This entire argument of @orientExpress is a straw man
So what? It could have a jillion kWh battery, but if you can't sell it at a price that makes you a profit, then you have to sell it at a loss. That is the crux of GM's dilemma, they thought that the market for entry level EVs was range sensitive ("give them 200+ range and they will be standing in line for you to take their money"), when it is not, it is price sensitive, always has been.
But nevertheless, GM flooded the market with $42K+ 200+ mile cars that were simply too expensive for their target market. At one point this summer, GM had over 200 days worth of Bolt inventory gathering dust on dealers lots. So they were forced to do what any good marketeer does with distressed merchandise, you fire sale the hell out of it to move it off the lot and take the loss. Currently GM loses about $6K on incentives for every Bolt that moves off of a dealers lot.
He defines the target market as price sensitive, then rhapsodizes how GM ignored price sensitivity.
As if that same market was not value sensitive, or range sensitive, or sensitive to practicality.
As if $30k is a wonderful price for this imagined price sensitive market slice. The Bolt died the day the Model 3 was announced. The LEAF is irrelevant to the Bolt story, just as is the Bolt price. This forum is an echo chamber that misses the rest of the world. For every person committed to buying a Bolt or a LEAF, there are 50 committed to buying a Model 3.
Nissan was able to sell damaged goods as an early mover and before the extent of their poor engineering became widely known. That situation does not exist today. It is not by chance that this forum mostly dwells on super cheap, used LEAFs for sale. If you want to identify the price sensitive EV market, it is nicely under $10k.