Word to the wise- I think I would stay out of that bar.   Many of Ford's competitors were also sourcing aluminum sheet out of that plant.

I think the problem was moving to the C1 platform for the Escape in 2013. The Escape had some major issues packaging wise with trims and profitability...I'm not sure if that is because of its EU roots as the Kuga and the market being different there...but I'll use this example-Parents bought Escape Platinum in 2013-it didn't have some options like the sun roof and other things on it, so it was lower price point for that model. My wife bought a 2017 XLT Escape that was I'd say 5-7K cheaper, if not more then the 2013 Platinum and it actually had more options on it then the Platinum did, like dual front power seats (the Platinum at the time only had drivers side). Then add in the discontenting towards the end with the simplified tail lights and other things to save money. Not sure how much the 2020 Escape redesign fixed the profitability part of things, but it appears it at least got the packaging issues fixed. But it had other issues that the automotive press wasn't fans of, but yet its platform mates, the Maverick and Bronco Sport had similar lower end trimmings in its interior for example and they where praised for it.    I still think this whole Nissan thing is a bunch of hot air. 

Predatory trade practices. Any country with a domestic auto industry will lose those companies if they allow BYD cars to be imported absent steep tariffs. 

Yep, this thing got beat with the ugly stick. 

Many of my Ford enthusiast buddies at the local bar think it's sabotage by competitors. Conspiracy theory?  Maybe.

China owns all the mines -- and not just lithium -- so as the Borg in Star Trek used to say, resistance is futile!

Tesla, Rivian and Lucid need to build compelling products that stand on their own instead of relying on financial engineering. Federal subsidies and carbon credit schemes distort the free market.

A 30% battery price difference is huge, and obviously more important in total dollars when buying an 80 kWh vehicle instead of one like 40 kWh that Ford Authority keeps picturing in BYD Seagull.  However, as a percent of vehicle MSRP there may not be much difference between BEV sizes.   Anyway, if LFP batteries have indeed fallen to $100/kWh or less price range already, a 40 kWh battery pack should cost no more than around $4,000 at cell level, so a 30% reduction in Chinese advantage would be in order of $1,000 or so.  That hardly explains the vast difference between Chinese and other manufacturers’ vehicle costs.  At 80 kWh their savings could be over $2k per vehicle, which is no doubt significant but not all that remarkable in context of entire vehicle and its price.   Just saying that if battery cells are actually costing less than $100/kWh, their influence on total vehicle costs may be overstated a bit.  My 2 cents.

Rather than start new thread due to limited scope, I’ll reply to your post above because it seems appropriate even though dated.   Tesla just announced new cheaper Model 3 and Y to help offset loss of $7,500 tax credit at end of September.  Prices for the significantly decontented 3 and Y are roughly in ball park of $5k lower.  I personally don’t see this move making a huge difference in total sales but it will be hard to know unless Tesla shares individual model data.  It seems they removed pretty much any feature that was easy to delete even if it only saves a few dollars each.  Lower battery capacity is a given, as is reduced range, though still better than previous standard versions.   I happen to agree that this approach won’t be as effective as an all-new smaller Tesla that was to share manufacturing line capacity.   https://electrek.co/2025/10/08/tesla-doesnt-want-to-sell-its-new-cheaper-model-y-heres-why/    

Terrifying how aggressively BEVs are being marketed in places outside the US, China is using Europe’s own CO2 legislation against domestic euro brands to basically kill them off in the next decade.