Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base • Hacker News Board

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#71

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:22 AM UTC

lopis wrote: post #39

echelon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in cities decided they wanted less car-centric infrastructure. People in cities demanded EVs, yet didn't show up to keep buying them. People in cities apparently know best what car companies should build, yet they don't buy the cars. Car companies build for suburbanites. Suburbanites buy cars.

> People in cities demanded EVs, yet didn't show up to keep buying them. That's only natural, because two kinds of people want EVs in cities (with some overlap). The first kind wants less noise, less pollution and fewer gas stations inside the city - they want other people to buy EVs, but don't want a car themselves. The second wants to own an EV because it's green and efficient.

> The second wants to own an EV because it's green and efficient

For suburbanites with off-street parking, overnight charging and few road-trips or long distance commutes, an EV is these days simply more convenient to operate, and has cheaper total cost of ownership.

For many people, the case for an EV is simply pragmatic - better convenience and cost.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#72

Post by Atheros » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:24 AM UTC

thinking_cactus wrote: post #23

magic_hamster wrote: post #10

A few points worth contending. First, personal flying vehicles are definitely not going to be a common mode of transportation. If and when this happens, it will be for ultra rich, select few people, effectively replacing a private helicopter. We don't have the infrastructure, regulation or technology to have millions of people buzzing around in their astro-ford like the fifth element - this is still very much science…

> First, personal flying vehicles are definitely not going to be a common mode of transportation. If and when this happens, it will be for ultra rich, select few people, effectively replacing a private helicopter. I wonder what it would be like for most cars to be replaced with flying cars (i.e. helicopters). I think the noise alone would be a huge issue. Helicopters can be heard from extremely far away and are quite…

Cities were originally built around walking. Later they expanded a little bit with horses. After that they were rebuilt for cars. They will be rebuilt again when transportation technology changes, at least for those that can afford it.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#73

Post by Atheros » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:28 AM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #28

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't have the infrastructure, regulation or technology to have millions of people buzzing around in their astro-ford like the fifth element - this is still very much science fiction. If by flying cars you mean flying robotaxies, then all you need are landing pads. They can be easily accomodated on top of buildings. And regulation for what? We already know how to fky helicopters by autopilot, no need for innovat…

If they are supposed to replace cars we'd need so many of these landing pads. No idea how this is supposed to work. I'm the suburbs it's unclear where you'd put them. Where do I walk to fly this to Costco? Does it land on the Costco warehouse next to an entire line of these arriving instead of cars today? In proper downtown areas I suspect even if you'd cover every rooftop in these it wouldn't be enough capacity

Airtaxis can't retrofit suburbs just like cars can't retrofit 1850s cities. Imagine a city built around airtaxis and delivery drones. I think it is doable which means that they'll do it.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#74

Post by dns_snek » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:31 AM UTC

pmontra wrote: post #69

magicalhippo wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Oslo, Norway they've also been ripping up roads to make bike lanes, make streets one-way to accommodate the bike lane and so on. And yeah, initially not a lot of bikers. But it's been a few years, and in the meantime good e-bikes are affordable for most here now, so these days there's quite a lot of bike riders all over. Of course when the snow and ice sets in there are fewer, though a fair few carry on with…

However I can see my 80 yo self driving a car (I know plenty of them that still drive) but I can't see my 80 yo self riding a bicycle in winter, especially on snow. I know some 80 yo cyclist but not many of them. So there must be some balance. In cities the balance often takes into account metro, buses and trains. In the countryside it's almost only cars.

Of course it's different in the countryside but we're talking about cities, that's where these changes are taking place, and most 80 year olds shouldn't be driving cars in cities or riding bicycles in the winter. They should have heavily subsidized or free public transport available.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#75

Post by dns_snek » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:37 AM UTC

jjav wrote: post #66

imtringued wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Only North Americans are crazy enough to believe that a red light should mean go. >The bike lanes are gender and age inequitable, How? Everyone can ride a bicycle, even kids and seniors, meanwhile cars are locked behind expensive driving lessons, licenses and exams. Not to mention car ownership is inherently expensive due to fuel, m…

> Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Obviously not since it is so widely adopted. Right on red is an extremely useful optimization so you don't sit waiting for nothing when it is clearly safe to turn.

If you want to optimize traffic throughput you can replace numerous intersections with roundabouts. Then everyone can go when it's "clearly safe to go", not just those who are turning right. An optimization that sacrifices the lives of cyclists and pedestrians is not acceptable.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#76

Post by danaris » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:43 AM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #35

usernametaken29 wrote: post #20

If your theory is true we might see an era where supply vastly exceeds demand and car manufacturers will need to offset brand new vehicles to keep cash flow going. Sounds great to me, sign me up for 20$k brand new Ford when the time’s ready.

> If your theory is true we might see an era where supply vastly exceeds demand and car manufacturers will need to offset brand new vehicles to keep cash flow going. Sounds great to me, sign me up for 20$k brand new Ford when the time’s ready. The car manufacturers could have staved this off - they keep developing new models with little to no marginal improvement. Once we got seatbelts, airbags and similar in cars, t…

You must be unaware of all the recent safety improvements in cars: things like anti-lock brakes, collision avoidance, and traction control have saved countless lives, and they're being improved on even today.

"The things cars had in them when I was first driving are all they should ever need; everything else is frivolous, planned obsolescence, or fashion" is a very tempting position to hold, but it doesn't actually hold up to reality.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#77

Post by lelanthran » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 8:59 AM UTC

danaris wrote: post #76

lelanthran wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your theory is true we might see an era where supply vastly exceeds demand and car manufacturers will need to offset brand new vehicles to keep cash flow going. Sounds great to me, sign me up for 20$k brand new Ford when the time’s ready. The car manufacturers could have staved this off - they keep developing new models with little to no marginal improvement. Once we got seatbelts, airbags and similar in cars, t…

You must be unaware of all the recent safety improvements in cars: things like anti-lock brakes, collision avoidance, and traction control have saved countless lives, and they're being improved on even today. "The things cars had in them when I was first driving are all they should ever need; everything else is frivolous, planned obsolescence, or fashion" is a very tempting position to hold, but it doesn't actually h…

> You must be unaware of all the recent safety improvements in cars: things like anti-lock brakes, collision avoidance, and traction control have saved countless lives, and they're being improved on even today.

First, those are almost all in the 2010 Toyota that I used as an example. Other than those things (which are in the 2010 model), what did the post-2010 models bring?

Second, none of those require an entire new model to be designed that shares no parts with the previous model.

> "The things cars had in them when I was first driving are all they should ever need; everything else is frivolous, planned obsolescence, or fashion" is a very tempting position to hold, but it doesn't actually hold up to reality.

Please go back and re-read my post - I was not comparing cars from 1990 (when I first started driving). You are doing that comparison, and it's a strawman.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#78

Post by reverius42 » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 9:08 AM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #56

reverius42 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of 2010 Toyotas still out there, running great, if you want one. The market has instead demanded more different-looking cars (for variety), and generally larger vehicles with a higher riding position, not to mention newer creature comforts like air conditioned seats, and safety features like beeping at you when a car is in your blind spot and you try to change lanes. The evidence that this is what th…

> There are plenty of 2010 Toyotas still out there, running great, if you want one. That's not my point. My point is that the billions poured into designing the three new generations of Toyota since 2010 did not have to be spent by Toyota. But they did spend it, to design new cars, with little to no actual improvements, and so they have had to price their new cars appropriately, to recoup the cost. What would a brand…

My point isn't that you, personally, don't want to buy a used 2010 Toyota. My point is that everyone, collectively, doesn't want to buy a used 2010 Toyota -- and Toyota has correctly deduced that they also don't want to buy a new 2010 Toyota in 2026.

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#79

Post by magicalhippo » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 9:52 AM UTC

dns_snek wrote: post #74

pmontra wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However I can see my 80 yo self driving a car (I know plenty of them that still drive) but I can't see my 80 yo self riding a bicycle in winter, especially on snow. I know some 80 yo cyclist but not many of them. So there must be some balance. In cities the balance often takes into account metro, buses and trains. In the countryside it's almost only cars.

Of course it's different in the countryside but we're talking about cities, that's where these changes are taking place, and most 80 year olds shouldn't be driving cars in cities or riding bicycles in the winter. They should have heavily subsidized or free public transport available.

Yeah my 80 year old mom uses the "pink busses"[1], basically a multi-passenger taxi where she books a trip in advance and they go from A to B, but also the other's trips. So takes a bit longer but it doesn't cost more than a regular bus.

[1]: https://ruter.no/planlegg-reise/aldersvennlig-transport

Re: Some car companies are operating without regard for a declining customer base

#80

Post by lelanthran » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 10:19 AM UTC

reverius42 wrote: post #78

lelanthran wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are plenty of 2010 Toyotas still out there, running great, if you want one. That's not my point. My point is that the billions poured into designing the three new generations of Toyota since 2010 did not have to be spent by Toyota. But they did spend it, to design new cars, with little to no actual improvements, and so they have had to price their new cars appropriately, to recoup the cost. What would a brand…

My point isn't that you, personally, don't want to buy a used 2010 Toyota. My point is that everyone, collectively, doesn't want to buy a used 2010 Toyota -- and Toyota has correctly deduced that they also don't want to buy a new 2010 Toyota in 2026.

> and Toyota has correctly deduced that they also don't want to buy a new 2010 Toyota in 2026.

We cannot tell that for sure, because that 2010 model is not being sold new anymore.

I'm working off the assumption that the billions in dollars spent on developing the new generations are reflected in the price of the new generations.

Maybe I'm wrong, and the $40k on a new Toyota comprises only $1k to recoup the development cost, but I'm pretty certain that a market exists for a 2010 model Toyota sold new in 2026 for a lot less than the current-gen.

China has done this with their Haval brand. The new model is manufacturer and sold concurrently with the model it is replacing, and the price difference is significant.