I mean, this strategy exists for a lot of consumer industries, right? Sell at a loss for years to flood the market, then once people are bought in and competition is left scrambling to catch up or worse, jack up the prices to start making a profit. But preventing competition so you can sustain a jacked up automobile market is also anti-consumer especially if domestic car companies are making record profit margins in the meantime. But this is the EU and I’m from the US where consumer protections are laughable, so maybe vehicles are actually affordable over there and this would be a good decision.
Comment on EU approves steep tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles
JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 1 month agoIf we assume they actually were that affordable in reality, then the answer would be yes.
The accusation is that the Chinese government is financing and supporting their domestic EV manufacturers in an effort to artificially lower their prices to levels no other manufacturer could ever match in an effort to dominate the market and remove all competition - at which point they could rise their prices drastically and recover the “investment” as there would be no-one else left to compete.
If it’s true or not, I can’t say, I haven’t researched the subject enough. Those votes at least showcase that there is no clear consensus about it.
Jentu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 month ago
teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
There’s also the factor that China controls the largest “rare earth” mines which are the raw materials for battery manufacturing. Right now, a lot of non-chinese EV companies source their battery materials from China, who will obviously always give their domestic market an anti-competative advantage over any other country.
JayTreeman@beehaw.org 1 month ago
BYD is also a battery company that makes cars. They can afford to lose a little on the car, when they make money overall.