When China’s BYD recently overtook Elon Musk’s Tesla as the global leader in sales of electric vehicles, casual observers of the auto industry might have been surprised.

But what’s caught other carmakers around the world off-guard is something else about BYD, which is backed by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway: its low prices.

“No one can match BYD on price. Period,” Michael Dunne, CEO of Asia-focused car consultancy Dunne Insights, told the Financial Times. “Boardrooms in America, Europe, Korea and Japan are in a state of shock.”

BYD can keeps its costs low in part because it owns the entire supply chain of its EV batteries, from the raw materials to the finished battery packs. That matters because a battery accounts for about 40% of a new electric vehicle’s price.

  • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
    163·
    2 years ago

    Are these even street legal in the US? Our safety standards are obscene. Air bags alone cost 5k.

    It’s why Tata never released a vehicle here.

    • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      356·
      2 years ago

      Another example of America costing loads of money for little to know benefit.

      • thechadwick@lemmy.worldEnglish
        361·
        2 years ago

        Yeah! Airbags suck! Wait, what?

        Clown take if I’ve ever seen one lol

        • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
          81·
          2 years ago

          But America bad! If America has airbags then airbags bad, too.

        • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          323·
          2 years ago

          No not the airbags, the safety standards being “obscene”, cost prohibitive and not yield good results.

          So if American standards are preventing additional competition it should be because they have a very high standard which should bare out in terms of road and pedestrian deaths and injuries. It does not. Therefore the “obscene” standards are another example of poor results to cost.

          • ieatpillowtags@lemm.eeEnglish
            7·
            2 years ago

            What a silly thing to say. On what basis have you decided they don’t yield good results?

              • ieatpillowtags@lemm.eeEnglish
                4·
                2 years ago

                Not really conclusive as there have been increases in speeding and drunk driving that cause total accident numbers to go up. A more relevant stat would be fatality or injury rates per accident.

                • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  44·
                  2 years ago

                  You’ve changed your tune from it being silly to needing more granular data.

                  Pedestrian deaths are on the rise and decent safety regulations could impact speeding and drunk driving.

                  • ieatpillowtags@lemm.eeEnglish
                    41·
                    2 years ago

                    I said you were silly because it was more polite than calling you stupid, and in neither case is it referring to the issue of traffic deaths.

                    And now you’ve changed your tune talking about pedestrians which has nothing to do with the topic.

                  • Tattorack@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    22·
                    2 years ago

                    That’s called “moving the goalpost” fallacy. :D

              • ThisIsNotHim@sopuli.xyzEnglish
                3·
                2 years ago

                Per capita probably isn’t a good way to measure this.

                Car deaths should probably be by miles driven.

              • kofe@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                2 years ago

                Jesus what is going on in Russia

          • Shard@lemmy.worldEnglish
            62·
            2 years ago

            Sounds like what the Oceangate CEO said about industry safety requirements for submersibles.

            • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
              34·
              2 years ago

              I’m saying they’re not fit for purpose, America has a shit ton of road and pedestrian deaths. The safety regulations don’t do enough.

      • ByteWizard@lemm.eeBannedEnglish
        15·
        2 years ago

        Also why all the new cars suck.

        • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          28·
          2 years ago

          New cars suck because planned obscelensce has been catered to by regulations and industry.

          Safety standards are not bad, they just don’t have decent standards in America.

          • ByteWizard@lemm.eeBannedEnglish
            24·
            2 years ago

            If you want people to buy new cars every year wouldn’t you make the new cars look different? More exiting or whatever? We used to have awesome fins on the back of cars now we just get a shiny grill. “planned obscelensce” doesn’t force them to make cars that all look the same. That’s safety regulations.

            • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
              12·
              2 years ago

              Fins and spoilers are cool but like if their removal saves lives then I’m all for it.

              Cars all looking the same is because of the tightening of supply chains, it is cheaper to make everything apply to as many models as possible.

              I can’t remember which brand it is, whichever supercar brand is under VW, but they have parts shared with golfs and audis. This efficient but doesn’t make for huge variations.