Carlos Ghosn On Renault-Nissan Electric Vehicle Market Share


Renault ZOE

Renault ZOE

There’s no denying that the Renault-Nissan Group is the world leader in pure electric vehicles and that the Nissan LEAF is the global BEV sales champ, but according to Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn, the Alliance’s domination in the BEV segment is even stronger than most would believe.

How dominant is the Alliance?

Well, how’s this for domination:

Carlos Ghosn Quoted On Renault-Nissan's BEV Domination

Carlos Ghosn Quoted On Renault-Nissan’s BEV Domination

There’s no automaker in the world even close to Renault-Nissan when it comes to all-electric vehicles as the group closes in on 200,000 cumulatively sold to date.  (over 200k now if you count the Renault Twizy)

In fact, there’s few automakers who even attempt to promote BEVs.  In this regard, Renault-Nissan is really in a class of its own.

Categories: Nissan, Renault, Sales

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

32 Comments on "Carlos Ghosn On Renault-Nissan Electric Vehicle Market Share"

newest oldest most voted

As I have been saying for months:

If the stock market applied the same multiple to Renault-Nissan as it does to Tesla (TSLA) today, Renault-Nissan would be by far the biggest car company globally by market cap.

If Renault-Nissan fulyl merged, the company could also save billions more per year. At least it’s moving ever closer (for example, battery supply fpr future EVs coming from LG Chem for both companies).

The overwhelming majority of the alliance’s sales and profits are in ICEv.

Stock market does not evaluate based on past profits but discounted projected future profits.l

Yeah, Nissan and Renault are queen of the pigs. Also if you do the comparison using sales dollars rather than units then the percentages change dramatically.

You could use dollars, euros, or kWh and the tables would look dramatically different.

The goal is to get an individual out of his/her daily ICE commuter into a BEV. So number of BEVs sold is the only number that matters.

I would modify that slightly. The goal is to reduce the amount of gasoline that would have been burned otherwise. The closest proxy we have to that is miles driven. Therefore, I would argue that EV miles is the statistic that matters more than kWh, # cars, etc.

You can apply this to PHEVs/EREVs as well. Of course, in the US we find that Volts have driven more EV miles than Leafs, which would make them the leader.

Yeah, getting 10 people out of a Hummer H2 and into a EV reduces gasoline use much more than getting 10 people out of a Prius and into a EV.

If the leaf owners just drive less than volt owners cease they make life choices to live close to work or reduce unnecessary trips, isn’t that best for the environment, traffic, and wear on roads? I’m not sure that the volt being driven more miles on average than the Leaf makes it better for the environment. Encouraging longer commutes is bad regardless of the vehicle driven. I’m not saying that the Volt isn’t saving a lot of gas use, but I wouldn’t say it is better for the environment than a Leaf because of its range. More practical, yes. But not better for the environment from a social engineering standpoint.

You are making a big assumption here, and that is that the people are deciding how close to live to work based on their car. You have that exactly backwards – people chose their car based on what fits their needs, including their commute distance. I agree that sprawl and long commutes is an issue. But don’t blame that on the car. The Volt meets people where they are, allowing for more electric miles than the Leaf. If somebody has a commute too long for a Leaf, but chooses a Volt instead, then the Volt enabled them to drive 40 miles/day without gasoline. The Leaf cannot do that because it wouldn’t work in the first place. Therefore the Volt is absolutely offsetting the gasoline that they would have burned if they chose, say, a Prius instead. The elephant in the room is the fact that people travel more trips than simply their commute. My daily driving averages 25-30 miles. However, I often take trips longer than 150 miles. A Leaf works for me because we can take my wife’s car out of town. If I had one car, then it wouldn’t work even though I chose to live 2.5 miles… Read more »

Gibber. That is not true. The point of electric transportation is not to reduce emissions, but to give people better and more convenient cars. And for heavy trucking the point is to reduce the costs of logistics.

If we want to reduce carbon emission, the most efficient way would be to mix synthetic diesel and synthetic kerosene into fossil fuels.

Not true. If it were, we would have given tax credits to early adopter of flat screen TVs because most of us want to enjoy better TV watching. We clearly did not. It does not hurt that EVs are typically more enjoyable to drive, but that is not the reason to incentivize their adoption. Reducing emissions and strengthening national security are justifiable reasons to put the tax payer on the hook until the technology has fully mature.

An BEV kWh … GWh comparison:

Renault: ~22 kWh * 58,000 = 1.28 GWh
Nissan: 24 kWh * 142,000 = 3.41 GWh
Nissan+Renault: ………… = 4.68 GWh
Tesla: ~83 kWh * 50,000 = 4.15 GWh

~approx. numbers … globally est. 10+ GWh energy storage now in use by BEVs for transportation (not including PHEV energy storage)

Average daily electric miles driven would be the fairest indicator of impact

Not entirely.

They are not glamorous, but petrol saved by hybrids and micro hybrids are also a big part of the impact of electrification.

The Prius for instance may have travelled negligible miles under electric, but they have not half saved some fuel.

An interesting comparison would be total eVMT (EV Miles Traveled).

Good stuff.

You can’t blame a man for talking his book, and Renault/Nissan deserve great credit for being at the forefront of introducing electrification in transport.

1. Sales are far lower than they were projected to be.

2. Consequently their ~$5 billion investment in electrification is not paying off at the moment, and is being carried by their ICE cars.

3. They STILL have not managed to produce their car with 150 mile range, which would be transformative and has been in the works since 2009.

4. Competition on all fronts is heating up, and may take a chunk out of the sales they have got, and everyone else has more of the 200,000 car tax break left than they have.

5. Petrol prices are in the basement, which hinders electric car take up.

So whilst the achievements are genuine, so are the problems.

This is very misleading. Nissan LEAF sales are utterly depended on government subsidies as the car is seriously overpriced.

Tesla on the other hand can sell as many cars as they can manufacture indifferently from the subsidies. The Average selling price of S is over 100 000 dollars and D line up will even further increase the average selling price — and Tesla’s gross margins! This tells that those who on average are buying Tesla, just do not care how much it costs. They just want according to their taste, the best car available.

Therefore it is just wrong to say that Nissan is anyway serious towards electric transportation. LEAF is little bit better than mere compliance car, but still it is just miserable attempt that just strengthtens the public perception that electric cars are something that you really do not want to buy.

Besides, Tesla will overtake Nissan-Renault also in sales volumes by the end of 2015. And this is with cars that costs more than three times more than Nissan’s electric cars.

“Besides, Tesla will overtake Nissan-Renault also in sales volumes by the end of 2015. And this is with cars that costs more than three times more than Nissan’s electric cars.”

Maybe for a very short period of time until Nissan and Renault launch their 150-200 mile range cars in 2016-2017.

The Leaf 2.0 (or what it will be called) could especially build volume long before Tesla can launch the Model 3 car.

PS: I also expect Model X delays in 2015, at least in the ramp-up. Tesla still can’t for sure say when the X launches in 2015 (another slight delay is likely imho), this could impact Tesla 2015 volume substantially.

The Tesla numbers are now out and as I expexted for sone time Model X is delayed once again…

I think Model X will essentially be a 2016 car now (non-signature deliveries).

That is true and it was not unexpected. Model X is rather irrelevant car anyway on short term, because Tesla is seriously production limited and cannot expect to meet the demand for Model S 85D no earlier than in late 2017. Therefore, Tesla does not lose money with delayed Model X.

But the relevant thing was that Tesla confirmed my expectations that Gigafactory is ahead of its schedule and therefore Model 3 will get to markets well before the end of 2016.

Leaf sales are certainly propped up by incentives far more than Tesla’s, I will give you that. But the rest of your analysis is unduly harsh.

Nissan is quite serious about electric cars. They just happen to be targeting a larger volume / lower margin portion of the market than Tesla. Tesla needs to stand alone on the profits of a single model. Nissan can invest profit from other models towards getting the Leaf off the ground (which they have, to the tune of billions of dollars).

Nissan and Tesla are both approaching the same market: 150 to 200 mile range mid-sized EVs for ~$35k. They are just approaching it from opposite sides. If anything, by taking the risk of entering a more competitive market space, Nissan has only reinforced that they are very serious about EVs. Otherwise, why not just start at the top where the potential for profit is much greater, but the overall market impact will be lower?

Brian: FWIW, I would bet that Nissan gets there a lot sooner than Tesla does. I hope that they both(along with other manufacturers)get there,and soon. However, I suspect that Tesla will still be the cream of the crop in terms of extras and such, and is not going to put out what might be considered a “Chevy”(Mass market, affordable car). It’s just not in their DNA. They are simply predisposed to making a car more on the style or cost of a BMW/Audi/Lexus as opposed to Nissan, which would be akin to a Ford or a Chevy. I am glad, because I am certain that I will never be able to afford a Tesla, but suspect that 150-200 mile BEV from Nissan will be in my price range. In any event, I absolutely wish all of them well and hope they get these cars to market pronto.

Agreed on all points. I believe Nissan and Tesla will both get there, with Nissan most likely beating Tesla to the punch.

Tesla sees its Model III as a competitor to a BMW 3-series, not a chevy, so I think your analysis is spot on. It will nominally start in the $30ks, but will be quickly optioned up to $50k or more.

Nissan-Renault is already today at the sales numbers that Tesla wants to achieve in the end of 2015. So… it makes it pretty hard for Tesla to do that unless Nissan-Renault reduce their sales.

Plus Teslas goals are most of the time underachieved so it will probably be mid 2016 before they reach the numbers Nissan-Renault has today.

Tesla will definitely need the Model 3 and the Gigafactory up and running before having a shot at permanently reaching or surpass the levels of Nissan-Renault BEV sales (and if you would add PHEV’s then Tesla will be even further behind)

“LEAF is little bit better than mere compliance car…”

Have to strongly disagree with that. Unlike compliance cars you can actually buy a LEAF at a local dealer almost anywhere in the US. And unlike, say, the Focus Electric, you’ll find a wide selection of LEAFs on dealer lots in any major metro area. Unlike with compliance cars you’ll also find Nissan service shops that are actually familiar with the unique requirements of the LEAF (not every shop, but most of them). You’ll also find a healthy-sized support community including lots of advice and after-market add-ons.

After US electric car incentives are discontinued when Nissan’s total sales reach 200 000, it is very probable that people do not want to buy Leaf as it is seriously overpriced.

I doubt that. I think nissan will have significantly reduced cost and improved the car with the gen II. If they do that there will be a market after the subsidies run out. If the rumors are true and a 150 mile leaf is going to get built and they get close to the $300/kwh, a 40 kwh pack will cost them about $12K. That should be a faster more desirable car, if they make the interior and exterior desirable enough.

Nissan has been amazing so far in their efforts to kick gas. They have had some stumbles with battery capacity loss, however, they keep getting better. I can’t wait for the 150 mile Leaf. It will put EV sales into high gear. Go Carlos and Elon. I had a leaf for 3 years and drove it 45,000 miles before trading it in for a Rav4 EV this year. I’m happy I was one of the first few hundred Leaf buyers in the US.

I believe the adjective you seek is “dominant”.

Part of the reduction in gas prices recently has been influenced by the fact that people are driving less, at least here U.S.
In fact many young people are choosing the no car option, which is really the best way to reduce pollution, but it is more of a consequence of the worldwide economic downturn that affected younger people disproportionately.
I think the ev will do fine, it’s just that the revolution will evolve more slowly than many suspect.

1. I think you have to hand it to Nissan and Carlos, all the OEMs were anti EV and Nissan went against everyone else, GM and Volt not withstanding.
2. Comparing Tesla and Nissan is false, Tesla is a new company so different from other automakers I would say they are a new thing all together, making a product in a different class.
3. The notion that people will just give up their cars is silly, all those roads and suburbs will be here for a long time and the only thing that works with that is cars.