Your post seems to indicate that the US auto industry would scoff at 500,000 units sold in a year. Please note that that is 83,000 to 100,000 less units than Subaru sold in the US last year. Subaru has been in the US market for decades. It is a company built on loyalty. It took Subaru decades to position themselves to fill the areas of the car market they own. To have Tesla suddenly pre-sell just 500,000 units is a shock to the industry. Remember that Subaru only sold over 500,000 for the first time less 2 years ago and they are considered a very well run, profitable, healthy car manufacturer in the US.
On your loyalty statement. It is a nice NASCAR selling point. However, if that statement were true then the automakers would shy away from investing in the sport due to it. Why? The amount of people that dislike driver A, or B within the sport would cause people's loyalty of the manufacturers' brands those drivers are associated with to suffer. They wouldn't purchase a Ford, Chevy, or Toyota due to it. Also, they would be fearful of leaving the sport once involved. The blow back would cause all their loyal customers to leave them if they left NASCAR. I must have missed the stories about the massive decline of Dodge's sales numbers after they left the sport. Their sales numbers and market share % of the US have been falling for well over a decade. That includes the time they were in NASCAR. As you have so eloquently posted, the versions of vehicles on the track are nothing like the vehicles found in showrooms. Does anyone walk into a Toyota showroom on a Monday and say I want a Camry like the ones NASCAR has that goes 200+ miles per hour and won that race at _________ yesterday? Heck no, those days ended decades ago too. Who in the world keeps up with the manufacturer's points and cares about who won it? OK, the people in NASCAR and the NASCAR industry, and the people involved for the manufacturers but not many outside that. I hope that you can see that the street in that NASCAR selling point moves both ways.
The points I have been making and have to go back to are that they aren't about 1, 3, 5, 10 years from now. I'm talking about long term market planning that in 10 to 20 years out. Why everyone can't seem to follow that and have their panties in a bunch I can't say?
Oh, and to your last sentence it wasn't aimed at you. We are having a logical back and forth.
Re: Subaru - you can be a healthy, profitable well run company if you can find a niche to target, but it's still a niche. You don't see motor sports manufacturers building full-time AWD for the race track, and by your own numbers that a relatively larger market share than electrics. That technology does show up in other forms of racing, but those forms are as niche as Subaru. But then, based on sales numbers, the Truck series should be more popular than the sedan-based Cup series. Go figure.
Yes, sometimes a driver's personality drives part of the fan base away. That's part of any form of racing. Chevy certainly wasn't bothered by all those Earnhardt haters back in the '80s and '90s. Apparently they felt those who were attracted outnumbered those who were repelled. I do know that building brand recognition is the primary reason they're in NASCAR. Whether it's effective is up to the marketing gurus to measure. Chevy seems to think the grass is pretty green over in IndyCar, a form of racing that has even less to do with their production models. Ford has been quite successful on the track with its sophomore year in IMSA; that's a series that ties more closely to the showroom than NASCAR, and has more appeal for the performance fans / gearheads.
My point is that the manufacturers in NASCAR aren't in it for the R&D, despite all those 'TRD' logos out there.
Ford, Chevy, and Toyota ARE working on long-term electric car development. They're not using stock car racing as part of it, but they have've used it for development in decades. I don't understand why you want the manufacturers to tie the two (e-car R&D and racing) together, and why you think NASCAR is the appropriate venue.
You don't find it or NASCAR on ESPN either. Sorry, couldn't resist.
NJJammer is the one who said NASCAR couldn't be a fad. not me. I pointed out tennis and wrestling because I do think NASCAR is following a similar trend, but that doesn't mean the sport is going to disappear entirely as some are screaming. Like Subaru, it can be profitable and successful with a small, dedicated audience, just not at the boom level of 15 years ago.
Bro, the new Tesla cost between 30K and 50K. Ford F150's are in that price range. Yes, not the same buyer but I hope you get my point about cost.
Frankly, I don't get the obsession with trucks among the US vehicle buyers. I'm not a marketing VP but darned if I don't think most of them are bought more for the ego appeal than for any practical reason. Most of the ones I've seen appear to have never carried a piece of unfinished lumber or set a tire off the pavement. Me, I'm too cheap to fuel and insure a bunch of capability I won't use very often.
I don't plan on spending over 30K+ next year when I get a new vehicle, so it won't be a truck and likely not a Tesla either. Just me, I guess; I'm a cheap sumbich.
Every house, all seven of them on my mile long road have pickups and multi acre chunks of land. If you live in a city, it is very easy to have a misshapen outlook of not only the future but also what most people who don't live in the city use their vehicles for. We have more cows than people in Oklahoma. Large open spaces and many miles between them. Cell phones are a joke in some places..they don't work where I live