Accountants: How did my Lightning cost $200,000 to build?

[25StarWhiteLightning]

Lots of cluelessness in this thread but good entertainment to share on social media. Keep it coming!

Help us out Mr. Accountant!

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member 21405]

Help us out Mr. Accountant!

Beyond help so I’ll just enjoy sharing it

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Lots of cluelessness in this thread but good entertainment to share on social media. Keep it coming!

Exatly my thinking!!

 

[bc1]

Maybe Ford give you a discount from the $200,000 because you are a nice guy?

When I stop at a motel and start going down my list of reasons (including things like you're a beautiful girl, etc.) for getting a discount I usually end with asking for a "nice guy discount". Somewhere in there I wear them down and they find what they say is their lowest rate.

 

[RickLightning]

It's very clear that few have ever taken a Cost Accounting class...

When I was a consultant, I sometimes had a prospective client tell me "I can't afford you". My response was "so you can't afford to pay me $X, when the return on your investment is more than $3X?" "No, you're too expensive". That's when you knew that either a) he had no cash position or b) he didn't understand how to run a business.

Ford understands the accounting side very well. It's the building profitable vehicles without recalls side that they have trouble with.

They just opened their new World HQ on which they spent $1.2B. That's a "B", as in billions.

What's not in question is their inability to raise the value of the company, year after year, or to beat GM's #1 ranking in recalls (2014) by a wide margin.

 

[bc1]

It's very clear that few have ever taken a Cost Accounting class...

When I was a consultant, I sometimes had a prospective client tell me "I can't afford you". My response was "so you can't afford to pay me $X, when the return on your investment is more than $3X?" "No, you're too expensive". That's when you knew that either a) he had no cash position or b) he didn't understand how to run a business.

Ford understands the accounting side very well. It's the building profitable vehicles without recalls side that they have trouble with.

They just opened their new World HQ on which they spent $1.2B. That's a "B", as in billions.

What's not in question is their inability to raise the value of the company, year after year, or to beat GM's #1 ranking in recalls (2014) by a wide margin.

Maybe Ford needs a female CEO to giturdun? Take my wife, she's an expert at giving out marching orders. There would be no goofing off with her in charge. She is coming back home on Sunday so if you don't see me on the computer as much you will know why.

 

[ZeusDriver]

They must have come down in price, my 25 Flash was 72k msrp. 61k otd.

$65.8K is Ford's offering price for the flash, prior to any individual negotiation. MSRP is 69.9K, but that is a fictional figure, without the incentives to unload them.
The Raptor with 3.5 Ecoboost, starts at $79,995, per the Ford website. It is not a dog, but it is slower to 60 than the Lightning.

 

[22legit2quit]

Guess the greed machine broke down, this is just what they’re saying to slow the bleed. I bought my 24 flash with the intention of keeping it until I could no longer get it serviced since I already have a vehicle that is much older and sold much less than the lightning. I don’t know why this is such a hard sell to anyone unless they’re literally towing heavy equipment all day long (which a half ton is probably not the best regardless of fuel source). Probably the best truck I will ever own, but since they’re likely to become something like my gen 1 insight it probably won’t be my last.

 

[RLXXI]

$65.8K is Ford's offering price for the flash, prior to any individual negotiation. MSRP is 69.9K, but that is a fictional figure, without the incentives to unload them.
The Raptor with 3.5 Ecoboost, starts at $79,995, per the Ford website. It is not a dog, but it is slower to 60 than the Lightning.

Like I said, they must have come down on price.

 

[25StarWhiteLightning]

Let's see what the "accountants" (actually just small business owners) in this thread say about ChatGPT response:


Here’s the short version up front: Ford isn’t losing $132,000 per Lightning because the truck itself costs that much to build. The loss comes from spreading massive R&D and future‑EV investment costs over a very small number of vehicles sold, combined with price cuts, slower demand, and battery‑related cost inflation.

Let’s break it down clearly and tie it to the reporting.


Why Ford “Loses $132,000 per Lightning Sold”
According to Ford’s own financial reporting, the $132k-per-vehicle loss is not the manufacturing cost of each Lightning. It’s the result of:

1. Ford allocating billions in EV R&D across a small number of sales
Ford’s EV division (“Model e”) lost $1.3 billion in Q1 2024, selling only 10,000 EVs in that period. That’s where the “$132,000 per vehicle” figure comes from.

Ford explicitly said the losses include:

• Hundreds of millions in R&D for next‑generation EVs
• Long‑term investments that won’t pay off for years
• Not just the cost of building the trucks

This is why the per‑vehicle loss looks absurdly high.


2. Price cuts hit revenue faster than Ford can reduce costs
Ford said EV price cuts across the industry caused revenue to plunge 84% for its EV unit. Even though Ford removed about $5,000 in cost per Mach‑E, the CFO said:

“Revenue is dropping faster than we can take out the cost.”

So even if the Lightning’s build cost is improving, falling prices erase the gains.


3. EV demand slowed sharply
Ford’s EV sales dropped 20% year-over-year in that quarter. Lower volume means:

• Less revenue
• Higher per‑unit allocation of fixed costs
• Factories running below efficient capacity

This amplifies the “loss per vehicle” number.


4. Batteries are expensive and volatile
Battery materials (lithium, nickel) have had wild price swings. Ford also had supply chain disruptions, including a fire at an aluminum supplier that affected Lightning production.


5. Lightning is NOT a “simple” vehicle
You’re right that EVs have fewer moving parts than ICE vehicles. But EVs have very expensive components, especially:

• Large battery packs
• High‑power inverters
• Thermal management systems
• High‑voltage wiring
• Rare‑earth motors

These are far more expensive than the engine/transmission systems they replace.

And Ford is still early in its EV learning curve—Tesla took 15 years to reach consistent profitability.


So why didn’t Ford “know the cost” in advance?
They did—but forecasting cost is not the same as achieving it.

Ford expected:

• Higher sales volume
• Lower battery costs
• Faster factory scaling
• Less aggressive price competition

Instead, they got:

• Lower demand
• A price war
• Higher material costs
• Slower scaling
• Billions in sunk R&D that must be accounted for

Ford even said it intends to reach “build cost parity” (not full profitability) within 12 months—but only if the price war cools down.


Bottom Line
Ford isn’t losing $132k because the Lightning is expensive to build. They’re losing that much because:

• They’re spreading huge R&D and future EV investment over very low sales volume
• They cut prices aggressively
• Battery costs remain high
• Demand slowed
• They’re early in the EV learning curve

This is a financial accounting loss, not a “we don’t know how to build trucks” loss.

 

[chl]

AI got a lot of things right.

But it kind of glossed over the pandemic shutdown of the supply change which drove battery prices higher reversing a decades long trend in lower battery costs per kWh of storage., something no one could have predicted when the Lightning was first planned in 2019 and maybe earlier.

Several studies have tied the reduction in EV sales world wide, even in China, to the pandemic:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9761589/

And no mention of the tariffs?

800million in Q2 of 2025 alone on materials (aluminum, steel etc.) and parts (Mexico and other countries), estimating $2billion is costs for 2025.

And the ICE F-150s rely on those supply chains as well.

Or the expiration of the tax credit that factors into the reduction in sales projections?
Price theory econ 101.

Of course if not for US economic policy of imposing tariffs on Chinese made EVs and battery components, since 2018, would there have ever been a Ford Lightning made in the USA? But the new tariffs on things made in Mexico and Canada certainly went into the calculations of losses (projected) on the Lightning.

And besides the R&D costs, Ford as a legacy carmaker has overhead and, as a public company, a fiduciary duty to shareholders, things that the guy making his EV in his garage doesn't have.
----
Someone mentioned Tesla and wonder how they seemingly do so much better.

First, not a legacy carmaker at the onset, so none of those big overhead costs. Think about how Apple got started in a garage and at HP - first designed at HP by Wozniak, HP said they weren't interested and gave him a release, and the rest is history. Apple for a while, dominated the personal computer industry by being one of the first, before the legacy computer makers (IBM and others) caught on and caught up.

Tesla was two engineers in 2003 who liked the GM EV1 (which GM scrapped) and wanted to make an EV sports car, Musk came along with investment money about a year later, then they partnered with Lotus using their chassis and a couple years later produced the Roadster in 2008.

Their R&D invested to get to the Roadster was in the millions, not Ford's billions, so the ROI of the company over time has been much better (a positive number, lol).

Initially, the Roadster reported cost $180k to make and sold for $100k, but a year later it was profitable to produce, that is, not considering upfront R&D costs. But the breakthrough factor made Tesla a leader in the EV arena in the US, leading to investor and consumer confidence, and future profitability with other models.
----
Ford had this advantage with the first EV pickup brought to market, but may be about to squander it - if they don't go through with their "Universal EV Platform" truck. Time will tell, but they really ought to get with the cutting edge battery tech, not old tech as the OP noted!
----
Since then, Tesla has made billions from selling regulatory credits to other companies, in 2024 estimated at $2.76 billion. That money is basically pure profit so it boosts Tesla's ability to keep on making EVs and to engage in price wars with other EV makers.

What will it cost Tesla now that the federal EV tax credit is gone? At least $2billion a year in lost profits say analysts.

How will they make up for that? They have already raised their lease prices as a result.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-makes-first-move-to-counter-loss-of-7500-ev-tax-credit/

---
But taking the R&D costs out, how much does it really cost in material and labor to produce a Lightning?

And what is that loss per vehicle? I have read $30k per some places.

If the tariffs on materials were eliminated, then what would they be?

Only the Ford exec's really know.

But at this point it is purely academic since they cancelled it and will have a big tax write-off no doubt,

 

[The Weatherman]

So riddle me this Bat Man!

Since Ford just wrote down $20+Billion on the Lightning to date, does that mean that if/when they restart the line will they be able to show a profit on each unit then?

 

[bc1]

So riddle me this Bat Man!

Since Ford just wrote down $20+Billion on the Lightning to date, does that mean that if/when the restart the line will they be able to show a profit on each unit then?

I'm thinking that the BBB has some bigger and faster tax write offs for newer startups for their new vehicle instead of the old longer term depreciation schedules so their may be billions of dollars of future tax write offs with costs being written off immediately with the rest capitalized on shorter terms as a secret agenda/secret method to their so called madness in cancelling the Lightning a/k/a Lingering. Makes sense to me. Killing multiple birds with one stone.

 

[mr.Magoo]

I don’t know why this is such a hard sell to anyone...

Because you can't reason with emotions.
Several people in my "circle" are hard core anti-EV for no logical reason, simply emotional.

People tend to latch onto / remember all the negatives, probably because there's a lot more negative / click-bait posts about EV's than there are positive ones, it's not like we post "hey, my truck started today and I drove to work without any issues - again - whohoo" but the minute it doesn't there's a post here, reddit and probably instagram.


Even my wife is afraid we'll get stranded at home (if we were to become an all EV household) because there was a week long power outage that covered half the county some eight years ago (the same outage took out all the gas stations as well, so - again - no logic), brother/sister inlaw who does nothing but drive around in circles the all day (kids school drop-off, errands, kids school pickup, sports, etc. like 20-30 miles each direction with hours at home inbetween, an EV would be perfect for them) but EV's are somehow not an option. My boss loudly proclaimed he'd never get an EV bacuse of all the camping he does (few times a year, not even with an actual camper, just tent, so the Lightning would be perfect).

And that's just EV's in general, now look at an even more conservative segment, ie. truck owners, and well...

 

[bc1]

Because you can't reason with emotions.
Several people in my "circle" are hard core anti-EV for no logical reason, simply emotional.

And the "circle" gets the "square"!!

For you young folks, I'm using a game show phrase from the Hollywood Squares game show and also referring to what the hippies from the 60s called the old fashioned, ignorant, Archie Bunker types a/k/a a "square". The same young folks wouldn't know who Mr. Magoo was either.

Sponsored