Automotive News’ coverage of product launches tends to display lots of pom-pom waving, so it was curious that a recent story about the Slate Truck was fairly negative.
I think it is entirely reasonable to discuss why this fledgling electric vehicle maker faces an uphill battle to get established in a tough market. However, Laurence Iliff (2026) put his finger onto the negative side if the scales too much. This was the opposite of the approach used on a more typical Automotive News piece about the Cupra Raval (Malan, 2026).
The negativity of Iliff’s (2026) story may partly reflect talking to experts who spout conventional wisdom privileging legacy automakers. Even so, it is revealing how he played up the most damning views and buried more supportive ones.
For example, the first quote was a harshly dismissive take by analyst Karl Brauer. “My biggest problem with Slate is I can get a real car from a real car company with a real dealer network to support me for the same or little additional cost.” By this logic, Tesla had no chance of success.
Iliff’s unflattering comparisons are debatable
Iliff (2026) went on to write that Slate could “find passionate fans but likely won’t dent sales of the bigger Ford Maverick pickup, the proven Chevrolet Bolt EV or gasoline and hybrid crossovers from legacy brands, analysts say. Fleet buyers, focused on total cost per mile, are likely a better fit.”
That may turn out to be true. However, Iliff doesn’t acknowledge that Slate is different enough that it doesn’t directly compete with the other mentioned vehicles. Why would very many people cross-shop the Slate and the Bolt when one is a truck and the other is a minicar? The use cases are substantially different. Much the same could be said in comparing the Slate and Maverick.
Also see ‘Will the Slate Truck be the closest thing you can get to a modern simple car?’
A forthcoming Ford compact EV pickup could be a more direct competitor. However, that truck isn’t expected to arrive until sometime in 2027 (Stafford, 2026; Lee, 2026). Early indications are that the new entry may be similar in size to the Maverick and have four doors.
“The Slate is a two-door and two doors don’t sell very well,” analyst Sam Fiorani told Iliff (2026). That may generally be true, but left unmentioned is that Slate has features that could boost its appeal such as a body that can be configured as either a truck or a sport-utility vehicle. In addition, a two-door model could be somewhat more popular in a small pickup reminiscent of the early Ford Ranger.
What would it take for Slate to become profitable?
Iliff (2026) noted that, outside of Tesla, EV startups have a poor record of achieving profitability in the U.S. “Rivian is burning through cash five years after launching its first vehicle and Lucid hired turnaround firm AlixPartners after cutting jobs in June.”
In addition, Iliff (2026) reported that Slate’s production capacity is 150,000 units per year. He implied that there might not be a big enough market for the automaker because “only two electric vehicles managed 150,000 registrations last year, the Tesla Model Y crossover and Model 3 sedan.”
What Iliff left out of his story was that Slate’s break-even point will be roughly 80,000 units per year. Car Scoops reported that the automaker’s goal is to “reach positive free cash flow and earnings before taxes, depreciation, and amortization by 2027.” Chief Executive Peter Faricy acknowledged that reaching profitability next year was “an ambitious goal” but that “you have to have ambitious goals if you want to achieve big things” (Anderson, 2026).
That strikes me as the most problematic aspect of Slate’s launch thus far. I suspect that the automaker’s ability to build a loyal customer base will require a smooth production ramp up with minimal quality-control glitches and a high level of customer service. Given the challenges of standing up a distribution network, I would be surprised if Slate met its initial production goals even if demand proved to be brisk.
Slate could more fully exploit EV reliability advantage
In theory, EVs should be more reliable than gas-powered cars because they have fewer moving parts. However, Consumer Reports (2026) has found Teslas to have mixed reliability and Rivian has been near the bottom of its rankings. Slate’s ultra-simple design holds the promise of better realizing the advantages of EVs.
By the same token, Slate’s minimalist approach in launching an automaker could help it more gracefully navigate a volatile EV market than costly startups such as Rivian and Lucid. And as Slate gets more established, it could have more financial room to plug holes in its lineup. For example, I should give Iliff (2026) credit for acknowledging that the automaker could eventually add a four-door model.
Also see ‘Which EV startups will succeed in crossing the Valley of Death?’
Alas, even his concluding paragraph has only a lukewarm quote from analyst Robby DeGraff: “This is not a vehicle for everybody, but it is a vehicle for somebody and that somebody is going to love it. If you’re a single person and have a 50-mile commute and some recreation on the side and can plug it in every night, this seems like the perfect fit.”
Well, yeah — that’s one type of buyer. However, it seems to me that Slate could appeal to an eclectic range of people, from fleet operators seeking to minimize their costs to rural home owners who need a flexible and no-nonsense workhorse. In other words, a modern-day simple car. Something that the rest of the auto industry has been running away from for years. The forthcoming compact Ford EV may be too fancy to fit the bill.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Anderson, Brad; 2026. “Slate Bets Its Electric Truck Is So Cheap That It’ll Turn A Profit.” Car Scoops. Posted June 26.
- Banner, Justin; 2026. “GM Will Kill the Chevrolet Bolt EV (Again) by 2028, Says Report.” MotorTrend. Posted Jan. 23.
- Consumer Reports; 2026. “Which Brands Make the Best Cars?” Accessed July 28.
- Iliff, Laurence; 2026. “Slate’s $26,400 EV looks like a bargain, but mainstream rivals offer more features, fewer trade-offs.” Automotive News. Posted July 27.
- Lee, Kristen; 2026. “2028 Ford Ranchero: Everything We Know About the $30,000 Electric Truck.” MotorTrend. Posted July 14.
- Malan, Andrea; 2026. “VW’s Cupra launches sporty Raval electric hatchback to challenge Renault 5.” Automotive News. Posted April 9.
- Slate; 2026. “Back to Basics, Made to Be Accessorized Over Time.” Press release dated June 24.
- Stafford, Eric; 2026. “Ford’s $30,000 Electric Truck Comes into Focus in New Spy Photos.” Car and Driver. Posted July 4.
I see the appeal of Slate. I’m interested but I’d want the SUV package, some upgrades. Once you’re well over 30k it’s a harder sell. I think it’ll be initially successful. It could be one of those situations where once everyone who wants one has one sales very quickly taper off. They’ll need the commercial market. It makes more sense as a business vehicle. I hope it succeeds.
A visit to the Netherlands this summer illustrated what the US has been shielded from with respect to EV exports from China. I saw brands I’d never heard of that looked reminiscent of and in some cases more appealing than domestic EVs sold in the US, but at a lower price.
I believe China will subsidize its EVs to gain a foothold and decimate its competitors in any market it enters. China plays a long game, not a quarterly one.
A Slate success may be what the US EV manufacturers and market need to wake up and prepare for the inevitable flood of EVs from China becoming soon to become commonplace in Canada and Mexico. The current offerings in the US are over optioned and too expensive for many wanting to switch to an EV.
The Slate launch reminds me of that of the Henry J by Kaiser more than 75 years ago — a start-up automaker introducing a low-priced, efficient, no frills vehicle to fill a gap in the market that seemingly did not exist judging by its failure in the market. Tesla is an anomaly in that it was able to succeed despite having no history or public trust. This shortcoming was, I would think, a significant factor in the demise of the Henry J and eventually Kaiser. As well, Kaiser probably overestimated the American appetite for a vehicle offering only basic transportation. This may also be the case with Slate. Americans will now be less accepting of “bare bones” today than they were in the early fifties.
That’s one plausible scenario. I would offer the caveat that the U.S. has gone through ebbs and flows when it comes to the fanciness of cars. For example, the early-60s were marked by a back-to-basics trend (e.g., the Falcon) and so were the early-70s (the Maverick).
Where I think Slate has at least somewhat more potential than the Henry J is that it is a multi-purpose vehicle that could carve out a niche with fleet owners that need basic, low-cost transportation (such as municipal maintenance departments). In other words, I see Slate as more akin to a utility vehicle like the Ford Econoline van than an entry-level passenger car.
Another potential factor is that times have changed from the early postwar period in terms of how people use cars. For example, in the early-50s your typical middle-class household was unlikely to have a truck; today they may often be considered essential.
In my last house the neighbor next door traded in his Toyota Corolla for a mid-80s subcompact truck. He didn’t need anything big or fancy — he just needed a truck to occasionally haul stuff to the dump or pick up supplies for his gardening projects. He bought such an old truck because no one makes small, basic pickups anymore. Slate could appeal to that market if they can avoid quality glitches.
My concern about the Slate, or any automotive startup for that matter, is reliability and getting the damn thing repaired. No matter how simple the vehicle is, it’s still going to be a computer with wheels. My fear is having something going sour with no dealer nearby and independent shops afraid to touch it.
One problem with surveys is people tell the surveyor what they think they want to hear. Sure, a no frills vehicle sounds good until you test drive one. “Frills” made sense when they were added on rather than designed in. If you don’t have AC, power windows, or radio in the basic version for instance, it will cost a fortune to add them on for those that want them ie. most everyone and will look jury rigged.
Is the truck actually in production and available to the public yet?
Air conditioning is standard. You can use your smart phone for a radio and can either get an optional Bluetooth speaker or install your own. If you’re the kind of guy who insists on power windows then the forthcoming Ford EV pickup may be more to your taste. I personally prefer manual windows.
It sounds like deliveries will start in the fourth quarter of this year.
In my experience, it’s difficult to predict sales success simply by judging the quality and usefulness of the product itself.
Success is often driven by uncontrollable external variables such as the future state of the economy (cost of living; cost of energy) and what’s culturally cool (varies according to demographics).
Then there’s the effectiveness of the marketing effort (getting non-enthusiast buyers to consider the offering) and the efficiency of the distribution network (including satisfactory retailing and servicing).
Sometimes, fine products can have great launches, but then struggle in chaotic or hostile economic environments.
Sometimes, success is a slow burn because growth in popularity depends upon personal word of mouth recommendations.
Sometimes you get an instant hit because the timing is perfect and everyone wants it because it’s cool to have one.
Small economical Japanese pickups became very popular when gas became expensive after the 1973 OPEC oil embargo. If similar economic conditions are sustained by the conflict over the Strait of Hormuz, then Slate might fill that niche.
I believe it was the Nissan NX that offered a wagon attachment in addition to the standard hatchback. It was a novel idea and one that I thought had potential. It failed. People didn’t want a dual use car. They didn’t have a safe place to store the alternate parts when not in use. For the price of the car and the wagon attachment, they could buy a wagon. Many convertibles offered an optional hardtop. They weren’t taken up on their offer very often and now the answer is an electric retractable top.
The Slate will be popular the 1st year as a ‘meme’ car. The bare-bones model is overdue for a comeback. But since the base model went away, customers have gotten used to having a heater, power windows, radio etc. Those who are anticipating this vehicle have not experienced paying for optioning their car to their tastes and don’t know how quickly things add up. Cars are kept longer these days, beyond the time when vinyl wraps begin to deteriorate. If Ford can improve its game regarding recalls, it will dominate this market with the Maverick and their new small truck.
Until Tesla, no new manufacturer has been successful since Chrysler in 1925 (and look where they are). Tesla had something that separated them from all others, electric. They got out ahead but are sloping toward Chrysler territory now that there is ample competition.
The Slate comes standard with a heater/air conditioner. And in this day and age when a lot of people are virtually married to their smart phone, why would using one as a substitute for a radio be an imposition?
As a case in point, I have all of my favorite music loaded onto my smart phone. If I owned a Slate I would pick what I wanted to listen to and then plop my phone onto its dashboard holder. All I would need is the optional speaker.
I agree that the Nissan NX is a cautionary tale, but how much? That’s a long time ago and in a rather different market segment. In addition, the NX was an add-on model rather than the whole ballgame, so it arguably wasn’t marketed as energetically as Slate will be. My guess is that a goodly portion of Slate buyers will be less inclined to switch back and forth between body styles. Instead, they might start with the truck cap and a few years later switch to the SUV after having a kid. Fleet operators might have more of a need to switch back and forth — and presumably they would be more likely to have the facilities needed to store spare parts.
At any rate, I suspect that the most important advantage of body style switching isn’t because of consumer popularity but to lower production costs. This strikes me as Slate’s most important innovation — they have come up with a remarkably stripped down approach to launching an automaker. That may not guarantee their success, but I suspect that it improves Slate’s prospects over Rivian’s. The latter company has been spending enormous amounts of money with the hope that eventually they will start making a profit.
It will be interesting to see how the Ford EV truck does compared to the Slate. Ford certainly has many structural advantages as a legacy automaker, but I wonder whether its EV will languish because the company and its dealers would really rather sell you a big, gas-powered truck. In contrast, Slate is similar to VW when it entered the U.S. market after WWII. There was no backup plan if the Beetle failed, so they had to sell the heck out of it.
‘“My biggest problem with Slate is I can get a real car from a real car company with a real dealer network to support me for the same or little additional cost.” By this logic, Tesla had no chance of success.’
This is not quite an apples-to-apples comparison. The Tesla was a much more unique proposition: a fully electric alternative to a BMW 5 Series or Mercedes E Class that provided all the capability in a zero emissions package. In addition, while Tesla had a network of company owned stores and service centers, Slate is relying solely on partnerships–a light asset model, but potentially riskier to the customer.
‘Why would very many people cross-shop the Slate and the Bolt when one is a truck and the other is a minicar? The use cases are substantially different. Much the same could be said in comparing the Slate and Maverick.’
These are legitimate concerns. There are a lot of Wrangler owners who never go offroad, and there are a number of pickup owners who rarely (or never) use a pickup as a real truck. There aren’t a lot of truly affordable EVs out there, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see some Bolt/Slate interaction. Remember that Ford has killed the Escape and has identified both Bronco Sport and Maverick as viable alternatives. Slate and Maverick differ mostly in the presence or absence of a rear seat–but we’ve all seen data on how often people use their rear seats.
All that being said, there are some intriguing aspects to Slate in world where “digital detox” is now a recognized term. I’m not convinced there are 150,000 buyers out there, but I do agree that this is the perfect vehicle for a smaller portion of the population.
Of course Tesla vs. Slate isn’t a fully apples-to-apples comparison; that’s hard to find in the wild. My underlying point is that the analyst was entirely too glib in his dismissal of Slate’s prospects. He offered a clever quip rather than substantive analysis.
I agree that use cases can be blurred, but they still exist to some degree. For example, some people may buy a Wrangler only to use it as a daily commuter, but how happy would they be with it compared to a passenger car better designed for freeway driving? I would also push back on whether Ford made a good move in killing the Escape, but that’s the subject of another article that I’ve been working on.
I also agree with you that 150,000 buyers sounds ambitious even if fleet sales took off — at least if production is only targeted at the U.S. market. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if they managed to reach break-even within two or three years if they can avoid too many ramp-up problems. That strikes me as the big “if” given the complexities of a launch, particularly in such a volatile market.
Actually, I do agree with the concerns related to obtaining a ‘real car’ (with power windows, a rear seat, an audio system, and a driving range over 200 miles) from a ‘real dealer network’; yes, it was glib, but there was substance behind it.
As far as use cases, I’ll offer the anecdotal evidence of my brother, who traded in the family Ford Flex for a Jeep Gladiator. Didn’t really need the pickup bed or offroad capability, but still enjoys it (as does his wife).
Oh, and I definitely agree killing the Escape was not a smart move.
Remember Steve, Ford has some sort of tie in with Rivian. This should help Ford’s design. Tbe real question is how much the dealerships are willing, or can be forced to, spend to handle the service aspect. Tesla succeeded because it had enormous resources of Elon Musk to tide it over in rough times and the start up period. It takes several years for a vehicle to go from a blank PC screen to something being produced and sold. All the while you have employees and suppliers expecting to be paid now while any revenue is several years away. That Slate made it this far is a credit to them.
Ford *had* a connection to Rivian; they had invested $1.2B into the company (and had a VP on the board) but have now sold off most of their stake. At one point, Rivian was going to develop an electric SUV for Lincoln–but that, of course, never happened. It sounds like there is some clever design and engineering going into the UEV, but I don’t think Rivian has had anything to do with it.
Thanks for the clarification. ISTM that designers are not yet taking advantage of EV potential and sticking with the three box pattern. One EV truck that intrigued me was the Canoo, which went with a COE platform, something easy to do with a proper EV “skateboard” platform. However they went belly up. As far as getting little use of the rear seat= or the pickup bed of a pickup, when you need it, nothing else will do.