Demand for F150 Lightning so Great that Ford stops Taking Deposits

In a story that speaks to the future of mobility and bodes well for the company and Detroit, Ford has stopped taking waiting list deposits for its Dearborn-made all-electric Lightning F150 pickups. The current wait list now extends to 2023.

Similarly the Factory Zero's [the former 'Poletown' GM Plant] GMC Hummer EV SUV, whose first edition sold out in minutes, is fueling excitement for the future of locally produced vehicles.

I call this a nice problem to have.
https://freep-mi.newsmemory.com?publ...ed81d8_134602f

“We stopped at 200,000,” [Ford CEO] Farley told CNBC, explaining the art of “capacitizing.”

Ford plans to build 70,000 to 80,000 electric pickups initially, Farley said, “We're gonna to try to double that. ... Don't bet against Ford when we have to increase capacity. This is what we do.”

Official orders will begin getting booked in January. And delivery of the battery-operated vehicle is scheduled to begin in mid-2022.

Attachment 41856

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

In a story that speaks to the future of mobility and bodes well for the company and Detroit, Ford has stopped taking waiting list deposits for its Dearborn-made all-electric Lightning F150 pickups. The current wait list now extends to 2023.

Similarly the Factory Zero's [the former 'Poletown' GM Plant] GMC Hummer EV SUV, whose first edition sold out in minutes, is fueling excitement for the future of locally produced vehicles.

I call this a nice problem to have.
https://freep-mi.newsmemory.com?publ...ed81d8_134602f

“We stopped at 200,000,” [Ford CEO] Farley told CNBC, explaining the art of “capacitizing.”

Ford plans to build 70,000 to 80,000 electric pickups initially, Farley said, “We're gonna to try to double that. ... Don't bet against Ford when we have to increase capacity. This is what we do.”

Official orders will begin getting booked in January. And delivery of the battery-operated vehicle is scheduled to begin in mid-2022.

Attachment 41856

---

Sorry, but I can't help but be a bit disappointed that the "future of mobility" is everyone driving vehicles the size of tanks, even if they are all electric.

Um, yes and no. Sure there are some choosing these vehicles just for their size, not hauling much or using the bed often.

On the hand there are those who have businesses and interests that specifically choose and require large trucks and their pay-load capability. Personally, for a truck I'd go for one of the Toyota [Tundra or Tacoma) models [that hold their value owner to owner] but that's whole 'nother issue!

Drive what you want IMO, but drive safely!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Sorry, but I can't help but be a bit disappointed that the "future of mobility" is everyone driving vehicles the size of tanks, even if they are all electric.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Sorry, but I can't help but be a bit disappointed that the "future of mobility" is everyone driving vehicles the size of tanks, even if they are all electric.

---

At this point, it has kind of become a feedback loop.

At first, people [[those who don't use them for work) were buying them because they're easier to get in/out of and offer a bunch of space for seating, storage, shopping trips, road trips, etc.

Now, with so many people on the road
who own these trucks, everyone who was relunctant to buy them is now buying them because they would feel safer if one of those gigantic Silverados, Rams or F-150s crashes into them. Also, they're unable to see the blind spots those trucks hide in smaller/lower cars.

EDIT: But regardless of your feelings about these tanks, you have to also accept the gigantic margins that GM, Ford and Chrysler* can fetch for them is literally the only thing keeping them alive with much of their scale and market share having whittled away.

Not easy getting my plug-in hybrid Escape now either. Orders backing up everywhere, but nothing like this situation for the pickups. Are fleet orders driving a lot of this backlog? A friend of mine trying to get an electric Transit van for his business is running into that problem.

^ I had the chance to be driven in a new Ford Escape and was tripping to see the flat circular dial tranny 'gear' changer on the mid-panel! What's that like?

I've liked the Escapes, from seeing them, but we're terminally Toyota folks in my household [used mind you]. Don't want a car note!

less supply but more demand, looks like someone the Ford corps. didn't study their Keynesian Economics.

Wow, impressive for a car company that was according to trolls supposed to go bankrupt last year and merge with VW.

Also Ford stock is now the highest it's been since the 90's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacha341

^ I had the chance to be driven in a new Ford Escape and was tripping to see the flat circular dial tranny 'gear' changer on the mid-panel! What's that like?

I've liked the Escapes, from seeing them, but we're terminally Toyota folks in my household [used mind you]. Don't want a car note!

---

I don't know yet, because I haven't been able to get ahold of a hybrid Escape to experience the new-fangled transmission.

I'm from a Ford family on my mother's side [[my maternal grandfather worked there for 35 years) and a Chrysler family on my dad's side [[since Hudson Motor Car went belly up a few years back now). But Ford has usually won out with me over the years. I think my mother would roll over in her grave [[well, her urn) if I bought a Toyota.

Ford hit it big like that once before, in 1964 when demand exceeded supply.

Attachment 41858

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Ford hit it big like that once before, in 1964 when demand exceeded supply.

Attachment 41858

---

My dad bought a 1964 1/2. Three or four years later, he got caught in a flash flood in a tunnel in Montreal and the car had to be cleaned out. My mom complained that it still smelled funny. My dad replaced it with a Javelin. That didn’t end well either. Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacha341

Um, yes and no. Sure there are some choosing these vehicles just for their size, not hauling much or using the bed often.

On the hand there are those who have businesses and interests that specifically choose and require large trucks and their pay-load capability. Personally, for a truck I'd go for one of the Toyota [Tundra or Tacoma) models [that hold their value owner to owner] but that's whole 'nother issue!

Drive what you want IMO, but drive safely!

---

I agree with drive what you want, but I think it's silly for people to own a huge pickup for the once a year or once every two years they need the carrying or towing capacity. The couple of times I've needed to haul a bunch of stuff, I've been able to borrow an Explorer from a neighbor or friend for a few hours to get the job done. If necessary, I would rent one for a day.

All that said, when I was working for Ford Credit I would nod in the direction of Crown Vics, Grand Marquis, Town Cars, and pickups in the lot and say, "Thanks for the tiny addition to my profit-sharing/bonus check."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don K

I agree with drive what you want, but I think it's silly for people to own a huge pickup for the once a year or once every two years they need the carrying or towing capacity. The couple of times I've needed to haul a bunch of stuff, I've been able to borrow an Explorer from a neighbor or friend for a few hours to get the job done. If necessary, I would rent one for a day.

All that said, when I was working for Ford Credit I would nod in the direction of Crown Vics, Grand Marquis, Town Cars, and pickups in the lot and say, "Thanks for the tiny addition to my profit-sharing/bonus check."

---

Larger vehicles are also much more dangerous to pedestrians and other drives. Plus they encourage larger roads, parking spots, etc. which also makes pedestrians less safe. So drive what you want, but there should be some push to control the size of vehicles and encourage small sizes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonWylie

Larger vehicles are also much more dangerous to pedestrians and other drives. Plus they encourage larger roads, parking spots, etc. which also makes pedestrians less safe. So drive what you want, but there should be some push to control the size of vehicles and encourage small sizes

---

Pedestrians would be a lot safer if they didn't stare into their phones like small children in front of TV sets and walk out into traffic on red lights.

Sounds like for you a truck is not optimum. Each case varies. There will always be the conspicuous consumer in a free commerce society.

I prefer that over some anointed/ appointed authoritarian bureaucrat or politician's pushing policy on who drives what [as they lavishly drive/ fly where they want]. Hah!

Shopped for a used car recently - trying to go back to smaller, I quickly learned that now having knee issues, I couldn't get in and out of those comfortably. I guess I could consider more spacious mass transit.

Nope. I stayed with a larger, taller, four-door sedan option. Maybe someone should have measured my ability to get in an out of the tiny sub-compact with a stop watch. LOL!

There's even talk out there about how much housing square feet one person alone should be allotted for the sake of _______ [fill in the blank].

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don K

I agree with drive what you want, but I think it's silly for people to own a huge pickup for the once a year or once every two years they need the carrying or towing capacity. The couple of times I've needed to haul a bunch of stuff, I've been able to borrow an Explorer from a neighbor or friend for a few hours to get the job done. If necessary, I would rent one for a day...

---

What are you greenies going to do when this becomes a Attachment 41896reality?

^^ First off, a hydro executive is not exactly impartial.

Second, someone who owns an 'average home' with a 100A service will most likely not be buying an $80K truck. New homes generally have at least a 200A service and 400A is becoming more common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meddle

^^ First off, a hydro executive is not exactly impartial.

Second, someone who owns an 'average home' with a 100A service will most likely not be buying an $80K truck. New homes generally have at least a 200A service and 400A is becoming more common.

---

How does that help the fact our infrastructure will not be able to handle the load especially if we keep shutting down coal and becoming reliant on wind and solar? It doesn’t much matter what your service is if the grid fails!

You posted a screenshot of a TikTok that came from a debunked article from five years ago. Of course, the domain for the original article no longer exists, but someone in this forum went line by line covering the full and very obviously made up story. It even included data points from another old, debunked 2013 article about the cost of owning a Chevy Volt.

Now, I'm sure you'll say that this is biased, but a few key points stood out:

It is incorrect to say a Tesla ‘requires’ a 75 amp service… it is accurate to say it is ‘capable’ of such amperage for ‘fast charge’ it can slowly charge on slower amps such as a regular 110 outlet that usually puts out 15-20 amps [[found every few feet in a house) or a dryer type of outlet that can usually put out 20-50 amps. I know..I do so with my electric Nissan Leaf every day on a 110 outlet...75 amp is for the rapid charge/quick charge special sites that can handle such a load and is never done at home charging locations...As such This observation that 75 amp service is ‘required’ to charge your vehicle at home is invalid

And:

My 145 year old house is 100 amps… but I just use less than 12 amps off of a regular 110 outlet to charge my car… the same outlet you use for a hair dryer or refrigerator etc.etc.

We all use that much with 110 outlets regularly [[your refrig.. A hair dryer..etc) As such it would NOT overload your home or the neighborhood grid. And most people charge at night while sleeping when the car is not in use and the electrical grid is not being taxed as much



And if I may speculate on the future of energy, once costs reach a certain point, most people will demand whatever will drive those costs down; more coal, gas, nuclear [[hopefully) or cow farts. Simple supply and demand, no matter what politicians say in campaign speeches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheels

How does that help the fact our infrastructure will not be able to handle the load ...

---

The infrastructure can handle the load. Even out here in the boonies, our grid has been rebuilt several times over the last 20 years, in part due to massive storms that destroyed miles of lines and poles. Other improvements are continually being made as industries move around and new subdivisions are built.

The bigger issue is the recent storms in VA that stranded so many vehicles. The cars that ran out of gas were simply able to be refueled and sent on their way. An EV stuck for hours that runs out of charge will have to be towed.

Touché

Ford has stopped taking reservations for the all-electric F-150 Lightning as it prepares to start making and shipping the new pickup truck in the first half of 2022. The company says it has collected 200,000 refundable $100 deposits for the Lightning since it debuted in May.

Ford hasn’t said how many it plans to build in 2022, but Automotive Newsreports that the automaker is looking to build as many as 80,000 in 2023. The company has publicly said it wants to build that many in 2024 after originally targeting just 40,000 annually and has been hiring new workers to handle the demand.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/9/2...ed%20in%20May.

So did they stop taking deposits because of demand or because they do not even know if they can produce them yet or how many out of speculation?

They did the same thing Tesla and others did,take deposits for something they have not produced yet.

When they do gear up there are other companies out there with the same target release date,so who knows how many will get their $100 back and go another route.

The other elephant in the room is they were told that if they geared up for EV production,current proposed emission requirement restrictions would be delayed.

Once they all jumped in the EV bandwagon publicly,the emission delay was pulled back,so on top of gearing up to produce this truck,they are going to have to come up with billions more in meeting current emission standards that they had not counted on.

So do they have those extra resources to allocate to the EV side and how does it stack up against the other EV manufacturers coming online at the same time with a blank slate.

They say a range of 230 miles,but other reports out there say if you run the heater or A/C it severely reduces the range,so what is the real world range?

Current new trucks are selling way over MSRP and most likely will be doing so for the next couple of years,so even if you could take delivery in 2022 at the $40,000 you could flip that truck for $60,000 comparatively,without even taking delivery.

Or unless there is a no transfer clause in the deposit,you could most likely flip that build spot for in the $5000 range if not more.

So did they stop because of demand or did they stop because they realized at this time they were shooting themselves in the foot by offering them at the $40,000?

How much of that was based on price speculation verses actually interested in wanting one,with a refundable deposit what does one have to lose,I should have ordered 100,good way to park a small amount of cash for a massive return with zero risk.

There are boat manufacturers that sell build spots for $50,000,that is what you pay just to get in line,if you are close to the front of the line,you can sell that build slot for $100,000 and walk away.

There are more flipping build slots then actually buying the boats.

Remember the PT cruiser,same thing happened,people were paying $15,000 above MSRP before they were even delivered just to be first to have one.

The $40,000 offering was like a Realtor listing a house under value just to drive interest and selling for double at the sale date,are they really going to want to sell an EV truck for $40,000 when their other models are still selling for up to $80,000 with higher profit margins?

They are a business after all,I guess they can always offer the truck and delay launch for a few years by saying production delays because of a chip which brings up demand and then all they have to do is tell 200,000 sorry,here’s your $100 back,and it has cost them nothing in the process while looking good by saying,yes we are good people trying to save the planet while getting millions in free publicity.

It was more about gambling with the government then an actual EV truck,the tighter emission standards will now drive up current costs of production while trying to meet those demands,if they can only produce 40,000 EV Trucks verse 200,000 ICE the immediate money is on the 200,000 - the shareholders are not going to take that hit today in order to save the planet tomorrow,it is all about profitable 1/4s.

If they launch that EV truck 2 or 3 years from now,the competition will not matter,if people want a Ford truck,they are going to buy a Ford truck,EV or not.

We do not know the real basis of the demand,a car rental agency could have order 50,000 or a large fleet could have ordered 100,000,it could have been 4 companies that placed an order that totaled 200,000 trucks for future purchase.

They did not specify individual demand,they just said demand.

The way it looks now,98% of the buying public is not really interested in saving the planet,they just want to make it look like they are,so outside of forced switch,what demand is there really for EVs outside of the commercial last mile delivery,or large fleets looking at cost reductions.

Our local electric company just spent $350 million to build a emission free solar plant that they say can power up to 80,000 homes at current demand,for 2 hours.

Its going to be years and trillions of dollars before anybody can build the infrastructure to handle that demand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EGrant

You posted a screenshot of a TikTok that came from a debunked article from five years ago. Of course, the domain for the original article no longer exists, but someone in this forum went line by line covering the full and very obviously made up story. It even included data points from another old, debunked 2013 article about the cost of owning a Chevy Volt.

Now, I'm sure you'll say that this is biased, but a few key points stood out:

It is incorrect to say a Tesla ‘requires’ a 75 amp service… it is accurate to say it is ‘capable’ of such amperage for ‘fast charge’ it can slowly charge on slower amps such as a regular 110 outlet that usually puts out 15-20 amps [[found every few feet in a house) or a dryer type of outlet that can usually put out 20-50 amps. I know..I do so with my electric Nissan Leaf every day on a 110 outlet...75 amp is for the rapid charge/quick charge special sites that can handle such a load and is never done at home charging locations...As such This observation that 75 amp service is ‘required’ to charge your vehicle at home is invalid

And:

My 145 year old house is 100 amps… but I just use less than 12 amps off of a regular 110 outlet to charge my car… the same outlet you use for a hair dryer or refrigerator etc.etc.

We all use that much with 110 outlets regularly [[your refrig.. A hair dryer..etc) As such it would NOT overload your home or the neighborhood grid. And most people charge at night while sleeping when the car is not in use and the electrical grid is not being taxed as much



And if I may speculate on the future of energy, once costs reach a certain point, most people will demand whatever will drive those costs down; more coal, gas, nuclear [[hopefully) or cow farts. Simple supply and demand, no matter what politicians say in campaign speeches.

---

Nice try but you know as well as I that EVERYONE will be on fast charge.
There will be brown outs and times your not allowed to charge!

The things that would prevent me from going electric at the moment are range and charge time. But both of those are rapidly being solved. Take this news item from yesterday of a Michigan battery start up company.

Tesla Model S Goes 752 Miles with a Prototype Battery from a Michigan Startup
This 'proof of concept' was meant to show that very long-range, environmentally sustainable battery packs can exist—and ONE, Inc., is about to start building one

The car went from Detroit across the Mackinac Bridge and back on one charge.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...r-next-energy/

I think this is just the start of things as technologies for extending electric power systems do not face the same challenges as extending ranges of fossil fuel systems. A situation similar to solar panels is emerging where cost of the panel is diving and while output from the panels is soaring.

On the financial side of things my advice is to position ones' portfolios into electric power generation companies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EGrant

And if I may speculate on the future of energy, once costs reach a certain point, most people will demand whatever will drive those costs down; more coal, gas, nuclear [[hopefully) or cow farts. Simple supply and demand, no matter what politicians say in campaign speeches.

---

I'm betting my money on cow farts.