GM: Chevrolet Bolt Deliveries Outside Of California & Oregon Will Be At a “Slow Flow”


Chevrolet Bolt EV At LA Auto Show - Image Credit: InsideEVs / Tom Moloughney

Chevrolet Bolt EV At LA Auto Show – Image Credit: InsideEVs / Tom Moloughney

Chevrolet Bolt EV Front Seating - Image Credit: InsideEVs / Tom Moloughney

Chevrolet Bolt EV Front Seating – Image Credit: InsideEVs / Tom Moloughney

There’s a bit of an uproar out there related to a comment from a General Motors spokesperson.

GM spokesperson Michelle Malcho told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday that the 2017 Chevrolet Bolt will be limited in its availability and this has led some to believe that GM is backing down from its nationwide committment for the Bolt. There’s simply no truth to that line of thinking though.

Here’s what Malcho stated:

“We are focusing on this year getting the cars ready for customers…and doing it the right way.”

She then added that deliveries to states outside of the two initial launch markets (California and Oregon) will be at a “slow flow.”

For the 2nd generation of Chevrolet Volt there was a ~6 month production gap between 2016 Chevy Volts headed to California, and 2017 Volts available nationwide (photo via forums)

For the 2nd generation of Chevrolet Volt there was a ~6 month production gap between 2016 Chevy Volts headed to California, and 2017 Volts available nationwide (photo via forums)

This is precisely how GM did it with the Gen 2 Chevy Volt (and has pretty much been the expectation for the Bolt EV). California and select other markets for its first Model Year, then nationwide for the following Model Year.

Here’s how the rollout of the Bolt will likely play out too.  California and Oregon first (easiest place to fill initial volume demand and also fulfill compliance), followed by some other CARB states for Model Year 2017 Bolt.

Then, by perhaps Summer of next year, the 2018 Bolt will come out with sales nationwide. If that’s how it works out, then the Bolt will still be available across the U.S. prior to the sale of even one Tesla Model 3, the only other car seen at the moment in competition with the long range/reasonably priced Chevy EV.

Editor’s Note:  For its part, Tesla is also planning a ‘west to east’ coast rollout with the Model 3, then internationally – beginning with more “highly optioned” cars in the first wave.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Categories: Chevrolet

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

86 Comments on "GM: Chevrolet Bolt Deliveries Outside Of California & Oregon Will Be At a “Slow Flow”"

newest oldest most voted

GM game plan: Oversell Bolt in Tesla Model 3 pre order territory on the West Coast in 2017, and then let market forces dictate the rollout across all 50 States in 2018. GM is brilliant in their “plans”. If savvy EV shoppers in 2019 are cross shopping GM Bolt and Tesla Model 3, the competition will be interesting to see if GM and the rest of the legacy car makers can sway Tesla shoppers away from the premium EV Brand.

Premium EV at the same price point as Chevy Bolt and Nissan Leaf SV/SL. They must be doing something wrong.

Chew on this a bit. Under current regulations, GM along with all automakers need to produce zero emission vehicles. The automaker’s lobbyists have already submitted requests to the Trump Administration to do away with the zero emission requirements. Big Oil and Automakers will prevail. You ask when the Bolt will move out of California and Oregon; answer is, when Big Oil and the Automakers are required to do it. If the Trump Administration folds and removes the requirement, the Bolt will stay on the west coast in limited quantities. Just my two cents worth.


Sad but potentially true. When you buy a GM product, you tell that company “hey, here’s my money, go do what you do.” When you don’t, you tell that message to the company who gets your business.

No, I don’t agree. I know GM is a member of the alliance that requested a roll-back of emission requirements, but I also believe that GM is serious about electrification of the automobile. They have made major investments in the Volt and Bolt and we will see that technology expanded through their other models.

If by actually delivering it to customers instead of just having “reveals” than I would say yes, you are right…

GM is apparently planning on making only a bit over 30k Bolts in the first year of production. Contrariwise, Tesla plans to ramp up production ASAP to, potentially, 400k cars per year. Any talk about the Bolt “competing” with the Model ≡, at least over the next 2-3 years, is ridiculous. GM and Tesla will both sell as many Bolts and Model ≡’s as they make, period. Only if GM significantly ramps up Bolt production will there be any real competition between the two models. And GM has clearly limited its ability to ramp up, by relying on LG Chem for battery cells and on LG Electronics’ brand new automotive division for the EV powertrain. GM can’t ramp up production beyond what its battery supply is. Tesla has had the same limit, and that is why they are building the Gigafactory. Other auto makers are now moving to do the same. Some try to handwave away this limitation by saying “GM can buy as many commodity batteries as it needs on the open market.” This is ignoring history rather firmly. It didn’t work for Nissan and its Leaf; it didn’t work for Tesla and the Model S. GM doesn’t have… Read more »

EV sales – even for an award-winning, revolutionary EV – are limited not by the amount you are willing to build, but by the amount customers are willing to buy. GM learned this lesson quite well with the Gen1 Volt.

The idea that sales are driven simply by production is rather silly.

You’re right. I am making the assumption that the market for 200+ mile BEVs will be much greater than the market for the Volt. That assumption is based on the startlingly high number of paid reservations for the Tesla Model ≡.

But as you say, GM has good reason to be cautious, as the demand for the Volt 1.0 was significantly lower than expected.

I underestimated the demand for the Model ≡ rather significantly. Heck, nearly everyone did, including Tesla Motors. Hopefully I have not overestimated the market for the Bolt. We’ll have to wait at least a few months before the level of demand becomes clear.

In the case of the Bolt it will be production that limits the sales for a long time to come.

They could almost sell 30 000 in Norway alone.
If they would sell it globally they would easily do 30k a month as the competition is today.

Hopefully they will soon realize how much higher demand is than planned production and adjust to that.

When has there ever been any indication LEAF production was battery constrained?

Tesla is buying batteries. GM is buying batteries. There’s no magic to making more batteries in one factory instead of multiple factories. LG can scale up within reason. I doubt they could scale up to 400K/year without GM having told them well in advance and I’m sure they didn’t do so.

I don’t really see Tesla ramping up to 400K/year at launch either.

unlucky asked:

“When has there ever been any indication LEAF production was battery constrained?”

Nissan was unable to produce as many Leafs as it wanted to until after it built auto assembly plants and battery manufacturing plants in Tennessee and the UK. Originally, the Leaf was supplied with battery cells only from Nissan’s supplier in Japan, and that supply was seriously compromised by the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan.

This is all well documented, if you bother to research the subject. For example:

“Tesla is buying batteries. GM is buying batteries. There’s no magic to making more batteries in one factory instead of multiple factories.” I didn’t say there was. Nissan has at least three battery factories (I’m not sure there is just one in Japan), altho they share the supply with Renault. The question isn’t how many factories; the question is who is in control of how much those factories produce. Tesla wasn’t able to strong-arm Panasonic into ramping up production as fast as Tesla wanted, despite all its efforts over multiple years. That is the main reason Tesla is investing all that money in a giant battery factory. “LG can scale up within reason. I doubt they could scale up to 400K/year without GM having told them well in advance and I’m sure they didn’t do so.” Sure looks like LG didn’t. An article a few months back (link below) showed a startling lack of ramping up production on the part of LG, considering their rapidly growing list of customers. And that is the point. GM doesn’t control how fast LG ramps up battery production. LG controls that. And that will remain true until GM can control production of its own… Read more »

And if they ramp up production, the cost goes down and therefore their profit per unit.

In Europe such threat exists not, since buyers refrain from ordering/buying a Tesla car just because of simple facts of having no service//maintenance centers in their area (don’t want to travel 300-700 km to reach one) and no SuperCharger within city perimeter with convenience of paying per charge. Every market has its own obstacles and paricularities. Until Tesla resolve those two aforementioned roadblocks it will see no significant rise in Europe sales. Consequently, when it does address it as depicted above it will see its sales increase 10 fold. Simple as that.

Sure thing, LOL!

If you want one early buy it out of state. Thats what early adopters of volt did.

I’d rather wait for the model 3 even if the Bolt were to be $12,000.00 cheaper…it would still be a “NO BRAINER”..BTW., Tesla Should Build a 2 door sporty model on the Model 3 platform as well.

“Slow flow” is more reminiscent of the gen 1 Volt rollout. Not gen 2. I think Mr Loveday is being overly optimistic. If you go look at the maps for the first generation Volt rollout, it took about a year for it to be on sale throughout the country. It started in Q4 in limited areas like NY and CA, and then slowly spread throughout the country.

I’m pissed that GM has talked about 50-state availability and then they’re now back pedaling. I don’t know if it has anything to do with the election of Trump and the anticipated rightward push in government policies, or if it is a sourcing problem with the LG batteries, or whatever.

It’s a failure on GM’s part – either a technical failure or a moral one.




Bolt makes CAFE reachable. GM being a member of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, that is trying to thwart CAFE, would be doing something entirely consistent with that aim if they “slow flow” the car.

Bolt allows GM to sell more gas guzzlers.
So when you buy a Bolt, your supporting their ability to continue selling gas guzzlers and spew carbon emissions.

+1 Pofolks

while simultaneously increasing EV market share furthering apparent demand and presumably replacing your own gas guzzler. I mean I thought Hillary was awful but I still voted for her over Trump. just because GM sucks doesn’t mean their product does.

anyone who thinks that electrification and fossil fuel cessation are not inevitabilities are woefully out-of-the-loop. one 4-year idiotic presidency is not going to change a thing in that regard.

The same is true of any BEV as far as it goes. Tesla doesn’t landfill their credits, they sell them. To manufacturers wanting to build gas guzzlers. This is the system working as intended.

Excellent Point!


For Gen 2, the 2016 Volt was *only* sold in CARB states, so there most definitely was a slow, localized rollout.

So much for a year headstart on model 3….might be closer to 6 months if Tesla stays on target.

Let us hope the timeline doesn’t get off target. Not holding my breath as I have seen the many previous glitches that have arisen in the past with Tesla rollouts of their innovative premium EV vehicles.

Mark, Understanding people always want the new hotness immediately, so any perceived delays nets a strong reaction, I think Eric has a decent handle on this one/keeping the original WSJ report in context, which I think is important. It’s kinda of a single, random quote from the LA show that has turned into a headline story. This type of rollout is pretty much standard operating fare for most OEMs, and certainly for GM and Tesla – both historically, today and in the future. If you have an in demand product (or just an EV project in general), your gonna dump in California first (both for the volume/ease of getting product out, and for the benefits of the CARB system). Just as an example to the Model 3 roll-out, Tesla is already on the record for the EV’s roll-out: “Model 3 production is scheduled to begin in late 2017. When production begins, we will begin deliveries in North America starting on the West Coast, moving east. As we continue to ramp production, we will begin deliveries in Europe, APAC and right-hand drive markets.” And as such, they will be producing the higher trim/more heavily optioned cars first: “Our default plan as… Read more »

To me a more interesting question is when Model III production will pass the Bolt, in total number of cars produced.

I’ll hazard a guess of Sept. 2018

Spot on on your Guesstimation!!! Tesla will blow by The Bolt, when it gets its ramp up in production dialed in!

Sounds about right. I will undercut by 2 months.
The 4th of July, Independence Day, 2018.

Another Euro point of view

Jay, you are a wise man :-).

I disagree with this assessment Jay. I believe GM’s rollout will be compliance first, so ZEV states are likely to get first dibs. Whereas Tesla’s distribution model is all about rank, then options, then distance. GM will ship a Bolt clear across country to get the credits, while Tesla wants the car, initially, to be as close as possible to base to iron out any anomalies. Therefore they have completely different reasons for starting in California, thus making an apples to apples comparison difficult at best. My thinking is that both companies will try to sell every car they make, of course, whether or not GM makes a move on CAFE standards, but that GM’s distribution model(ZEV first) will hamper and confuse its availability. Tesla’s more straightforward model(start here, work your way to there) is logistically easier to deal with. This makes me believe(if Tesla starts on time) that the Model 3 will reach parity with Bolt as early as April or May of 2018. Of course as the numbers grow much larger and there’s the issue of battery availability to contend with, then it essentially becomes no contest. So while I believe the Bolt will be a car for… Read more »

As has been shown time and again, GM has a higher bar simply because of prior bad behavior. Perhaps you are right, but, unless there is some newly arisen supply chain issue, the timing is a bit suspect–if a slow rollout was always the plan, then why not say that up front. The skeptic in me sees this as a hope on GMs part of a softening of CAFE and other regulations under a Trump administration, in which case the Bolt ends up as a compliance car for CARB markets.

Stop with the facts already! 😉 This is a blog! You should tell your writers to be more click bait-y! They should enrage the public and send them into a frenzy!

Be sure to use out of context scare quotes when saying things like “slow flow” and “limited quantities”. Here, I have provided a model for you to reference:

LOL, no kidding. It’s amazing what the public will latch onto if it fits their “evil-GM” narrative.

Early 2016 GM says: “Production to start end of 2016, with first deliveries to the West coast”

Later 2016 GM says: “Production to start end of 2016, with first deliveries to the West coast”

Haters say: “YOU LIED!”

What? (Meanwhile Tesla can miss their dates & prices 10 times, but apparently their sh*t don’t stink).

“GM spokesperson Michelle Malcho told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday that the 2017 Chevrolet Bolt will be limited in its availability and this has led some to believe that GM is backing down from its nationwide committment for the Bolt. There’s simply no truth to that line of thinking though.”
Maybe this was the plan all along, but it doesn’t quite jibe with what Mary Said on the Bolt’s announcement:
“We believe strongly in the dealer model and the tremendous value our customers derive from neighborhood dealerships,” she said. Unlike some electric car customers, Bolt EV customers never have to worry about driving to another state to buy, service or support their vehicle.”

The irony is that GM is the one manufacturer who has Stifled Legislation in Tesla transitioning away from the Dealership Model in certain states. This is GM holding onto market share using existing laws and lobbies in the State Legislature!

..the value our customers derive from.dealerships.

Are they trying to be ironic?
Or are they completely utterly Blind? Or is it out of spite?

In any case, one more reason for me to wait for M3.

It’s the Official Company Line. When you’re in public relations or you’re a spokesman for the company, then you have to parrot the Official Line whether you believe it or not.

This is true of every corporation of any size, certainly not just GM. I wish it were otherwise. I wish that every corporation didn’t routinely lie to the public, its customers, and even its own employees; but the reality is that they do.

Don’t forget the adjective “tremendous.” Personally I, in my life, have never heard anyone describe a car dealership service center as a tremendous value. Tremendous hassle, or pain in the neck…
Oh, and Pushmi-Pullu is right about public relations.

In spite of GM’s haughty praise of dealers, they would love to free themselves from the anchor of the ‘dealers only’ model. But they’re not going to do the dirty work themselves and possibly risk a full scale revolt. So they’ll don their shiny armor and battle the evil upstart Tesla, on behalf of the “small” business person.

Now if Tesla loses, it’s because GM fought and prevailed on behalf of ‘local’ businesses. If Tesla wins and GM is ‘forced’ to sell online(or partially sell online) to compete, then they shed their biggest crocodile tears and say they gave it their best shot.?


This makes sense. GM and others manufacturers have already asked Trump to relax or dissolve acfe standards. What happens if he does??
Sounds like if he does, there’s going to a crushing party.

GM already has contracts for production of the Bolt, at least for the first year. And LG Chem makes delivery contracts two years in advance for their li-ion batteries, so it may well be that GM is locked into a certain production for at least two years. Now, if the GOP and the Trumpians gut the CAFE standards and/or eliminate the ability of the CARB States to use CARB standards rather than the weaker EPA standards, then we may well see GM suddenly lose interest in promoting the Bolt, and we may well see no increase in future production. But any talk of GM crushing Bolts en masse is silly. The EV1 was crushed after GM cancelled the test marketing of the car, partly because it was far too expensive to make a profit and partly for political reasons: part of GM’s ultimately successful effort to get CARB to roll back the ZEV mandate. But GM isn’t ignoring reality like Toyota is. GM knows the future lies with PEVs (Plug-in EVs), and altho shifting political winds may speed or slow the rate at which GM develops and markets new PEVs, they’re not going to stop altogether. Even if the USA… Read more »

You are absolutely correct, thank you for stating this clearly.

If I’m remembering correctly, Chevy still has sold more Plug Ins than any other car maker in the US. GM didn’t actually need to make the Bolt. They could keep producing the Volt and Spark and call it a day if they wanted.

Although Tesla will almost certainly eclipse them soon, GM has invested heavily in this technology and intend to continue to be a leader.

“GM and others manufacturers have already asked Trump to relax or dissolve acfe standards. What happens if he does??”

IMO – this isn’t an “if” question, it’s a “when” question. What will the automobile manufacturers do WHEN Trump rolls back emission standards?

Consumers rule. To state the obvious, how we spend our money dictates all products on the market. The easy answer is to only buy BEVs and don’t worry about the Oil driven non-sense. Free market will take care of the rest.

Note to non-CARB states: join CARB.

NO. You don’t say.

GM reacts to the change in political climate, lobbies with others to reduce the compliance car need and only sells the bolt in compliance states initially, and also doesn’t want to ramp up massively after that.

They basically are yielding to the German automakers BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen that could not compete with the Bolt yet and the American Tesla that can. Who all will go full throttle on the electric revolution. and
and Mercedes telling the Green Party in Germany that they embraced electric cars and are fully behind the transition including banning new gas car sales in the not so distant future.

Who do not want to rump up drastically Bolt production?

30k sales first 12 months is MAJOR ramp up.

Why not 35k? Where the heck would GM find batteries for those extra 5k cars?

LG can’t meet Panasonic volume. End of story.

Well banning gas cars in Germany is not a big deal. Most vehicles run on diesel fuel and not gasoline. So of course Mercedes is okay with that.

I always knew GM would sell the Chevy Bolt to CARB States first and the rest of the States would get the left over scraps, assuming there are any left overs. It’s still disappointing to hear GM say it.

Hardly a surprise.

Yes indeed. Now people can get off their BOLT highchairs and stop praising GM because clearly they are not committed to Zero Emissions.

Jean-Francois Morissette

Will there be any Bolt sales in November in California and Oregon, or we will only see that in December?

leave it to ev enthusiasts to offer up crazy conspiracy theories when a company follows what everyone else would consider to be a common sense product deployment strategy. the biggest market for electric vehicles is california, by far. of course GM is going to want to make sure that they serve that market first. not only is california the most important market, but it is the market that is most likely to produce favorable driver experiences in the field. with the mild climate in the major california markets, drivers are likely to report higher range numbers from actual driving because they won’t have to operate the heat as much. this creates favorable buzz in advance of a broader geographical rollout into markets with less favorable climates. for example, it is better to introduce a BEV into colder climate areas in the late spring because that would mean that the drivers get their first experiences with the vehicle in favorable conditions for higher range numbers. you don’t want to introduce the car in the winter when the drivers’ first experiences would be at the low end of range, and when it would be harder to keep the car charged since you… Read more »

I was going to comment, but then I thought, no.

No conspiracy here, just bad decision making failing on the long term vision for short term optimization.

Since all Californians and one from Kansas City hate GM, and think the BOLT is ugly, why doesn’t GM start selling them close to home in New York State only and let us get them who want them?

I don’t know why the butt-hurtness. I ordered the Bolt and placed a $500 deposit, and they just gave me a delivery estimate of the last week in December or first week in January. As I recall, they said the waiting list was not that deep, certainly less than 100 at that dealer.

Thus if you really wanted one, and preordered it, its coming. What is to complain about?

All I can say is I own an electric car and I’m never going to buy another ICE car. If any auto manufacturer wants to sell me a car ever again they better sell an electric car that I want to buy in the state I live in.

Gm-volt member posted their Bolt has been produced and is awaiting shipping. Not long now!

Meanwhile, Model 3 reservation holders are still waiting for the next unveil as they get strung along. Lol

Regardless of US rules and incentives I expect decent demand for the Opel in the Netherlands as starting january 1st only BEV will have a 4% tax disc, and the rest will have 22% tax disc. (Price of the car seen as income).

Effectively this means paying taking a 50-60 euro pay cut or a 200+ euro pay cut for driving a company car depending on the model. Meanwhile, something the cost of a Tesla S is still over 110 euros a month compared to the Leaf, Ioniq, etc.

I thank Tesla for their spearheading electrification of consumer vehicles but I have numerous problems with their practices that help dissuade me from siding with them over GM.

on Tesla alone the practice of innovating technologies other than electrification. I get that the affluent that the other recent article refers to may very well have considered autopilot the tipping point in their decision to purchase but I think it’s ridiculously unnecessary (see mission to Mars) and feels more like a pet project tied to Tesla that’s potentially hindering electric vehicle adoption.

raising the starting price of the Model S in the US while effectively lowering it in Germany.

letting a 75kWh battery go for the price of 60 without any promise of being able to recuperate that extra $9k tells me they can afford to sell it for cheaper.

I’m rooting for Electric vehicles forget choosing sides anywhere other than where it counts. aka BEV > PHEV.

people want to talk about compliance cars — hybrids more clearly fit that bill than BEVs.

“But G.M. still needs new vehicles like the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt to make substantial gains in corporatewide fuel economy.” ““It is a zero-emission vehicle, so there are a lot of credits for vehicles like the Bolt,” Mr. Reuss said. (Mark Reuss, head of global product development at General Motors)” ******* I honestly can’t imagine GM allowing the Bolt to be sold in Montana,’or North Dakota, or some other less progressive state. There’s no regulatory requirement, and sales incentive. They absolutely will sell the car in California, and Oregon (it’s next door?). But, thinking that GM it’s painfully aware that one D. J. Trump just might throw a wrench into the other CARB-ZEV states is seriously sticking your head in the sand. It is a VERY real possibility, and the auto manufacturers are requesting it. ******** CARB states – Arizona, California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, District of Columbia. CARB-“Zero Emission Vehicle” states – California’s ZEV program has now been adopted by the states of Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont. These states, known as the “Section 177 states,” have chosen to adopt California’s air quality… Read more »

It will be interesting to see “small government” Republicans try and override state legislatures.

This is the schizophrenic behavior of a corporation… They want to show Tesla what they can do… and suppress Tesla to keep things as they are since they make so much that way. Build a great new EV… no charging infrastructure. Build an EV1 then crush them… crazy… Let’s hope they figure out which end is up soon.

I’m one of those people that many here don’t believe exist. I cross shopped the Bolt, Volt, and Tesla.

I put down a deposit on the Model 3 the second you could.
But I was still thinking about the Volt or Bolt.

GM lobbying Trump to relax CAFE was the last straw. The Volt is amazing. The Bolt could be.
But it’s time to take a stand.

Tesla needs to live if we are going to see electrification in my lifetime. We can’t let Big Oil and The Legacy automakers off the hook.

And thus I ordered a Tesla Model S (confirmed it today) and will take delivery next month. Keeping my 3 reservation for spouse.

I’m spending $30,000 more than I want to spend. But luckily my “charity” is the most fun charitable endeavor ever!

Corporations are amoral. (Not immoral, amoral). They respond to profit and loss. We need to send them a message they understand

I totally agree with you. I own the Gen 2 Volt and we have money down on the Tesla 3. I hope Tesla thrives as they are doing things for the right reasons.

When General Motors CEO (Mary T. Barra) said, General Motors will not build a fast charge infrastructure or support any such program, I knew at that moment, any electric cars General Motors made would be just compliance cars.

How could you *know*? Seems to me that you just chose to interpret information in a way that reinforces your prejudice.

Yeesh! If you don’t want to buy a Bolt, no worries! Relax, put a deposit on a Model III, or a Leaf or an Ioniq and love it! 🙂 But for the rest of us horrible soulless monsters… we need to support GM. If all of us who want EVs decided to never buy them from other automakers then what incentive would they ever have to fully embrace these cars? If GM decides to throw out 10 years of R&D since the Volt announcement, large contracts with vendors like LG, and years of development on the Bolt overnight… I will join you all at a protest in Detroit! But the Bolt will be sold everywhere. I am on 3 dealer’s waiting lists in Texas for my Bolt with a few dozen other people at each dealer. I’m aware that it will be spring at least before I get a Bolt. I’ve known that for months now and I’m cool with it. I was going to post about the Tesla rollout as well, but I see Jay already took care of it above: ‘Just as an example to the Model 3 roll-out, Tesla is already on the record for the EV’s… Read more »

I think that GM is betting that with oil under $50 per barrel the demand in the initial markets will be able to be met in the first few months of production at rate. Two additional months will be able to provide more than one Bolt to every Chevy dealer in the country. By mid 2017 the federal EV tax credit might be eliminated which would further depress ev sales in the US and allow rollout in export markets where demand would exceed that of the domestic market.

This whole thing is rather puzzling. Sure the car is a little late but otherwise I don’t really see what people are on about. I can understand electrek since they are massive Tesla fanboys. But where is everyone else getting the idea that GM did anything but run a few months behind schedule?

It’ll be out there nationwide in a few months. Sure, they may never sell one in Montana, that’s up to the dealers. If dealers don’t carry it, they don’t carry it.

Actually, they are right on schedule. There’s no news here.

How long until GM repossess and crush all the Bolts because Trump has repealed emission laws?

Not going to happen. Even if the emission laws are completely repealed, GM knows there is a growing market for EVs and they cannot force people who want to buy EVs to buy gasmobiles. They will only force those customers to go to other brands if they refuse to compete. GM wants those customers they will continue to make more and better EVs.

The EV cat is out of the bag. Even Bloomberg is saying that worldwide EV sales will be 35% by 2025. Changes to USA emissions laws won’t slow worldwide sales.

If a company wants to compete worldwide they need EVs. China is a huge market. Much bigger and higher growth than USA.

The only way I’m getting a ’17 Bolt will involve a plane ticket.