• Jul 23, 2011
How much money can you make selling a $20,000 electric car? Mitsubishi Motors thinks you can make plenty and, according to Japan's Nikkei business daily, expects its plug-in vehicles to turn a profit in two years. In the U.S., the company's i EV will cost $27,990 (or just $20,490 after the federal tax incentive is factored in). A company like Mitsubishi obviously looks at profit on a global basis, so we hope our lede wasn't too deceptive.

In any case, Mitsubishi's executive vice-president, Hiizu Ichikawa, reportedly told the Nikkei that the Japanese automaker expects to surpass its break-even point of 70,000 units sold annually by the fiscal year ending in March 2014. At that time, Mitsubishi's plug-ins will begin to contribute to the automaker's annual earnings.

Mitsubishi projects that sales of "green vehicles" will hit 25,000 units by the end of 2011, but with the addition of a plug-in hybrid version of its Outlander Sport in 2013, Mitsubishi is getting ready for annual sales of its plug-ins to steadily climb.

[Source: Automotive News – sub. req.]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 22 Comments
      Ford Future
      • 1 Day Ago
      Only Good News I've Heard Today! Thank God.
      Nick From Montreal
      • 1 Day Ago
      Mitsubishi has never had a hit car in the US or Europe. This EV might be their first real chance. Hopefully, they will produce as many as they can.
      Larz Larzen
      • 1 Day Ago
      Wow. Now they're starting to hit a pretty good price point. This is going to take off soon.
      Marco Polo
      • 1 Day Ago
      Hmm....Well, far be it from me to rain on any EV makers parade, but two things stand out in this equation.1) this figure includes 'plug-in hybrids'. 2) assumes that EV's will continue to derive their profits from taxpayer rebates. To me Mitsubishi's announcement, seems a little risky. How long will the Taxpayer be required to subsidise car owners choice of technology. Obviously the more successful the EV the less necessary is taxpayer funding. Hopefully by the time these EV manufacturers are profitable, gasoline prices will have risen sufficiently to offset the reduction of Taxpayer funded rebates. Boasting about profitability, gives oxygen to the argument that taxpayer benefits to EV's should be removed.
        EJ
        • 1 Day Ago
        @Marco Polo
        "How long will the Taxpayer be required to [subsidise] car owners choice of technology." Let's try it for as long as we subsidized gasoline and see what happens.
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Day Ago
          @EJ
          Yeah, like you, I always believed that oil production was heavily subsidised, but in fact, even in the USA, oil products are not only more heavily taxed than most other products, but actually receive almost no unique subsidies. The oil industry subsidy turns out to be a bit of a myth. Believers in the myth, when challenged to actually name the subsides, always quote either obsolete concessions, or tax deductions and subsidies that are available to all high risk resource sector industries especially those in the 'national interest'. That leaves only the "military fighting wars for oil' theory. But that's not a very honest argument, when discussing tax subsidies. A better argument is that the US and other countries spend large amounts of currency to buy oil. (There are other countries, not just the US!) But, in the case of Mitsubishi, the whole car imported. In Australia where no subsidies exist, the government is about to grant an import tax exemption on imported EV's, and increase the tax on locally manufactured EV's!
          • 1 Day Ago
          @EJ
          I concur with Marco Polo. Attacking Big Oil is pointless, as is attacking its subsidies, which are basically inline with any US business. If you want to kill the tax incentives, kill them across the board, otherwise, it's just political nonsense meant to fire up the troops. Moreover, Big oil is a game that is today dominated by national oil companies that are far more subsized than US ones. Many of these incentives are intended to keep US oil companies producing in the US, essentially to limit the chances of greater foreign oil dependence.
      Ford Future
      • 1 Day Ago
      Bring it on, the Outlander SUV Hybrid Plug! Plus this. There could be 2 Mitsu's in the driveway!
      upstategreenie
      • 1 Day Ago
      "How long will the Taxpayer be required to [subsidise] car owners choice of technology." I agree with comment below...how about AT LEAST one hundred years, as oil/coal subsidies are still going and radicals refuse to repeal them even when 90% of voting americans felt they should be repealed......so much for representation by our newly elected members of Congress. or how about as long as we are spending billions to support ethanol which can only go up since there is RECORD drought and RECORD wildfires and RECORD heat now entirely covering the midwest and the ENTIRE corn growing region... I am sure that ethanol is too big to fail, like banks.
        Marco Polo
        • 1 Day Ago
        @upstategreenie
        @upstategreenie Great! Now can you just nominate those oil subsidies that you would like '90%' of vetoing Americans to repeal? Just name the Acts of Congress, and nominate those which are special to the oil industry. Now, in the interests of fairness, name the tax obligations and revenues levied on the oil industry at each level of production and distribution? Now extrapolate that world wide, to all the different tax regimes levied on oil companies that contribute to providing gasoline to Main Street USA. If you can't, than you are really just repeating something you have heard from others, and don't actually know if what you claiming is true or not. Hating Oil Companies may be fun, and popular, but pretty pointless when your hatred is based on inaccurate ranting. I have spent 18 years promoting EV's. But repeating myths and pointless inaccuracies against the oil industry doesn't assist the adoption of EV's. The Age of Oil for transport fuel, is ending ,due to economic depletion, nothing can stop that eventuality. But oil and oil companies will still play a significant role in the world economy for centuries to come. Oil has other uses and products far more essential than Gasoline.
        Ford Future
        • 1 Day Ago
        @upstategreenie
        Agreed: If Oil Can't Stand On It's Own Now, during Record Profits, When will It! Add Up 100 years of Oil Subsidy, and apply that to Green Energy. Then we'll see where Green Energy Stands.
      upstategreenie
      • 1 Day Ago
      bush was asinine when he cut off tax credits for hybrids at artificially low couple hundred thousand in order to boost pseudo american flex fuel (since we had ZERO hybrids) JUST to boost ethanol and considered flex fuel tahoe for example the same as hybrids...therefore, in order to make up for this gross miscarriage of justice there should be renewed tax credits for hybrids and electric vehicles until a saturation point is reached, say 20%. otherwise, we will be waiting forever even after throwing another trillion at US automakers and only end up with volt while world turns into a giant unhabitable planet only fit for reptilians.
      2 Wheeled Menace
      • 1 Day Ago
      That's what these companies need to move forward: to actually make a profit on these cars! Nobody is getting rich on EVs, that is for sure.
        sirvixisvexed
        • 1 Day Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        "Nobody is getting rich on EVs, that is for sure." That'll change over time
        • 1 Day Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        "Nobody is getting rich on EVs, that is for sure." I wonder what Nissan's profit or loss would be if it could produce as many Leaf's as there are willing buyers.
          • 1 Day Ago
          Depends on if you add production costs into the equation.
      fairfireman21
      • 1 Day Ago
      I did some resurch on this thing and found that: from a 110 volt outlet it takes 22.5 hours to charge. Not a good thing if you drive the 80 miles and need to go another 80 more. A 160 mile trip might take you more than 3 days. From a 240 volt charger it takes 6 hours and about an extra $800 for the charger. This car is only good if you do not plan on going more than three quarters of the rated distance you are screwed, I say thre quarter of rated distance because of all the electronics being run from the battery, IE(radio, heater, A/C, lights and such).
        fairfireman21
        • 1 Day Ago
        @fairfireman21
        Why is common since a minus? Oh I know because all of you are major TREE HUGGING MORONS! Think about it 80 mile range. To get to nearest big city is 45 miles one way, 90 miles round trip. Oh and this thing has a range of 80 miles for 16K, that is over 86,000 miles @ $5 per gal or over 40,000 miles @ $10 per gal, 40,000 miles would do us for 4-5 years. That is only if you got the full 80 out of it. As I have said to you egg heads electric is not good for the rural part of America, but you are so stuck on it because you can afford it and thinkk it is right for all, well come down off you peddistal and look at the rest of the people that can not use it. Face it they are not right for all, because you can afford and use does not mean the rest of us can.
      upstategreenie
      • 1 Day Ago
      my next car will be whatever actually materializes in my small city, such as leaf or this car or ford focus electric.. I don't think there is much saturation when I have yet to see any of these in my area.....and I know there is demand.
      Mr. Sunshine
      • 1 Day Ago
      "The most likable car on the planet." That's overshooting.
    • Load More Comments