The Wall Street Journal
WSJ:
WSJ's Take On the Week
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2025
9/28/2025 6:00:00 AMShare This Episode
Automakers Are Hitting the Brakes on EVs. Will That Help Their Stocks?
「自動車メーカーはEVでブレーキを踏んでいる。それは株価の助けになるのか？」
In this week's episode of WSJ’s Take On the Week, co-hosts Gunjan Banerji and Telis Demos kick things off by talking about perpetual futures or “perps,” which are offering turbocharged bets on bitcoin. Next, with the September jobs report out this week, they break down what investors should be looking out for beyond the headline number.
Later in the show, Telis is joined by John Murphy, a managing director of strategic advisory at Haig Partners, for a deep dive into what the end of the EV tax subsidy this week could mean for the auto industry. Then, Murphy makes the case for why the best strategy for Ford, Stellantis and GM may be to focus on their truck businesses. Later, Telis asks: Does the end of the EV credit mean a renaissance for the internal combustion engine?
This is WSJ’s Take On the Week where co-hosts Gunjan Banerji, lead writer for Live Markets, and Telis Demos, Heard on the Street’s banking and money columnist, cut through the noise and dive into markets, the economy and finance—the big trades, key players and business news ahead.
- hit the brakes hɪt ðə breɪks ブレーキを踏む、（比喩）進展を止める、減速する
- EV (electric vehicle) iː viː 電気自動車
- perpetual futures (perps) pərˈpɛtʃuəl ˈfjuːtʃərz (pɜːrps) 無期限先物取引（満期がなく、主に暗号資産で用いられる）
- turbocharged ˈtɜːrboʊtʃɑːrdʒd ターボ搭載の、（比喩）非常に加速した、強化された
- jobs report ʤɑbz rɪˈpɔːrt 雇用統計
- tax subsidy / EV tax credit tæks ˈsʌbsɪdi / iː viː tæks ˈkrɛdɪt 税控除、補助金（特にEV購入時に受けられる税制優遇）
- renaissance ˈrɛnəˌsɑːns / rəˈneɪsəns ルネサンス、復活、再生期
- internal combustion engine ɪnˈtɜrnəl kəmˈbʌstʃən ˈɛnʤɪn 内燃機関（ガソリン・ディーゼルエンジン）
- cut through the noise kʌt θruː ðə nɔɪz 雑音を切り抜ける、核心を突く
Gunjan Banerji: Hi everyone. Welcome to WSJ's Take On the Week. I'm Gunjan Banerji.
Telis Demos: And I'm Telis Demos.
Gunjan Banerji: Telis, the big thing I've been watching this week is perps, crypto perpetual futures.
Telis Demos: Perps, not like criminals, perps. Not that kind of perp. Perpetual futures.
Gunjan Banerji: Perpetual futures.
Telis Demos: You've got to catch me up.
Gunjan Banerji: If crypto buying and selling Bitcoin, Ethereum is not volatile enough for you, these are a way to amp up the risk even more. They're basically turbocharged bets on Bitcoin. 10X returns, 20X returns-
Telis Demos: Over what time period? Like a day?
Gunjan Banerji: Yes, exactly.
Telis Demos: You could make 10X in a day doing this?
Gunjan Banerji: You can. So basically these are-
Telis Demos: Who needs a casino really?
Gunjan Banerji: Well I think that's the big thing is these have entered the U.S. market for the first time this year, and I think mainstream brokerages are going to look to amp up the risk even more. These have been really popular bets abroad. Around 70% of Bitcoin trading volumes occurred in perpetual futures this year.
Telis Demos: Wow. Wow.
Gunjan Banerji: So they are one of the most popular trades on the planet. Definitely the most popular way to bet on Bitcoin.
Telis Demos: I know that, say Bitcoin, again has been trading like gold. People see it as an alternative to the U.S. dollar as a way to protect themselves from inflation. That's one view of Bitcoin. I'm sure there are many. Economic data can drive that. Something that you see as an inflationary piece of news, maybe that drives up the price of Bitcoin. So are people trading around like data releases? Is there a certain time or pattern into when people are putting on 20X bets, I've got 30 minutes to see this thing through?
Gunjan Banerji: I think it's speculation. It's truly speculation. A lot of it is gambling. Of course there's professional traders doing this to maybe hedge, but there's also retail traders. Coinbase brought them to the U.S. for the first time. Robinhood introduced its European clients to perps recently. So I think you're going to see these expand and I think you're going to see leverage increase here, and you might see more of your friends or coworkers trading these things because brokerages are likely going to expand access here.
Telis Demos: Well, to the extent that any of those folks are data-driven, there's a big piece of data coming this week that they could tune into and that is the September jobs report. The last few jobs reports obviously have been fireworksy, not just the reports themselves, but the revisions to pass reports. So perhaps that's what people will be most focused on. What are the revisions? I will say that the Chicago Fed led by our erstwhile guest, Austan Goolsbee, the Chicago Fed President, they've launched a new series of indicators that are meant to study what is known about the job market and predict the future moves. And what their current forecast for the September report is that the unemployment rate will be unchanged at 4.3%, but the unemployment rate isn't really the whole story with the job market these days.
- to the extent that tə ði ɪkˈstɛnt ðæt ～する限りでは
- fireworksy ˈfaɪərwɜːrksi （比喩的に）派手な、大きな反応を引き起こすような
- erstwhile ˈɜːrstwaɪl かつての、以前の
Gunjan Banerji: What do you think is the whole story?
Telis Demos: What a lot of our colleagues in the Journal have been writing in our recent economics coverage is that the percentage-based measures of the job market, that is not the number of jobs created or lost from month to month, but the percentage-based numbers like the unemployment rate might be impacted by immigration policy. If a lot of people are leaving the country, if we are shrinking the supply of workers in the U.S., that means that even if the U.S. economy isn't creating a lot of jobs, maybe even it's losing jobs, you could still see the unemployment rate looking healthy.
Gunjan Banerji: I thought Powell made a really interesting point about this in the last Fed meeting where he pointed to kind of this curious balance.
Telis Demos: Yes. Exactly the words he used. Yeah.
Gunjan Banerji: Yeah. You're seeing supply down and you're seeing demand down. So it seems like we're at a fragile moment in terms of employment.
Telis Demos: And I think it's going to raise very interesting questions about what is a recessionary indicator and what isn't.
Gunjan Banerji: Telis, you follow what's going on with credit cards and spending pretty closely. What are we seeing there?
Telis Demos: You still haven't seen a huge change in the way people are using their credit cards. Things that measure how indebted people are, the percentage of their credit lines they're utilizing, the average household debt, the average credit card debt per household. Those things haven't moved anywhere close to what we would think of as really scary territory, and I'm talking like pre-2008 financial crisis type stuff. You see pockets of people who aren't paying off their debts at the same pace that they were before. There have been times when the percentage of people making the minimum payment has risen, but I don't think that we really see a huge drop-off in credit card spending.
- indebted ɪnˈdɛtɪd 借金のある、負債を負った
- credit line ˈkrɛdɪt laɪn クレジット枠（利用可能限度額）
- pockets of people ˈpɑkɪts əv ˈpipəl 一部の人々（集団）
Gunjan Banerji: And what about auto loans? People still paying those off?
Telis Demos: There are some flashing red lights in the auto market. There've been some troubles for what I think people in the industry would call deep subprime auto lenders. That is people who-
Gunjan Banerji: The riskiest thing.
Telis Demos: The absolute riskiest borrowers. Some people think of that as a canary in the coal mine. Wow. Could this kind of filter up to the bigger part of the market?
Gunjan Banerji: Yeah.
Telis Demos: Other people look at that and say, "Look, it's the deep subprime part of the market." As somebody once said to me, and I say this all the time, "People in that credit bucket are always living in a recession." They're at risk of losing their job, they're not making a lot of money, they're struggling to borrow. That's just what life is like unfortunately.
Gunjan Banerji: Yeah. I never thought about it that way.
Telis Demos: I think the big thing really happening in the auto market right now is something that's been a bedrock of the industry for a long time, which is the end of the $7,500 tax credit that you get for purchasing an electric vehicle. That is set to expire now at the end of September, on September 30th.
Gunjan Banerji: That was a big reason my parents got an electric vehicle, that's for sure.
Telis Demos: And it's been a big reason people have been buying electric vehicles lately. Just consider these numbers. The average transaction price for a new EV was a little over $55,000. That's a Kelley Blue book number that our colleagues at Barron's wrote about. Consumers using the credit though would've paid around $48,000. Oh, a big discount. The average transaction price for all new cars, so that would include your internal combustion engine or ICE vehicles, traditional regular car, that would've been around $48,000. So basically without the credit, EVs are going to be more expensive.
Gunjan Banerji: Wow.
Telis Demos: And so to help us kind of find a point on the horizon to focus on, we spoke with John Murphy. He was a longtime stock analyst covering the automotive sector for Bank of America. He recently took on a new role at Haig Partners and he'll be advising dealers and other companies in the auto space on consolidation and other big trends happening in the market. And we had a really interesting conversation earlier this week about the end of the EV tax credit and what a future might look like for automakers.
Gunjan Banerji: I'm excited for this one.
Telis Demos: It's a great conversation and we're going to play it right after the break.
All right. Welcome back. We're here with John Murphy. He is a managing director in strategic advisory at Haig Partners. John, welcome to the show.
John Murphy: Thanks for having me. Looking forward to it.
Telis Demos: We're on the cusp of some big changes in the auto market. There's a lot going on and there's one in particular that I want to start with. We are now basically in the final days of the $7,500 tax credit that has gone to electric vehicle purchases and that's been a big support for the market for a long time. And as my Wall Street Journal colleagues recently put it, "The Trump administration is basically in the process of dismantling tailpipe emissions and fuel economy rules that long underpin the production and sale of the vehicles." So even beyond the tax credits there. How big of a deal is the end of the $7,500 tax credit?
John Murphy: It's a very big deal in many ways. First and foremost, when we look at EV penetration, last year, it was about 8%. First few months of this year, it's kind of ramped up because people were anticipating the end of these EV credits. But the reality is once that drops off, we're probably going to see something far below 10%, 8% and probably just a few percent because for a lot of folks in the country, it's a subpar product at a higher price. Simply over time, if you can bring the cost of an EV down and ramp up the charging network and create a better product at a better price, I think people will move in that direction. But we have not gotten there yet in the auto industry in the United States, and we are probably a very long way off from actually making that work.
- subpar product ˌsʌbˈpɑr ˈprɑdəkt 標準以下の製品、性能不足の製品
- over time ˌoʊvər taɪm 時間の経過とともに
- charging network ˈʧɑrdʒɪŋ ˈnɛtˌwɜrk 充電ネットワーク
- a long way off ə lɔŋ weɪ ɔf 実現までまだ遠い、時間がかかる
Telis Demos: And so what does that mean for the pipeline of products coming out of automakers? I mean, I think we're used to seeing EVs as some of the most anticipated launches of new cars and things like that. EV-focused companies like Tesla have been big winners, but even when looking at the big traditional automakers, your Fords and General Motors, their EV prospects were really central. How do we think about them in a world in which the EV maybe isn't seen as the growth engine as much?
John Murphy: So it's a great question because it's turned the industry on its head because for the last few years there was such a heavy push towards investing in EV technology and product development dollars or PD dollars being spent on EVs. What we're seeing now is the front end of the curve of cancellation of some of these major programs. Ford's 3-row EV that they canceled last year was a $2 billion charge. We're going to see a lot more of those coming. What it's done is it's really created a lot of wasted capital to be honest, a lot of head scratching as to how to handle an eventuality that's going to have a significant penetration of EVs over time. But holistically, what's happened is you traditionally have about 45 new models that are launched each year roughly. This year we're going to see less than 30. Next year, maybe we're getting back to 35 to 40. So there's a real hole in what's coming to market and that could put some real pressure on demand and pricing because it's those brand new vehicles that bring people into showrooms. So you got to get people really confident and excited about that new product.
- turn … on its head tɜrn ɑn ɪts hɛd ～を根本から覆す、大きく変える
- product development dollars (PD dollars) ˈprɑdəkt dɪˈvɛləpmənt ˈdɑlərz 製品開発資金
- front end of the curve frʌnt ɛnd ʌv ðə kɜrv （変化や動向の）初期段階
- head scratching hɛd ˈskræʧɪŋ 頭を悩ませること、困惑
- holistically hoʊˈlɪstɪkli 全体的に、総合的に
Telis Demos: What does the EV business look like without this tax credit? I mean it doesn't go away, but how does it change it?
John Murphy: We used to have a market that was called, a 16 to 17 million U.S. market that had a consistent powertrain. Now we have multiple powertrains, ICE, regular hybrid, plug-in hybrid and EVs. So now you have an extreme fragmentation of the most expensive part of the vehicle and that's going to put pressure on profits and returns over time unless you can drive significant scale. But you can't drive the same kind of scale because now we're chopping up the market into four separate powertrains. That's going to be a real challenge over time and it's something that we all need to really think about in the pricing side, meaning that automakers are going to have to continue to push pricing a little bit higher to pay for this, which then puts even more pressure on the affordability issue because it makes vehicles more expensive and makes the question of affordable transportation, which is a pillar of the economy, which often gets overlooked, that much tougher to solve.
- powertrain ˈpaʊərˌtreɪn パワートレイン（エンジン＋トランスミッションなど駆動系統）
- ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) aɪ-si-i 内燃機関
- plug-in hybrid ˈplʌg ɪn ˈhaɪbrɪd プラグインハイブリッド車
- fragmentation ˌfrægmənˈteɪʃən 分断、細分化
- chop up ʧɑp ʌp 細かく分ける、切り分ける
Telis Demos: The Journal recently tabbed up estimates of losses from tariffs for global automakers at like $12 billion. But if these same companies are going to be, some of them are going to be dialing back in EVs. I mean here's just one number for example from a recent story. Ford says it will save $1.5 billion on emissions credits that it uses to offset other vehicles that it makes that it won't have to be doing anymore. Is there a financial upside to some of these businesses from what's going on?
- tabbed up tæbd ʌp （非公式）集計する、計算する
- estimates of losses ˈɛstəmɪts ʌv ˈlɔsɪz 損失の見積もり
- tariffs ˈtærɪfs 関税
- dial back daɪəl bæk 縮小する、控える
- emissions credits ɪˈmɪʃənz ˈkrɛdɪts 排出権（排ガス規制対応のためのクレジット）
- offset ˈɔfˌsɛt 相殺する、埋め合わせる
- financial upside faɪˈnænʃəl ˈʌpˌsaɪd 金銭的なメリット、利益の可能性
John Murphy: As you look at this, that number from Ford is a point estimate on savings, not necessarily also including the potential higher sales you may have on some of these larger ICE vehicles that they make tremendous amounts of money on. The entire of the F-Series, including the 250 and 350 is almost the entire profit pool at Ford. So if they can sell more of those and make more money in the near term, yes, it's a huge boost potentially to profit. There's other things that are going on in the regulatory environment, the tax environment that really needs to be taken into account. But these companies really need to focus on what potentially could happen beyond the next 2.5, 3 years. New administration comes in and the rules change completely. So you can't turn a blind eye to EVs. So you have to think about really leveraging your core business, and that's in trucks, it's building up that capital on your balance sheet to deal with the uncertainty of all of these regulatory environments, the eventuality of some autonomous vehicles and the eventuality of Chinese competition so that you're in a really stalwart position on your balance sheet and your capital structure to invest and deal with these uncertainties going forward.
- profit pool /ˈprɒfɪt puːl/ 利益プール（企業の収益源の大部分を占める事業領域）
- boost to profit /buːst tə ˈprɒfɪt/ 利益への後押し、利益増加要因
- regulatory environment /ˈrɛɡjələtɔːri ɪnˈvaɪrənmənt/ 規制環境
- tax environment /tæks ɪnˈvaɪrənmənt/ 税制環境
- turn a blind eye (to …) /tɜrn ə blaɪnd aɪ/ （…を）見て見ぬふりをする、無視する
- leverage your core business /ˈlɛvərɪdʒ jɔːr kɔːr ˈbɪznəs/ コア事業を活用する
- build up capital /bɪld ʌp ˈkæpɪtl/ 資本を積み上げる
- balance sheet /ˈbæləns ʃiːt/ 貸借対照表、企業の財務状況
- stalwart position /ˈstɔːlwərt pəˈzɪʃn/ 強固な立場、堅実なポジション
- capital structure /ˈkæpɪtl ˈstrʌktʃər/ 資本構成（借入と自己資本の比率）
Telis Demos: We read a lot about Chinese automakers like BYD, they're growing fast in Europe, the Middle East, Mexico, Latin America. Will investors be excited about a company that essentially has mastered the U.S. market and makes vehicles for the U.S. market but isn't necessarily in the global conversation? Would investors want a business like that?
John Murphy: I've been involved in the auto industry for almost 30 years, and a very significant rule that's existed for decades is the only place that automakers really make significant amounts of money is in the North American truck business and global luxury. So when you look at what's going on with the Chinese manufacturers, it's maybe making sort of the global mass market that much tougher and potentially worse to be invested in. But it is not a place where you've ever really made any money, and over time you've probably lost a tremendous amount of money. So I think that what's going on right now is everybody needs to be even more diligent about where they're making money, which they've not had the greatest discipline historically. But it's mission-critical that they do it now and recognize that the D3 or North American truck businesses that potentially have an opportunity.
- diligent /ˈdɪlɪdʒənt/ 注意深い、勤勉な、慎重な
- mission-critical /ˈmɪʃən ˈkrɪtɪkl/ 極めて重要な、絶対必要な
- Detroit 3 / D3 /dɪˈtroɪt θriː/ デトロイトの自動車大手3社（GM、Ford、Stellantis）
Telis Demos: The D3, the big 3 Detroit automakers.
John Murphy: The Detroit 3. GM, Ford and Stellantis.
Telis Demos: Got it.
John Murphy: So they have potentially this real opportunity to leverage that transition and really build their luxury brands because they have some really good product that could compete not just in the U.S. but globally. And recognize they were never making much money, if any at all in the mass market, and now the Chinese are coming in and making it that much worse. But what you have to recognize is that you can have a smaller company that is more profitable, but not only do they have to love the internal combustion engine vehicles, they need to love their customers and their business partners on the dealership side because that is where there's this huge profit pool that for some reason just doesn't really get recognized. I would estimate that GM and Ford on an ongoing basis are doing about 20% of their profit or EBIT in aftermarket parts. Investors don't know that. I mean they don't recognize that, the companies don't talk about it in a segmentation basis, but that is a huge opportunity for them to massively increase their profitability because they're not playing in the life cycle of the vehicle much beyond the first three years, and even in the first three years, their dealers and the automakers are penetrating less than half of the potential parts and service revenue and profit.
- if any at all → 「もしあったとしてもごくわずか」
- penetration /ˌpɛnɪˈtreɪʃən/ 浸透度、カバー率
- EBIT /ˈiːbɪt/ 利益（Earnings Before Interest and Taxes、税引前利益）
- aftermarket parts/ˈæftərˌmɑːrkɪt pɑːrts/ アフターマーケット部品（販売後部品）
Telis Demos: Looking from the stock market's point of view, it seems like investors maybe are already kind of thinking along those lines. You've got some surprising performance this year. GM is up 11% as of this recording. Ford is up 17%. I mean Volkswagen is up 12%. Tesla has rallied back a little bit. It's now up 8% for the year, but it was down as much as 15% just a few weeks ago. And for perspective, the S&P 500 is only up 13%, so automakers are more in tune with this kind of bull market. Do you think that's what investors might be thinking about is through all of the mess of what's going on right now, you have big changes, you have tariffs, you have changes in incentives in EVs, and are they looking at those domestic automakers and saying, "Boy, there's actually the potential for a refocus on the core profitable business?"
John Murphy: I think there's an increasing understanding that that's where they're making the money. The companies are focusing on that. But I also think what they're finding is they're having very good discipline on production and matching supply with demand, which is resulting in pricing that is remaining far more resilient than anybody has been expecting.
Telis Demos: Pricing, you mean the prices they charge to consumers.
John Murphy: Pricing they're charging the consumers because they're keeping a relative lid on supply. Their dealers have inventory that are closer to normal, so they're not super short, but they're not getting into excess positions, which means if the consumer wants a vehicle and they want a certain vehicle, they're going to have to pay what is the market price, which is a price that is good for profits through the value chain. It's good for the automakers, it's good for the dealers, and ultimately, in an odd way, it's reasonably good for the consumer because their trade-in value or the residual value is holding up. So the equity in their vehicle is actually stronger, so when they go to buy a new vehicle, they're in a better position. Managing pricing through the age spectrum of vehicle actually can be a good guy or a good factor for everybody that's involved.
- 車の下取り価格（trade-in value）
- 残価（residual value）が維持されるため
Telis Demos: Yet General Motors said something interesting. GM said that it expects consistent pricing to offset about 10% of its tariff costs this year. Is that what you're talking about?
John Murphy: That's definitely what I'm talking about. And this is something we've all been kind of pushing the automakers to really, really focus on, and it really took COVID and the supply chain shock after it to really kind of force this experiment upon the industry where you're short of supply of parts, so you have to make the product that is sort of the high line product, the high trim product and focus on keeping price high. And they were forced into this experiment. It is getting a little bit wonky. There's something called the Lagrangian profit maximization equation.
Telis Demos: Okay.
John Murphy: It simply means if you take your marginal price down, you might drive a lot more units and your total profit might go up. The problem in the auto industry, if you look at that sort of at first blush is you end up killing your pricing and it hurts your residual values, which then eventually comes back and whipsaws, and then all of a sudden, your new vehicle pricing is getting hit even worse and you're caught in this death spiral on pricing. And now what you're seeing is a more stable environment in pricing, which once again is good for the automakers and their profits, but is actually not too bad for the consumer on a holistic basis.
Telis Demos: A lot of investors have been shifting their focus globally. And so as people do that, as they think maybe more globally in their portfolio and they're thinking about the end of EV credits here in the U.S., do you think it makes sense for people to start thinking about you know what? Maybe I want to move some of my money into global automakers because maybe they are focused on that mass market, global EV market, and I really still think that's the future. As an investor, how do you think they should think about U.S. automakers versus global ones? What's the right way to go about that?
John Murphy: I think what is going on right now is something akin to saw what we saw in the 20s, 30s and 40s here in the United States, but it's happening on a global basis. So I remember a long time ago being in the Walter P. Chrysler Museum and there was this great chart of dozens of U.S. companies and how over time they consolidated down to largely the D3 and then some of now the imports. What you're looking at is something very similar on a global basis right now is you kind of look at China and you have over 100 automakers and you're like, okay, let's start the list and figure out how that's going to consolidate over time. But that's not limited to the Chinese market because these companies are global. So every incumbent has to understand that they are in this new pool that is going to consolidate over time. And it's foolish to think because you're just in the U.S. or you're domiciled in the U.S. or domiciled in Europe, or you're domiciled in Korea, or domiciled in Japan, that you're not going to have to deal with that consolidation as well. The thing to also remember is that governments do get involved in committing capital to this industry, and as an investor that kind of makes it challenging because you have all these fundamental factors to think about. But then you kind of have these incentives and regulatory issues that are set up to favor the home team in some ways. So it's a really challenging way to make money. I do think there's probably going to be some really big winners. There's probably a lot of money to be made on the global automaker side. Suppliers, I think are very interesting, and I think the dealers are probably the easiest way and most reliable way to make money as an investor. There's public stocks right now, but mostly it's private. And if you were to look through the value chain, the consistency of earnings and returns over time, you can bet on all these big players and who's going to win or lose there, which is very interesting and intellectually challenging, and a lot of fun as an analyst to look at. Or you can get to somewhat the more simpler interface with the consumer where there's a lot of money that could be made over time as well. So I think there's probably bigger opportunity in the suppliers and the dealers that are risk-adjusted better investments. But there's a lot of stuff and a lot to work on the automaker side as well.
- akin to /əˈkɪn tu/ ～に似ている、～と同様の
- consolidate down to /kənˈsɑlɪˌdeɪt daʊn tu/ 統合されて～になる
- incumbent /ɪnˈkʌmbənt/ 既存企業、現職者
- committing capital /kəˈmɪtɪŋ ˈkæpɪtl/ 資本を投入する、投資する
- regulatory issues /ˌrɛɡjəˈleɪtəri ˈɪʃuːz/ 規制上の問題
- value chain /ˈvælju ˌtʃeɪn/ 価値連鎖、バリューチェーン
- risk-adjusted /rɪsk əˈdʒʌstɪd/ リスク調整済み（リスクを考慮した）
- domiciled /ˈdɑmɪsaɪld/ （企業や人が）本社・本拠地を置いている、居住している The company is domiciled in Delaware.（その会社はデラウェア州に本社を置いている）
- domicile /ˈdɑmɪsaɪl/ 名詞形。住所、本拠地、居住地 He changed his domicile to New York.（彼は居住地をニューヨークに変えた）
Telis Demos: So even if you're still a domestic-focused investor, you're saying you're not necessarily being left out of this next 100 years of how auto industry will evolve?
John Murphy: Absolutely not. To really make it simple, if you are a dealer that owns one or two stores in the United States and you're running a really good business, you not only need to understand what's going on in your market and with your automaker customers. But you also really need to zoom out and understand what's happening on a global basis because that global competition is impacting the automakers that you're selling vehicles for. So everybody needs to be fully aware about this, whether you're making a very small local investment or you're making a global investment. The industry is just a global industry right now and there's no way to bifurcate it. There's differences between markets, powertrains and all that, but you're making a global investment.
- bifurcate /ˈbaɪfərˌkeɪt/ 動詞 （1つのものを）二つに分ける、分岐させる
Telis Demos: Interesting. All right, we're going to take a quick break and when we come back, one last question for John Murphy of Haig Partners. Welcome back. We've got one last big question for John Murphy of Haig Partners. John, with the $7,500 EV tax credit coming to an end at the end of September, are we going to see a renaissance for the internal combustion engine? Is that going to be the vehicle of the future or is this just a speed bump on the long road to EV dominance?
John Murphy: So I might use a different period in history and call it the Ice Age cometh. So the internal combustion engine cometh because yes, I do think-
Telis Demos: Cometh back.
John Murphy: Yeah, cometh back. Yeah. I think for the next few years, next three years at least, we're going to shift back in that direction in a significant way. And I think what you're going to see over time is a more measured and rational approach by automakers to help solve the environmental issues the auto industry is involved in, and in some cases, causes. And we're going to see the hybridization of powertrain, which is something that is much more palatable to the consumer in the United States. And if you were to look at some products like a Toyota Camry that gets 52 miles per gallon because it's just a hybrid, very rational, inexpensive vehicle relative to others, that's great transportation. But I think you're going to see that in the large trucks at GM and Ford and Stellantis, and you're going to solve the problem in a more practical way. Toyota's got a very interesting stat. It's called the 1-6-90 rule. So the 1-6-90 rule is for all the precious metals and everything else that needs to go into an EV, they can make 6 plug-in hybrids or they can make 90 regular parallel hybrids like a Prius or like what I just mentioned in the Camry. Those 90 hybrids save 43 times the CO2 as the 1 EV. So it's 90 cars versus 1 for sure, so it's not necessarily a super fair comparison, but it shows that if you do something that is more practical, that the consumer will accept holistically, they don't have to change their driving patterns or their life, you can actually have a huge on the environment in a way that's as opposed to this revolution that EVs have been set up to really be, and the consumer's just not ready for it.
Telis Demos: Interesting. Well, John Murphy, thanks for joining us.
John Murphy: Thanks so much for having me. It's been a blast.
Gunjan Banerji: And that's all for this week. This show is produced by Anthony Bansi, Jessica Fenton and Michael Lavalle. Michael Lavalle and Jessica Fenton are our sound designers, and Michael also wrote our theme music, Aisha al-Muslim is our development producer, Chris Zinsli is our deputy editor and Philana Patterson is the head of news audio for the Wall Street Journal. For even more head to wsj.com. I'm Gunjan Banerji.
Telis Demos: And I'm Telis Demos. Until next time. There was a business where people who left New York or moved away, it's like you could order dirt from New York to your house and your kids could play in it.
John Murphy: I vaguely recall something like that, yeah.
Telis Demos: Yeah.
John Murphy: I vaguely recall something like that.
Telis Demos: So to this day, I say anytime somebody gets dirt, I say, "People pay good money for that dirt."
John Murphy: They do.