US$26,380 to US$29,695.

Americans don’t want tiny cars.  The only reason they sell (in any volume) is if they’re dirt cheap like the Nissan Versa.  But there is little to no profit in such a vehicle so why devote factory space and resources to that if you can build and sell larger vehicles that people want to buy.

It is not only about price and Chinese government subsidies. There are also valid security concerns with the Chinese software embedded in these internet connected vehicles. There are legitimate concerns of per-positioned malware in Chinese products. Solar panels in Japan are currently being investigated for this same issue.