Marketing Suggestions for Nissan: Let's Get Serious

[Randy3]

Generally, people I've spoken with don't define the LEAF as a car. A new ad needs to address the LEAF as a car, not a semi-car, golf cart, thingy that people see it as.

 

[Randy3]

Yes, it IS "fine." But Apple has never been happy with just "fine"; they set the hurdle much higher than that and I believe the Leaf needs to as well.

I think it's fine for what it is -- a family car. I like it.

I wonder if LEAF owners are also Apple owners, more so than the general population.

 

[SanDust]

The end game is clearly electric vehicles. Anyone looking far enough down the road has to know that. The big question is how quickly we'll get there.

Thanks so much Paul for the clear, level headed, and realistic assessment. Lots of noise but range and price do seem to be the big issues.

 

[mkjayakumar]

Thanks for sharing your experience and insight, Paul.

Has there been any impact on sales due to the problems seen in AZ & TX ?

 

[TomT]

My very first computer was a Heathkit H8. Now I'm primarily a PC guy. I have an iPad3 from Apple and that is it. My phone is an Android (now a Samsung Galaxy S3).

I wonder if LEAF owners are also Apple owners, more so than the general population.

 

[TickTock]

I cut my teeth on an Apple 2e but hadn't touched an Apple since until I recently won an iPad2 at a corporate lottery. After trying to like it for 6 months, I finally gave it away. Guess I'm not cool enough. Love my Galaxy S3 "tablone" or "phonelet" whatever it is...

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Be it chrome or Droid, its definitely google for me

 

[Deleted member 1622]

I get a lot of questions about why sales are slow, and in my experience, range and price are the two big ones. EVSE infrastructure is slowly making a dent in the former, but lower gas prices are hurting the latter.

The end game is clearly electric vehicles. Anyone looking far enough down the road has to know that. The big question is how quickly we'll get there.

Paul -
Thanks for your expert opinion, it's nice to hear from someone who's actually on the front lines of this rather than just EV fans and haters. I am really rooting for the numbers to come up for you and all dealers.
Price and range are definitely the biggest impediments, but I was hoping you weren't going to say they were your "big ones," because they are the two things that will not change much in the next few years (though I hope I'm wrong about that).
That's why I think messaging could really change the minds of the people who walk into your dealership TODAY. If they can envision a world where the Leaf is their primary commuter car and they have an ICE as a backup for long trips, I just don't see how range is that big a turn-off to someone who's ready to research an EV.
Anyway, it also occurred to me that the size of a metro area will really make a huge difference in sales pitch. We know that folks out in a rural area can't drive one of these. But I once assumed that the urban drivers would eat them up. Then the 35-mile radius reality hit me, and I realized that even though I love the car and I'm not bothered by the radius, someone who has to drive just out of that circle or beyond would never go for it.
When I bought the Leaf in Feb. 2011 I envisioned a robust charging network where I could "gas up" in dozens of places (hey, that's the vision Nissan was selling, I believed in WMDs in Iraq, too). We know now that isn't the case -- in my opinion, this focus on trying to get L2s in malls and parking lots, and the false promise of L3s is a huge waste of time and money (sorry, EV Project, but I don't see it). We aren't Europe, and never will be, so the huge subsidies will never be there for a driving population as small as ours.
But let's stop whining about the charging networks, shall we? Once we get over it, we can move on to the 35-mile circle we all draw around our home chargers.
So this brings me to two actual points:
- Nissan doesn't need to hide the 35-mile circle issue, dealers should be up front about it. If people are hesitant, tell them to go log their daily miles for two weeks. Then they'll get it. For two years I have felt like every dealer I talk to and Nissan itself has been trying to soft-pedal this 35-mile circle. EMBRACE the range, see what happens.
- Focus sales and marketing efforts only on medium-sized metro areas where it makes sense on the driving map. L.A. folks aren't going to like this, because that means L.A. is not a good market. I know this seems counter-intuitive: usually you sell in places where there are lots of people. But the Leaf is only good for those people if they don't have long drives every day. I live in Berkeley now and it's a bit of stretch, because I can't get to the South Bay (my trusty Prius gets me there). But I can honestly say that if I still lived in L.A. I would not have bought the Leaf, no matter how much I love the concept.

Thanks again, Paul, and I hope you will keep us updated on these new creative efforts that you mentioned Nissan is preparing for the fall.

Josh

 

[edatoakrun]

I get a lot of questions about why sales are slow, and in my experience, range and price are the two big ones. EVSE infrastructure is slowly making a dent in the former, but lower gas prices are hurting the latter.

The end game is clearly electric vehicles. Anyone looking far enough down the road has to know that. The big question is how quickly we'll get there.

... We know that folks out in a rural area can't drive one of these...

"We" do?

Paul,

My suggestion today to Nissan USA to build its BEV sales is the same as it was 18 months ago.

I do not understand Nissan USA's apparent reluctance to contribute to the development of the public fast charge infrastructure.

Billions of dollars have been invested by Nissan in designing and producing the LEAF. IMO the design and concept is far superior to any of the "plug-in" or ICE "conversions" that will enter the market in the next few years. But there is currently a glaring failure in the LEAF concept to any potential American buyer. Nissan is allowing it's EV competitors to beat it up over "range anxiety" and slower level 2 charge times.

The total cost of a DC fast charger installation is reported to be only $5,000-$25,000, before various subsidies and tax credits. Why Is Nissan not making any effort to promote DC infrastructure development? This is by far the most cost-effective way to increase the range and practically of the Leaf to current (any of you owners even used a DC charger yet?) and future drivers...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2374" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[sp4rk]

Where are "we" getting these $5,000 to $25,000 numbers from?

For Level 3 turn-key installations?

I was told when enquiring .. more like $65,000?

 

[thankyouOB]

very interesting to hear about the Chiat Day program and the ads coming from SoCal Leaf Dealers--is that right?

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

...ROFL, can you imagine if Musk rolled out a $40K S with 75-100 miles of range? Damn, now I'm drooling

that's the trouble, the S base is already close at $51,400, after rebate, with TMS, 160 miles per charge, 0-60 mph in 6.5 seconds, 8 year, 100,000 mile warranty (I'm told that Tesla will replace the battery FOC if gradual range gets excessive). for those with the discipline to overlook the panoramic sunroof and air shocks and premium sound, the base S is a beautiful high end car and competitively priced given the current range issues showing up in warm climates for the Leaf.

My loud and urgent message to Nissan would be that they must create a real battery warranty that defines at what point the battery may be replaced due to range loss. Without some assurance of a safety net, sales will remain low and maybe get even worse, current owners may even start to bail in large numbers! We can argue all day about what gradual is, but 7% over 1,000 miles is dreadful for anywhere the car is being sold and will quickly become something Nissan will have to address in marketing, perhaps even through a recall.

 

[DANandNAN]

...ROFL, can you imagine if Musk rolled out a $40K S with 75-100 miles of range? Damn, now I'm drooling

that's the trouble, the S base is already close at $51,400, after rebate, with TMS, 160 miles per charge, 0-60 mph in 6.5 seconds, 8 year, 100,000 mile warranty (I'm told that Tesla will replace the battery FOC if gradual range gets excessive). for those with the discipline to overlook the panoramic sunroof and air shocks and premium sound, the base S is a beautiful high end car and competitively priced given the current range issues showing up in warm climates for the Leaf.

My loud and urgent message to Nissan would be that they must create a real battery warranty that defines at what point the battery may be replaced due to range loss. Without some assurance of a safety net, sales will remain low and maybe get even worse, current owners may even start to bail in large numbers! We can argue all day about what gradual is, but 7% over 1,000 miles is dreadful for anywhere the car is being sold and will quickly become something Nissan will have to address in marketing, perhaps even through a recall.

If they lowered the capacity a bit more to 35ish they'd have a Leaf, FFE, HFEV et al killer at $40K before rebate. I think everyone here would be beating down their doors to get one. I know we would. 160 miles isn't enough because it's still not going to be a highway travel vehicle (even with a QC), and getting more miles puts the car at too high of a price point for many. So, go less, put in a real 100 mile range and QC on an S and start a city car feeding frenzy. I really don't know why they haven't - it'd kill the competition and create a ton of sales.

Nissan does need to stop watching and start acting on the capacity loss. Denying it's a problem is a terrible idea when so many folks are experiencing it (20+ folks in 3 states, 5 in Texas, 4+ with 2 bars lost). Someone mentioned that Nissan would have been better off without it on the dash. I disagree, hiding one source of info means nothing because folks will still know their range has been reduced. All those folks that have sold their Leaf's and moved on and even the buyers of said cars will be bad word of mouth that ads won't be able to easily overcome. I worry that this is going to be a huge black eye for all EV.

Nissan, why not just make an announcement "we recognize the problem and will be releasing info on a corrective measure soon"?

 

[evnow]

If they lowered the capacity a bit more to 35ish they'd have a Leaf, FFE, HFEV et al killer at $40K before rebate.

40-35 = 5 kWh

57-40 = $17k

No, by lowering the battery by 5kWh you don't save $17k in cost.

Tesla will save about $2k.

 

[GRA]

I get a lot of questions about why sales are slow, and in my experience, range and price are the two big ones. EVSE infrastructure is slowly making a dent in the former, but lower gas prices are hurting the latter.

The end game is clearly electric vehicles. Anyone looking far enough down the road has to know that. The big question is how quickly we'll get there.

Paul -
Thanks for your expert opinion, it's nice to hear from someone who's actually on the front lines of this rather than just EV fans and haters. I am really rooting for the numbers to come up for you and all dealers.
Price and range are definitely the biggest impediments, but I was hoping you weren't going to say they were your "big ones," because they are the two things that will not change much in the next few years (though I hope I'm wrong about that).
That's why I think messaging could really change the minds of the people who walk into your dealership TODAY. If they can envision a world where the Leaf is their primary commuter car and they have an ICE as a backup for long trips, I just don't see how range is that big a turn-off to someone who's ready to research an EV.
Anyway, it also occurred to me that the size of a metro area will really make a huge difference in sales pitch. We know that folks out in a rural area can't drive one of these. But I once assumed that the urban drivers would eat them up. Then the 35-mile radius reality hit me, and I realized that even though I love the car and I'm not bothered by the radius, someone who has to drive just out of that circle or beyond would never go for it.
When I bought the Leaf in Feb. 2011 I envisioned a robust charging network where I could "gas up" in dozens of places (hey, that's the vision Nissan was selling, I believed in WMDs in Iraq, too). We know now that isn't the case -- in my opinion, this focus on trying to get L2s in malls and parking lots, and the false promise of L3s is a huge waste of time and money (sorry, EV Project, but I don't see it). We aren't Europe, and never will be, so the huge subsidies will never be there for a driving population as small as ours.
But let's stop whining about the charging networks, shall we? Once we get over it, we can move on to the 35-mile circle we all draw around our home chargers.
So this brings me to two actual points:
- Nissan doesn't need to hide the 35-mile circle issue, dealers should be up front about it. If people are hesitant, tell them to go log their daily miles for two weeks. Then they'll get it. For two years I have felt like every dealer I talk to and Nissan itself has been trying to soft-pedal this 35-mile circle. EMBRACE the range, see what happens.
- Focus sales and marketing efforts only on medium-sized metro areas where it makes sense on the driving map. L.A. folks aren't going to like this, because that means L.A. is not a good market. I know this seems counter-intuitive: usually you sell in places where there are lots of people. But the Leaf is only good for those people if they don't have long drives every day. I live in Berkeley now and it's a bit of stretch, because I can't get to the South Bay (my trusty Prius gets me there). But I can honestly say that if I still lived in L.A. I would not have bought the Leaf, no matter how much I love the concept.

Thanks again, Paul, and I hope you will keep us updated on these new creative efforts that you mentioned Nissan is preparing for the fall.

Josh

I'd say that 35 miles is pushing it, at least on freeways once the battery ages. I'm about 20 miles south of you, and downtown San Jose is about 30 miles from me. The roundtrip is okay with a new battery under ideal conditions, but not with an older one with winds, HVAC/wipers and reserve. I'd like to see EV makers required to provide a minimum guaranteed range, one with the battery degraded to 70 or 80% and using accessories, which is critical for someone using the car to commute. The fact that the car has the range under ideal conditions for your commute when it's new, is far less important than whether it still has it under lousy conditions at the end of your lease/ownership.

Nissan or any other automaker is unlikely to do this themselves as long as their competitors aren't, but this is something the gov. could require on the Monroney sticker. Realistically, the Leaf should be sold with a guaranteed range of 40 miles or even less (depending on climate), and all BEVs should be required to provide range charts and/or software similar to Tony's, but inverted (i.e. starting from the worst case).

This will result in much slower sales initially, but owner surprises will be positive rather than negative: "I only thought I could go X, but I could go X + 20!" We need to get rid of the unrealistic '100 mile range' claims before the mainstream public starts buying these cars and large numbers of them wind up feeling they got flim-flammed. Caveat Emptor is not the way to nurture a new technology - that sort of behavior will inevitably develop once the technology is mainstream and the enthusiasts have been pushed aside by the only-in-it-for-the-money people, but we need to hold it off as long as possible. Nissan is not helping, seemingly doing everything in their power to do business as usual with their treatment of the high temp issues.

 

[GRA]

...ROFL, can you imagine if Musk rolled out a $40K S with 75-100 miles of range? Damn, now I'm drooling

that's the trouble, the S base is already close at $51,400, after rebate, with TMS, 160 miles per charge, 0-60 mph in 6.5 [Sic. 5.6.] seconds, 8 year, 100,000 mile warranty (I'm told that Tesla will replace the battery FOC if gradual range gets excessive). for those with the discipline to overlook the panoramic sunroof and air shocks and premium sound, the base S is a beautiful high end car and competitively priced given the current range issues showing up in warm climates for the Leaf.

My loud and urgent message to Nissan would be that they must create a real battery warranty that defines at what point the battery may be replaced due to range loss. Without some assurance of a safety net, sales will remain low and maybe get even worse, current owners may even start to bail in large numbers! We can argue all day about what gradual is, but 7% over 1,000 miles is dreadful for anywhere the car is being sold and will quickly become something Nissan will have to address in marketing, perhaps even through a recall.

If they lowered the capacity a bit more to 35ish they'd have a Leaf, FFE, HFEV et al killer at $40K before rebate. I think everyone here would be beating down their doors to get one. I know we would. 160 miles isn't enough because it's still not going to be a highway travel vehicle (even with a QC), and getting more miles puts the car at too high of a price point for many. So, go less, put in a real 100 mile range and QC on an S and start a city car feeding frenzy. I really don't know why they haven't - it'd kill the competition and create a ton of sales.

Nissan does need to stop watching and start acting on the capacity loss. Denying it's a problem is a terrible idea when so many folks are experiencing it (20+ folks in 3 states, 5 in Texas, 4+ with 2 bars lost). Someone mentioned that Nissan would have been better off without it on the dash. I disagree, hiding one source of info means nothing because folks will still know their range has been reduced. All those folks that have sold their Leaf's and moved on and even the buyers of said cars will be bad word of mouth that ads won't be able to easily overcome. I worry that this is going to be a huge black eye for all EV.

Nissan, why not just make an announcement "we recognize the problem and will be releasing info on a corrective measure soon"?

Agree with most of the above, but I'd point out that the 40kWh S only has a 'real 100 mile range', at least how I figure it. Ignoring that the '160 mile range' is at 55 mph and not the 70 or 75 mph that's the freeway speed limit (and/or the actual traffic flow) in most western states, as previously mentioned any car should be rated for its range at the end of the battery's life, not the beginning. So, depending on what you consider the battery's end-of-life capacity, 160 x .8/.75/.7 = 128/120/112 miles, and that's before any reductions for weather, accessories, terrain, load, realistically higher speeds or reserve.

 

[PaulScott]

Guy, with all due respect, how do we "... provide a minimum guaranteed range, one with the battery degraded to 70 or 80% and using accessories, which is critical for someone using the car to commute."?

The machine is the machine. Everything else is operator skill/error. At what level of hypermiling do you draw the line? Normal American driving is incredibly inefficient. We all see it every day.

I easily get north of 100 miles all the time. Last month, I held 5.6 m/kWh for over 600 miles. I don't slow people down more than a tiny bit, and I am probably the safest car on the road.

Why is normal American inefficient driving held to a higher standard in these conversations when everything points to our society's downfall if we continue wasting energy?

I think Nissan, and all OEMs, should test the car under ideal conditions and tell people that if you drive with extreme efficiency, you can obtain XXX miles per charge. Customers need to be educated on hypermiling and how it works. I do a cursory explanation for my customers, but will probably improve on that.

Sell the car honestly, but explain what the safest, most efficient driving style is and encourage them to strive for it. If they know this up front, they can't complain later. Battery degradation, of course, needs to be measured, but that can only happen when the same driving style is employed for the specific test car.

I welcome a discussion on this subject since it's incredibly important.

 

[GRA]

Guy, with all due respect, how do we "... provide a minimum guaranteed range, one with the battery degraded to 70 or 80% and using accessories, which is critical for someone using the car to commute."?

The machine is the machine. Everything else is operator skill/error. At what level of hypermiling do you draw the line? Normal American driving is incredibly inefficient. We all see it every day.

I easily get north of 100 miles all the time. Last month, I held 5.6 m/kWh for over 600 miles. I don't slow people down more than a tiny bit, and I am probably the safest car on the road.

Why is normal American inefficient driving held to a higher standard in these conversations when everything points to our society's downfall if we continue wasting energy?

I think Nissan, and all OEMs, should test the car under ideal conditions and tell people that if you drive with extreme efficiency, you can obtain XXX miles per charge. Customers need to be educated on hypermiling and how it works. I do a cursory explanation for my customers, but will probably improve on that.

Sell the car honestly, but explain what the safest, most efficient driving style is and encourage them to strive for it. If they know this up front, they can't complain later. Battery degradation, of course, needs to be measured, but that can only happen when the same driving style is employed for the specific test car.

I welcome a discussion on this subject since it's incredibly important.

Paul, you sound like my kind of salesman (and the kind I was) If it were just for me I'd say provide a guaranteed capacity, with a pro-rated warranty just the way starter batteries are sold; that needs to be done regardless. But the great unwashed public are unlikely to understand or want to learn the relationship between how you drive and your range, so I don't see any issue with having the EPA devise worst case tests for various conditions, e.g. extreme cold/heat/load, battery at replacement capacity, at LBW and putting that info on the Monroney (along with the usual YMMV).

That way, if you live in Minnesota and you want to know how far you can count on the car to transport you and your family in the depths of February, it will be right there on the sticker, no need to page through the owners manual in hopes of finding that (currently non-existent) information. Rather than the existing situation, where we find owners discovering shortly after they bought the car that the range claimed by Nissan and other makers is hedged about with qualifications, and is unlikely to be attainable with average driving.

 

[thankyouOB]

GRA GRA, Blah Blah.

 

[evnow]

That way, if you live in Minnesota and you want to know how far you can count on the car to transport you and your family in the depths of February, it will be right there on the sticker, no need to page through the owners manual in hopes of finding that (currently non-existent) information.

Whatever number EPA prints will be easily overpowered by some idiot "average" driver.

Rather than the existing situation, where we find owners discovering shortly after they bought the car that the range claimed by Nissan and other makers is hedged about with qualifications, and is unlikely to be attainable with average driving.

I think EPA's 73 miles range is a very good ball park. City driving in mild climates gets you more than that - winter freeway driving in cold places gets you less than that.

The problem is the range itself - not what the EPA or Nissan says what it is. If we doubled the battery - there would be fewer complaints about lower than expected range. That will happen in some years ... (unless you want to shell out 10s of k more for Model S).