But that is the reason whether you agree with it or not.  You have new models to build so you either have to expand and build a new factory or free up an existing one.  Ford chose to build one new plant but decided it was too expensive to build 2 more so they killed edge and nautilus to build the 3 rows and killed escape to build ce1.  It's corporate finance 101.  I'm sure edge and escape were profitable but at very low margins so they were the easiest to get rid of.  Without the EVs they would not have killed them.

I agree that public charging is key but I don't expect huge numbers at first - maybe 50k-75k for the truck, a little more for the CUV.  They can ramp up slowly and will eventually have 4 models in the plant.  More people will put up with less than ideal public charging on a $25k ev than a $45k EV.  

Two different things I can come up with-   The Edge went away because sales were dropping towards the end of its life and other new products like the Bronco and Mach E would occupy its price range, while not being an exact replacement.    The Escape “died” (at least in North America) so they could build the CE1 products in the plant and the Bronco Sport/Maverick hopefully fixed the pricing/profitably issues C1 was experiencing.    The CE1 is hard reboot of the building process of small vehicles. Hopefully lower prices will make EVs more desirable for buyers.    I’m also going to assume that some sort of ICE/hybrid product is coming in the next 24-36 months that will slot into the Escape/Edge market because the situation has changed. 

I think we’ll agree to disagree on whether demand is suspect. We are going to start getting a better understanding of actual US demand starting this year, which won’t be propped up by government incentives.   I didn’t mention anything about a sedan, as I was referring more to the loss of the Edge and Escape, which is the heart of the passenger vehicle market. It just blows my mind that Ford has such few vehicles to compete with.     Ford is really good at building a compelling vehicle, and then chopping it off at the knees, claiming that it isn’t selling well or isn’t profitable. I’m just tired of it.   I’m a truck buyer, so it doesn’t directly impact me however, I’m trying to keep other members of my family in Ford vehicles, but Ford has increasingly made this difficult.  I was going to try to put my mom into a Lincoln Corsair when she replaces her Cadillac, but I’m not going to now. I don’t buy dead man walking vehicles.   Ironically, my wife just asked me tonight if they stopped making the Escape and why they did that, which I have no answer for.  She is not a car person, but she was taken aback by that.  She won’t be the only one. I’ve read a couple stories about customers saying Ford left them, versus the customers leaving Ford, and it’s true.  I just find this strategy so weird.     You don’t need to provide your typical rebuttal about dropping X vehicle to build Y vehicle, I understand your position, though I don’t agree with it. I just think as of late, Ford is afraid to actually compete and find solutions when things get challenging, particularly under the current leadership.  IMO they fold like a house of cards. it isn’t a good look.     BTW, your statement” Lower prices always bring more volume,” sounds like a commodity product😉    

The very people that would likely be high on the target list for these new EVs are the people least likely have access to consistent charging and will likely be reliant on public charging.  This is a concern of mine, considering there has been virtually no change to the public charging infrastructure in my area since I stopped using the Mach E.  This is clearly an anecdotal observation, but I am skeptical there has been substantial improvement around the country.  Public charging was a requirement for me to use the Mach E and it was far from ideal.  The low price will make them more appealing, but I am still not sure how good the take rate is going to be.  One thing Tesla has going for it, aside from its EV legitimacy, is that it has been viewed as a pseudo luxury brand, which I think is helpful for sales.  I don’t think Ford gets that same consideration. 

I think you will need pass through to maximize the utility of these small trucks. 

I'd say this is one of those situations where we're both right. I agree that the desire to own EVs, especially amongst younger consumers, is there, but that high prices are gatekeeping those buyers from getting into new EVs, we agree on that. It's just that most consumers who have the level of income and assets needed to afford these massive, expensive EVs, tend to be on the older side.   In terms of tech perception, a significant portion of older consumers just don't like EVs, it's too different from what they know, they're often skeptical of new technology and adopting it unless they have to. Generally speaking, a lot of people as they age kinda settle into things, they don't want to have to relearn, and adapt to something drastically different than what they already know, unless it's absolutely necessary. A 70 yr old doesn't want to be stuck at a charging station in the middle of winter at night trouble shooting a sketchy charger when filling up for gas is something they've done for decades and can do effortlessly.   This doesn't apply to everyone, there are wealthy young people and tech savvy old people, but just as a general rule that's what I've observed. Again, it's a case of both of us being right, EV adoption is struggling because the people who want EVs, often younger, can't afford most of the ones on sale, and the people who can afford them are skeptical of the tech and don't want to embrace it. CE1 shifts towards EVs that will actually have demand.

As you know, there’s a lot of difference between the production of prototypes and the quality required for at speed main line production. Ford needs to spend enough time getting this right and not just sign off.   There is good reason to be optimistic but the process is just so different, none of this would be possible without gigacasting modules.

No but it's a hell of a lot further along than a theory on a powerpoint.  First, if their ideas had not proven achievable they would never have announced the skunkworks project at all.     Nobody is saying it's a sure thing and there will be challenges but factory workers have seen details close up and that tells me they're far enough along that it will come to fruition and meet most of the goals.

2 separate things.  Buyers either want or are willing to live with EV limitations or not.  For the ones willing to purchase an EV they might not be able to afford what they want or what they want might not be available yet.   Look at large suv monthly sales and compare it to small cars and suvs.  Out of 100 potential buyers almost all could afford a small car but only 10% could afford a new Expedition.   As price goes up you lose potential buyers.  That's why having a lower priced EV that can be sold at a decent profit is so attractive.  That's where the biggest volume is.  The challenge in the past was it was difficult to compete in that space and make healthy margins.  That's where ce1 has the potential to be a game changer.