While we toil on travel sites looking to save a couple of bucks on a squishy flight, spare a thought (or your jealousy) for these people who snagged the travel deal of a lifetime.
Cathay Pacific sold premium business and first-class tickets from the U.S. to Vietnam for a fraction of the price, thanks to an error on the airline’s website.
Spotted by travel bloggerson New Year’s Eve, return first class fares between New York and Hanoi were going for $1,100, which would usually set you back about $16,000.
For the cost-conscious, you could’ve picked up a return business class flight to Da Nang from several U.S. cities from $675. These tickets usually go for around $6,000.
Cathay Pacific quickly worked to fix the mistake, but for those who were lucky enough to snap the tickets up, the airline went ahead and honoured the deal.
“To those who bought our good – VERY good surprise ‘special’ on New Year’s Day, yes – we made a mistake but we look forward to welcoming you on board with your ticket issued,” the airline wrote in a tweet.
Happy 2019 all, and to those who bought our good – VERY good surprise ‘special’ on New Year’s Day, yes – we made a mistake but we look forward to welcoming you on board with your ticket issued. Hope this will make your 2019 ‘special’ too! .#promisemadepromisekept#lessonlearnt
One person who seemingly managed to snap the ultra-cheap fare up was Mac Jaehnert. He tweeted that his “new year’s resolution is to spend as much of 2019 as possible eating caviar and napping in the sky.”
“I thought, this has got to be either a once in a lifetime deal, or possibly a mistaken fare, possibly both,” he told the BBC.
just booked 2 transpacific F flights on @cathaypacific – one in feb one in sep. my new year’s resolution is to spend as much of 2019 as possible eating caviar and napping in the sky.
The pricing error is the most welcome of blunders for Cathay Pacific. It’s also recently made headlines for spelling its own name wrong on its own airplane, and a massive data breach which hit 9.4 million customers.
Here’s hoping for another “surprise” special for the rest of us.
China’s President Xi Jinping warned on Wednesday that the unification of China and Taiwan was “inevitable”, with the use of military force remaining an option.
Xi made the comments during a speech marking the 40th anniversary of a message sent to Taiwan, when China declared an end to what had been routine artillery bombardment of Taiwan-controlled offshore islands and offered to open up communication between the two sides.
The “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan” in 1979 eventually led to a thaw in relations with the self-ruled island.
Here are key dates in relations between Taipei and Beijing.
1949: Separation
Mao Zedong’s communists take power in Beijing in October 1949 after defeating Chiang Kai-shek’s Kuomintang (KMT) nationalists in a civil war.
The KMT flee to the island of Taiwan and form their own government in Taipei in December, cutting off contacts with mainland China.
In 1950, Taiwan becomes an ally of the United States, which is at war with Communist China in Korea. It deploys a fleet in the Taiwan Strait between the two to protect its ally from possible attack from the mainland.
PEOPLE AND POWER: Taiwan – Spies, Lies and Cross-straits Ties (25:00)
1971: Beijing gets UN nod
In October 1971, Beijing takes over China’s seat at the United Nations, previously held by Taipei.
In 1979, the US establishes diplomatic relations with China but also commits to assist the defence of Taiwan. It backs the policy of “one China”, with Beijing as the legitimate government, but establishes trade and military ties with Taipei.
1987-2016: fragile reconciliation
In late 1987, Taiwan residents are for the first time permitted to visit China, allowing families to reunite and leading to a boom in trade.
In 1991, Taiwan lifts emergency rule, unilaterally ending a state of war with China. The first direct talks between the two sides are held in Singapore two years later.
But in 1995, Beijing suspends talks in protest at a visit by Taiwanese President Lee Teng-hui to the US.
In 1996, China tests missiles off Taiwan to deter voters in the island’s first democratic presidential election.
TALK TO AL JAZEERA: Joseph Wu – Taiwan is a model of democracy (26:00)
In 2000 elections, the KMT loses power in Taiwan for the first time and over the next five years trade links between the two sides improve, first by sea and then via air.
In March 2005, Beijing adopts a law which makes secession by Taiwan illegal at the risk of military action. In April, there is the first meeting since 1949 of the leaders of the KMT and Communist Party of China.
In 2008, Taiwan and China resume high-level talks after the KMT’s Ma Ying-jeou is elected president on a Beijing-friendly platform.
In 2010, they sign a sweeping Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement; in 2014, they hold the first government-to-government talks since separation.
In 2015, the leaders of both sides meet in Singapore, shaking hands and waving enthusiastically to a huge press throng but refraining from any joint statement.
Tsai Ing-wen at her inauguration ceremony in Taipei on May 20, 2016. [File: Tyrone Siu/Reuters]
2016: End of the honeymoon
In January 2016, opposition candidate Tsai Ing-wen, from the traditionally pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party, wins elections to become Taiwan’s first female president.
In her victory speech, Tsai said the results showed that democracy is ingrained in the Taiwanese people and that she will strive to maintain stability with China.
“We will work towards maintaining the status quo for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait in order to bring the greatest benefits and well-being to the Taiwanese people,” Tsai said.
The day of her inauguration in May, China cautions that peace would be “impossible” if she makes any moves to formally break away.
In June, China suspends all communications with Taiwan after the island’s new government fails to acknowledge the concept that there is only “one China”.
In December 2016, President-elect Donald Trump breaks with decades of US diplomatic policy by speaking directly, by telephone, with Tsai.
In 2017, Trump’s administration approves $1.4bn worth of arms sales to Taiwan, prompting anger from Beijing.
In March 2018, the US adopts a law reinforcing ties with Taiwan, again infuriating China.
In September 2018, the US State Department approves the sale to Taiwan of spare parts for F-16 fighter jets and other military aircraft worth up to $330m, drawing a warning from China that the move jeopardised cooperation between Beijing and Washington.
Cook pins the lower revenue projections on a number of factors, including “challenges in emerging markets” and “economic deceleration, particularly in Greater China,” as well as factors like “US dollar strength-related price increases” and customers choosing to replace their existing iPhone batteries instead of buying new iPhones.
Of course, there’s no one reason why Apple’s making less money. But it mostly boils down to pricing.
Simply put: new iPhones are too expensive, starting at $749 for an iPhone XR and $999 for an iPhone XS. And so, too, is every other product Apple sells, including the new iPad Pros, which start at $799, and the new MacBook Air at $1,199.
Maybe Apple pushed its “Apple tax” a bit too far this time around.
Apple tested how high it could push prices with the $999 iPhone X. At first, the move was greeted by a collective, “Are you nuts?” But then people acquiesced.
A thousand dollars isn’t an unreasonable amount of money for a device that does so much. While past quarterly earnings reports painted a clear picture that iPhone sales were down and had plateaued, the higher average sale price (ASP) per device helped offset reduced unit sales.
The narrative shifted from “Apple’s doomed because it’s not selling more iPhones” to “Relax, everything’s fine! It’s all gonna work out.” And it seemed that way for about a year. Now, however, things look more dire for Apple.
Steep discounts are never a good sign
See that asterisk? It probably wouldn’t be there if the new iPhones were flying off shelves.
Image: screenshot: Apple
It’s hard not to notice Apple’s rising prices.
As a reviewer, I still believe that even at $750, the iPhone XR is a great value (I put my money where my mouth is and bought one for my mom for Christmas!) But I understand it’s still a big chunk of money for some.
Monthly installment plans have no doubt helped soften the blow of the full cost of an iPhone by splitting the actual price into more manageable monthly payments.
But even so, many customers just don’t feel the need to upgrade to a new iPhone. Why get a new iPhone when their old one works just fine? I know tons of people who are still clinging onto their older iPhones. They like their headphone jacks on their pre-iPhone 7 devices. Their older iPhones run fine and even faster because of iOS 12’s improved performance features. They like their home buttons and Touch ID! A new battery fixes everything!
It’s kind of like a TV. Do you need a new TV every year? Absolutely not.
Here’s the thing: phones are mature devices now. Unless your phone’s on its last legs or you really need the most bleeding-edge device, a new iPhone isn’t essential. It’s kind of like a TV. Do you need a new TV every year? Absolutely not.
Reports claiming Apple had cut production for all the new iPhones, especially the iPhone XR, first suggested trouble in paradise. New iPhone XR owners seem to be mostly ex-Android users. But even those converts apparently aren’t enough to inject life into the iPhone XR’s sales numbers.
It was clear a more drastic measure was needed. So came the price discounts via older device trade-ins. It was unusual for Apple to offer up to $300 off a new iPhone. Though it seemed tied to a holiday push, analysts and pundits read it as iPhone prices being too high.
And now, Cook’s letter confirms it.
Trouble in Asia
China’s market is not like the U.S.’s.
Image: ARTYOM IVANOVTASS VIA GETTY IMAGES
Apple has struggled to replicate the same kind of success in emerging markets such as India as it enjoys in the U.S. India’s population of 1.8 billion is an untapped market booming with potential.
But the iPhone is just too expensive there. Estimates for the average Indian salary range anywhere from $10,000-20,000. Not a lot of people there can pay around 98,00 Indian rupees, which works out to about $1,400 USD (yes, iPhones cost even more in India than other markets), for a smartphone.
Lower incomes in emerging markets are a disadvantage for Apple’s premium-priced products, but not so for Android phone makers that produce significantly cheaper devices sold at half, a third, or even a tenth of the cost of the iPhone XS.
China is also an increasingly difficult market for Apple. Putting aside all of the political concerns and Trump’s trade war, China’s top phone makers are squeezing Apple hard with more dazzling innovations.
Apple may have been the first to do a near edge-to-edge phone right (notch notwithstanding), but companies like Huawei, Xiaomi, and Oppo, and OnePlus are plowing forward with devices that are truly nearly all-screen and no bezel.
The designs are unconventional — some devices employ features like a pop-up camera and sliding mechanism — but there’s no escaping the fact that these innovations are putting more heat on Apple.
For sure, most of these phones, especially Huawei’s, which are banned from officially being sold in the U.S., aren’t a threat to the iPhone in the United States. But in China, which basically operates in its own bubble with homegrown devices and services, the iPhone looks more foreign every day.
Who needs an iPhone when Huawei’s excellent Mate 20 Pro has more cameras, an arguably sleeker design, longer-lasting battery, and more?
Apple needs its next big thing
Could an Apple Car be Apple’s next big thing?
Image: mashable composite
If the iPhone’s future is in question, then we have to look at what Apple’s next big thing will be.
Apple’s huge war chest can be traced back to the iPod. After iPod’s runaway success came iPhone. Along the way MacBook and MacBook Air grew into their own pillars. Then iPad.
But what will be the thing that pushes Apple above and beyond? It’s hard to say without being a fly on the wall in Jony Ive’s secretive design lab, but it’s not necessarily doom and gloom.
AirPods are another underrated product that continue to see growth. The wireless earbuds are frequently sold out and they’re seemingly in everyone’s ears. I mean, two years after they launched, people who are just getting them are blown away. Imagine people losing their shit over a two-year-old product. But AirPods are accessories to iPhones. They may sell well and be Apple’s most explosive new product, but they’re not even in the same league as the iPhone.
HomePod? It’s a great-sounding smart speaker, but it has failed to match the affordability and intelligence of competing smart speakers from Amazon and Google.
Apple has stressed how its booming services category — which includes iCloud and Apple Music — continues to grow. And certainly, Apple seems to have a lot up its sleeve for Apple Music and even the streaming video service it’s reportedly building out. But neither of these is what Apple does best: hardware.
Without some kind of revolutionary new hardware, Apple is heavily reliant on the success of the iPhone. It’s the iPhone company.
iPhone sales aren’t going to evaporate over night — the phone’s here to stay for a long time — but each hit from competitors is going to sting a lot harder. A new must-have product would take a lot of the pressure off the iPhone.
Who can honestly know besides Tim Cook and Jony Ive?
A much more obvious fix might be something simpler: Just lower iPhone prices. But that would also mean Apple would have to sell more iPhones and that’s just not happening now that everyone has a working phone.
And so Apple’s future will probably hinge on a new product. The question is whether it’ll be clutch or not.
On Wednesday morning in Perth, Western Australia, a bystander heard a man inside a property repeatedly shouting the words “why don’t you die,” with the sounds of a toddler screaming in the background,. They naturally called police.
It turns out the man was only trying to kill a spider.
Western Australian Police posted a screenshot of the interaction on Twitter, however, the tweet was later deleted as officers aren’t meant to screenshot police systems.
“No injuries sighted (except to spider),” the police report read.
A WA Police spokesperson told Mashable via email that it was “very pleased the incident turned out to be something completely different to what was expected.”
“The member of the community who phoned this in did exactly the right thing – they heard something that concerned them, and that made them think someone was in danger, and they immediately contacted Police,” the spokesperson added.
“Our officers attend the scene urgently and that is when they discovered the incident was related to a spider. This isn’t something we see on a regular basis but it is definitely something the officers involved will remember.”
A lesson on not what to scream next time you encounter a spider, at the very least.
Intensified fighting between a Buddhist armed group and Myanmar’s security forces has driven thousands of people from their homes in the country’s western Rakhine state over the past month, amid rising tensions in the area where the Rohingya crisis broke out in 2017.
Farhan Haq, United Nations spokesperson, said on Wednesday that about 2,500 people had been displaced since early December when clashes broke out with the Arakan Army, one of several groups fighting Myanmar’s military that want more autonomy for ethnic minorities.
The Myanmarmilitary last month announced a four-month cessation in fighting in the north and northeast of the country, in what appeared to be a rare conciliatory move aimed at kick-starting peace talks with the armed groups.
Rakhine was excluded from the pause, stoking doubts about the military’s willingness to bring an end to all the country’s conflicts.
Analysts say the military left Rakhine out because it does not want the Arakan Army – which claims to represent the Rakhine, the Buddhist ethnic group who make up the majority in the state of the same name – to gain a foothold in the area and has lingering concerns over the less powerful Rohingya armed groups, who call themselves the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army.
Rakhine clashes
The state-run Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper on Wednesday said that one police officer was critically wounded when border guard police were attacked by about 30 men carrying “small and heavy arms” the previous day near Saytaung, a village in the Buthidaung area.
Khine Thu Kha, a spokesperson the Arakan Army, denied that the group attacked the police, but said its fighters did clash with government security forces in Saytaung on Tuesday, according to Reuters news agency.
Hundreds of border guard police had been deployed in areas far from the border with Bangladesh as part of a broader military offensive against the group, Khine Thu Kha told Reuters on Wednesday.
There was no immediate comment from Myanmar’s military.
Rakhine state was where Myanmar’s security forces launched a brutal campaign in August 2017 that drove more than 730,000 Muslim-majority Rohingya into neighbouring Bangladesh.
A report by UN investigators in August last year found that Myanmar’s military carried out mass killings and gang rapes of Rohingyas with “genocidal intent” and said the commander-in-chief and five generals should be prosecuted under international law.
Myanmar has denied most of the allegations in the report.
Last month, a human rights law group by the United States State Department to investigate the Myanmar military’s crackdown on the Rohingya, said it had found evidence of genocide and called on the international community to establish a criminal investigation into the atrocities and ensure justice for the victims.
Houston Rockets guard James Harden has always excelled at getting to the charity stripe, but he’s taking that skill to another level this year.
The Beard has shot an average of 14.9 free throws per game over his last 10 outings, including 27 on Monday against the Memphis Grizzlies. David MacKay of Rockets Wire put that latter number in perspective:
David MacKay @DavidMacKayNBA
Last night, James Harden attempted more free throws than six of the other TEAMS that played: Celtics (20), Spurs (18), Timberwolves (23), Pelicans (21), Hawks (19), Magic (19), Harden (27).
His 10-game average trounces his previous career-high of 10.9 free-throw attempts per game.
One doesn’t have to go far to find fans who are less than thrilled with the amount of time Harden spends shooting free throws, as a quick search of “James Harden free throws” in the Twitter search bar returns responses from people who make their stances quite clear.
NBA on TNT and NBATV reporter Rosalyn Gold-Onwude asked Harden about the topic on Wednesday and received the following response:
Rosalyn Gold-Onwude @ROSGO21
I just asked James Harden what he says to people who are mad that he gets to the freethrow line so much. He said, dead serious, “Stop fouling. It’s simple”. #Rockets
He’s not wrong. Yes, watching Harden drive and get fouled time and again isn’t aesthetically pleasing basketball, but (a) he’s not calling fouls, (b) he’s doing whatever he can to help his shorthanded team sans Chris Paul win and (c) he’s playing by the rules.
Also, overall NBA teams are shooting an average of 1.6 more free throws per game year to year, according to Basketball Reference. One of the NBA’s “Points of Education” from this past offseason may have partially caused that spike, as “freedom of movement on the perimeter and post” was mentioned alongside other initiatives.
We should expect Harden to spend a lot more time at the free-throw line this year if this 10-game stretch is any indication. Fans will just have to accept that reality.
Trump aides said Mitt Romney, on the eve of his swearing in to the Senate, was seeking to define himself as the new leader of the Never Trump movement. | Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File/AP Photo
Those close to the incoming Utah senator told POLITICO he agonized over whether to publish the rebuke.
Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel connected with President Donald Trump by phone on Tuesday evening with some alarming news: Mitt Romney, her uncle, was about to publish an op-ed savaging him.
McDaniel, who’d gotten a heads-up about the missive directly from Romney, was frustrated and knew she wanted to push back forcefully. That evening, she wrote a tweet defending the president. Then the next morning, as Romney’s op-ed took hold of the news cycle, McDaniel, Trump’s handpicked party chairwoman, sent out an even more strongly-worded tweet scolding her uncle.
Story Continued Below
Romney’s op-ed, which argued that Trump’s “has not risen to the mantle of the office,” blew up a delicate détente between the two men. And it immediately fueled suspicions among the president’s top aides that the incoming senator is up to something — maybe even keeping the door open to a 2020 primary challenge.
At a time when talk of a 2020 GOP primary has simmered, Trump aides said Romney, on the eve of his swearing in to the Senate, was seeking to define himself as the new leader of the Never Trump movement. They noted that Romney had taken steps in recent weeks to reactivate the national fundraising network he’d established in his 2012 presidential bid: This fall, long before being sworn in, the incoming senator hosted a fundraiser for his newly-created political action committee.
Two senior Trump aides said they were convinced that Stuart Stevens, a longtime top Romney adviser and an outspoken Trump critic, had played a role in drafting the op-ed. (“Mitt wrote this. I didn’t do a thing,” Stevens responded when reached for comment Wednesday evening.) And former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon argued that Romney had launched a “direct challenge to Trump for leadership.”
It’s the latest chapter in a years-long tale of on-again, off-again tensions between Trump and Romney. In 2016, Romney vocally opposed Trump and implored the party to nominate someone else. Then, after the election, Trump considered Romney to be his secretary of state before ultimately leaving him hanging. Then, after initially taking steps to block Romney from running for Utah’s Senate seat, the president endorsed him.
Appearing on CNN Wednesday, Romney denied that he was interested in challenging Trump.
“He did something I couldn’t do. He won. And I recognize that and appreciate that,” he said. “But no, I’m not running again. And we’ll see whether someone else does in a Republican primary or not. But time will tell.”
Romney, however, pointedly refused to endorse Trump for reelection and that he first wanted “to see what the alternatives are.”
Behind the scenes, Romney was torn over whether to publish the op-ed, a person close to him said. In discussions with his tight inner circle of aides, many of whom have been with him since his 2012 presidential bid, the incoming senator weighed the pros and cons of going after the president so aggressively prior to his swearing in. He was well aware that the op-ed would ignite a media firestorm and that it would be seen as a key moment in his early Senate career, something he would be asked about repeatedly in the halls of the Capitol.
But as the New Year neared, Romney found himself increasingly frustrated with the president, the person close to Romney said. He vented over the president’s Syrian troop withdrawal and he was troubled by the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis. And he was vexed by Trump’s declaration to U.S. troops stationed in Iraq that America was no longer “the suckers of the world.”
The former GOP nominee decided to plunge ahead with the op-ed. After punching out a draft, he sent it to a small group of advisers for input.
Romney’s allies said he’s merely following through on his long-held promise to speak out against Trump when he feels he needs to.
“He’s setting down a marker for what kind of senator he will be, and the way he will comport himself once his time in the Senate begins,” said Lanhee Chen, a former Romney policy adviser.
As the op-ed dominated media coverage Wednesday, the White House was concerned enough that Trump’s top Senate surrogates were dispatched to push back on their soon-to-be colleague. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a vocal backer of Trump’s Syria decision, called Romney’s comments “an anomaly,” and a “minority opinion.”
“The senator from Utah misjudged,” he added. “This kind of sentiment doesn’t represent Utah that well.”
Trump himself took to Twitter to warn Romney not to become the next Jeff Flake and point out that “I won big, and he didn’t.” Later, in front of the TV cameras, again implored the incoming senator to get on board, noting, “If he fought the way he fights me, he would have won the election” against Barack Obama in 2012.
Trump aides insist the president wouldn’t be jeopardized in a prospective Republican primary — against Romney or anyone else. The president’s approval among Republicans hovers in the 80s. And last month, a survey released by Trump’s 2016 pollster, John McLaughlin, showed the president leading Romney, 72 percent to 9 percent, in a prospective 2020 matchup.
While Trump advisers concede there are pockets of unease in the party toward Trump, they contend a mainstream figure like Romney would pose little threat.
“Whatever ambition Sen. Romney had to be president, he needs to put to rest,” McLaughlin wrote in an email. “It’s time to look ahead. The Republican Party is now Trump’s party, not the Romney GOP establishment. It’s not a country club. It’s Trump’s party of working taxpayers.”
Still, Trump aides worry that a primary challenge would become an unwelcome distraction for the president’s reelection campaign and potentially turn the 2020 GOP convention into a circus. They note that no past Republican president has won reelection after a contested primary and point to George H.W. Bush’s bruising 1992 primary against Pat Buchanan as evidence of the damage an incumbent can suffer.
Some party officials are concerned enough that they’re exploring ways to shut off avenues for potential Trump challengers. Jevon O.A. Williams, an RNC committeeman from the Virgin Islands, circulated a letter to fellow party officials after Romney’s op-ed was published urging them to amend the party’s rules to make it harder for an insurgent.
“While President Trump would win re-nomination it wouldn’t come quick and it wouldn’t be inexpensive,” he wrote. “Any contested re-nomination campaign—even a forlorn hope—would only help Democrats.”
There’s still hope for Google’s gesture-sensing radar tech, Project Soli.
The project, which Google first showed off in 2015, uses a combination of radar and sensors to create gesture controllers for everyday objects. So instead of controlling a smartwatch by tapping on a display, for instance, you could quickly rub or tap your fingers together.
The product of Google’s secretive Advanced Technology and Projects (ATAP) lab, Google has teased a few prototypes over the years, but hasn’t said much about Soli publicly since its last update at Google I/O in 2016.
But now we know the project is still alive. Despite its relative silence over the last two years, Google has been working behind the scenes to get FCC approval in order to test its sensors at higher power levels than what’s currently allowed. That permission has now been granted, with the FCC giving Soli its sign-off last week in a filing that was first spotted by Reuters.
An example of how Soli could let you use a gesture to control something like the volume of a speaker.
Image: soli
Exactly what this means for the future of Project Soli still isn’t clear, but it’s certainly a positive development for anyone hoping the radar tech will eventually become something more than a prototype.
Because Soli relies on radar and small sensors that can be easily embedded into every day objects, the technology could make it much easier to create motion controllers than those that rely on 3D cameras and bulkier tech.
Project Soli’s gesture-tracking takes a particularly unique approach in that it depends on radar. Radar, which detects objects in motion through high frequency radio waves, enables what Project Soli’s design lead Carste Schwesig calls a “fundamentally different approach” to motion tracking.
Since Soli’s sensors can capture motion at up to 10,000 frames per second, it is much more accurate than camera-based systems, which track motion at much lower frame rates, Schwesig says. And unlike cameras, radar can pass through certain types of objects, making it adaptable to more form factors than a camera.
Since then, Google has made the tech available to a handful of developers, and demoed a few real-world use cases for the gesture sensors, like the ability to control Bluetooth speakers and smartwatches just by tapping your fingers together. Now, it has the FCC onboard, which also appeared to acknowledge the promise represented by Soli.
“Grant of the waiver will serve the public interest by providing for innovative device control features using touchless hand gesture technology,” the FCC notes in its approval.
We’ve reached out to Google for more information and will update if we hear back.
The American car company reportedly reached 200,000 electric vehicle sales in the U.S. since it started selling the zero-emission vehicles. A company spokesperson said official numbers would be released Thursday. That number is significant, because once a car maker reaches 200,000 electric vehicles sold, a hefty federal tax credit starts phasing out.
Tesla hit the threshold in July, so the $7,500 began to phase out on Dec. 31. As of Jan. 1, buyers can apply for the credit for only $3,750. For GM, the subsidy will fully disappear in April 2020, according to Reuters. For would-be GM car buyers, now’s the time to buy an electric vehicle to apply for the full $7,500 tax credit. It will be halved by July.
GM has the all-electric Chevy Bolt and hybrid Chevy Volt, which will be discontinued as the company focuses more on SUVs and crossovers instead of sedans.
An online EV sales tracker puts GM at over 203,000 vehicles sold since 2010 and Tesla at over 120,000 more EVs sold since hitting 200,000 in July. The next closest is Nissan with its all-electric Leaf.
Tesla announced Wednesday that last quarter it made 86,555 vehicles, an 8 percent increase from the previous quarter. On the delivery-front Tesla got 90,700 of its Model 3, S, and X cars to customers, a number that Tesla admitted was “limited.” The company said 1,010 Model 3 vehicles were in transit before the end of the quarter, missing the 2018 delivery deadline.
To make up for the delayed deliveries and fewer incentives, Tesla will “partially absorb” the reduced federal tax credit. So all vehicles will be $2,000 less starting today. The price reduction is available for all buyers.
/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F911197%2F26236b55-082d-4e88-af9a-5a0b90534e78.jpg)
/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F911170%2Fb8dad6f1-efdb-4f40-a99b-862b554621bc.jpg)
Daily Trends Hunter 