The Electric G-Class Flop Mercedes Didn't See Coming
A scathing report from Handelsblatt quotes a Mercedes executive who didn't hold back: 'The car is sitting at dealerships like a rock… a complete failure.' This brutal honesty reflects a reality that's hard to ignore. By April 2025, Mercedes had sold just 1,450 units of the electric G, while nearly 9,700 gas-powered G-Classes found buyers. That's not just a dip — it's a seven-to-one rejection by the very audience the EQ was supposed to impress.
Too Expensive, Too Heavy, Too Limited
Let's start with the price. The Electric G-Class, or the G580 EQ starts around €180,000 in Europe — over €40,000 more than a similarly specced G500. Add inflation and economic uncertainty to the mix, and that premium becomes nearly impossible to justify.
But price is just the beginning. Utility — one of the G-Class's defining traits — takes a major hit. The electric version can only tow about 415 kg. That's not a typo. Gas versions tow up to 3,500 kg. And while the G580 EQ looks the part, it weighs over 3,000 kg — hundreds more than the V8. That weight crushes its range, which tops out at just 385 km on a full charge, and even less in real off-road conditions.
Buyers Want the Real Thing
One Mercedes exec said it best: 'People want a real G-Class… with a V8.' The market isn't just rejecting the EV — it's sending a clear message. The G-Wagen is more than a silhouette and a badge. It's about raw power, sound, and capability. And right now, the electric version doesn't deliver on any of those fronts.
Is There a Way Back?
Mercedes isn't giving up yet. A smaller 'Baby G' is reportedly in development for 2027, and it might not be electric-only — a turbocharged combustion option is on the table. That could be the key to winning back the core audience.
The electric G-Class was meant to electrify the brand's most iconic SUV. Instead, it's become a cautionary tale. You can't strip the soul out of a legend and expect people not to notice. Mercedes now has to ask itself: can the future of the G really be silent, slow, and soulless?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
German aviation lobby warns of economic fallout as airlines withdraw over costs
Airlines are withdrawing aircraft from Germany due to soaring state-imposed costs, the German Aviation Association (BDL) said on Monday, warning of significant economic fallout. The number of planes stationed in Germany has dropped from 190 in 2019 to 130 this year, resulting in an estimated loss of 10,000 jobs and 4 billion euros ($4.66 billion) in annual economic value added, BDL said. 'Since 2019, state-imposed costs have more than doubled, and airlines are increasingly avoiding Germany,' said BDL President Jens Bischof, urging the government to prioritize post-pandemic recovery in the aviation sector. The industry has criticized Berlin's decision to postpone a planned reduction in aviation tax, arguing that reversing the May 2024 hike would have signaled support for carriers. State levies, including taxes, air traffic control fees and security charges, are expected to rise by 1.1 billion to 4.4 billion euros this year, hampering recovery, said BDL. Passenger numbers rose just 3 percent in the first half of the year to 99.4 million, far below the 10 percent growth seen a year earlier. Germany ranks 28th out of 31 European countries in post-pandemic aviation recovery, with seat capacity at 87 percent of 2019 levels, compared with a European average of 104 percent.
Arab News
16 hours ago
- Arab News
The great corridor conundrum
It is a truth universally acknowledged — or at least universally marketed — that the Middle East is once again poised to be the beating heart of global commerce. Enter the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, known as IMEC, a vision unveiled in September 2023 with the flourish of a G20 communique and the optimism of a startup pitch deck. India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, the EU, France, Italy, Germany and the US all signed on, proclaiming IMEC not just as a trade route but as proof that geography in the 21st century can still be redrawn. The idea is seductive: a twin corridor network, one stretching from India to the Arabian Gulf, the other from the Gulf to Europe, sewn together by ports, railways and digital cables. In theory, the scheme could shave eight to 10 days off shipping times compared to the Suez route, reduce freight costs and serve as a 'values-based' counterweight to China's Belt and Road Initiative. In practice, however, bold lines on a map are the easy part; turning them into steel, concrete and functional customs regimes is where so many grand visions are lost. Early cost estimates place IMEC's price tag between $20 billion and $30 billion, a figure almost certain to rise once engineering, land acquisition and security needs are taken into account. The project began as an Indian initiative, later embraced by the EU and Saudi Arabia. Yet, unlike the Belt and Road Initiative or the International North-South Transport Corridor, India has not set up a dedicated implementing body, nor has it committed actual funding. That omission is more than a bureaucratic footnote: without clear governance and committed capital, the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor risks becoming a PowerPoint concept rather than a functioning trade artery. Financing will almost certainly rely on India-EU partnerships, with Saudi Arabia and the US playing indispensable roles. Washington's stance is broadly positive, though it views IMEC through the lens of a larger strategic agenda tied to the Abraham Accords. For India, the calculus is more complex. A faster, more reliable route to Europe could boost exports, yet New Delhi's domestic infrastructure ambitions — from high-speed rail to renewable power grids — already stretch fiscal resources. Adding to the equation, President Donald Trump's recently announced 50 percent tariffs on certain Indian exports has introduced a strategic wrinkle: can a corridor partly championed by Washington truly offset the economic sting of US protectionism? The new corridor's backers frame it as a cleaner, more transparent alternative, but politics and geography are not easily tamed Dr. John Sfakianakis The IMEC plan enters a crowded field. The Belt and Road Initiative, since its launch in 2013, has channeled an estimated $1 trillion into more than 150 countries, financing everything from deep-water ports in Pakistan to railways in East Africa. The International North-South Transport Corridor is already moving goods across Eurasia and the Suez Canal — IMEC's implicit rival — still handles more than 12 percent of global trade and is investing heavily in capacity upgrades. The new corridor's backers frame it as a cleaner, more transparent alternative, but politics and geography are not easily tamed. European shippers may think twice if tensions with Iran escalate. India's commitment could waver if EU carbon tariffs trigger a deeper trade rift. For Greece, IMEC presents a more parochial contest: who gets to be the European gateway? The port of Piraeus is the obvious candidate, but it is majority-owned by a Chinese company, an awkward fact for a project marketed as a hedge against Beijing's influence. Thessaloniki might offer an alternative, yet both ports face the same structural flaw — an underdeveloped railway network with poor links to the Balkans and beyond. In the hard reality of freight logistics, ports are only as useful as the railways that feed them. Without a robust and interconnected backbone, the dream of containers rolling smoothly from Mumbai to Munich will remain stubbornly out of reach. Security risks loom just as large. The corridor skirts maritime zones where Iran has flexed its naval muscles more than once, while the overland legs could be vulnerable to cyberattacks, drone strikes and political unrest. The recent military conflicts in the Middle East have already slowed planning for the corridor, effectively 'freezing' parts of its development. The Red Sea's recent spate of security incidents has shown how quickly global supply chains can be thrown off course by a single attack. The Belt and Road Initiative has learned to build redundancy into its networks — alternative ports, backup lines, diversified shipping lanes — and IMEC will need to do the same if it hopes to withstand inevitable shocks. The economic logic is also not as clear-cut as its boosters suggest. Rail freight from India to Europe might be faster than sea, but it is more expensive — often 30 percent to 50 percent higher per container — and speed alone may not convince shippers to absorb the cost premium. Digital and energy links, another selling point of IMEC, may produce returns sooner, but they lack the visual and political symbolism of a freight train gliding across the desert. Clear governance structures, dependable funding and disciplined execution are what will make or break this project Dr. John Sfakianakis And yet, even in its current state, the corridor is a modest diplomatic success. It has brought India and the Gulf states closer, signaled Europe's willingness to invest in non-Chinese infrastructure and given Washington a convening role in a grouping that is neither a formal trade bloc nor a military alliance. But diplomacy alone cannot move freight. Clear governance structures, dependable funding and disciplined execution are what will make or break this project. The real challenge will be execution. Coordinating engineering standards, securing rights of way, harmonizing customs rules and aligning digital protocols will require a level of bureaucratic choreography that even Brussels might find daunting. The oft-cited 'phased implementation' risks becoming a euphemism for indefinite delay and, unless each segment of the corridor can operate viably on its own, the entire chain could stall. The Belt and Road Initiative's history offers no shortage of cautionary tales: gleaming ports that sit empty, railway lines mired in debt and high-profile launches followed by quiet decay. IMEC's planners would do well to study these examples — and place less emphasis on ribbon-cutting ceremonies and more on the unglamorous business of making infrastructure work in practice. So, can IMEC deliver? Possibly — but only if it exchanges vision statements for procurement schedules, diplomatic handshakes for binding contracts and high-level endorsements for on-the-ground problem solving. The world has no shortage of trade corridors. What it lacks are corridors that deliver on their promises. IMEC has the map, the mandate and the moment. Whether it has the machinery — and the mettle — remains the billion-dollar question. • Dr. John Sfakianakis is chief economist at the Gulf Research Center.
Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
After busy first 100 days, Germany's Merz faces discord at home
BERLIN: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has driven sweeping changes in security, economic and migration policy during his first 100 days in office, but faces widening cracks in his uneasy coalition. On election night in February, a jubilant Merz promised to bring a bit of 'rambo zambo' to the post – using a colloquialism that can evoke a wild and joyous ride, or chaos and mayhem. Having achieved his life's ambition at age 69 to run Europe's top economy, Merz lost no time to push change, mostly in response to transatlantic turbulence sparked by US President Donald Trump. 'Germany is back,' Merz said, vowing to revive the economy, the military and Berlin's international standing after what he labelled three lackluster years under his center-left predecessor Olaf Scholz. Even before taking office, Merz's Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and their governing partners from Scholz's Social Democratic party (SPD) loosened debt rules and unlocked hundreds of billions of euros for Germany's armed forces and its crumbling infrastructure. Merz vowed to build 'Europe's largest conventional army' in the face of a hostile Russia and keep up strong support for Ukraine in lockstep with Paris and London. A promise to ramp up NATO spending endeared Merz to Trump, who greeted him warmly at a White House meeting in June, only weeks after a jarring Oval Office showdown with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. When Israel bombed Iranian targets, Merz, with a penchant for strong and often controversial one-liners, praised it for doing the 'dirty work' – but last Friday he took the bold step of freezing arms exports to Israel over its Gaza campaign. On the home front, Merz has pressed a crackdown on irregular migration, a sharp departure from the centrist course of his long-time party rival Angela Merkel. He has said he must address voter concerns about immigration to stem the rise of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which won a record 20 percent in February's election. Merz's heavy focus on global events has earned him the moniker of 'foreign chancellor' – but trouble looms at home, where his SPD allies have often felt overshadowed or sidelined. To many of them, Merz's right-wing positions have been hard to swallow in the marriage of convenience they entered following the SPD's dismal election outcome of 16 percent. German voters have not yet fallen in love with Merz either. His personal approval rating slipped 10 points to just 32 percent in the latest poll by public broadcaster ARD. In an early sign of trouble, Merz's inauguration on May 6 turned into a white-knuckle ride when rebel MPs opposed him in the first round of the secret ballot. He was confirmed in the second round, but the debacle pointed to simmering resentment in the left-right coalition. Many have chafed at his hard line on immigration, his vow to slash social welfare and his limited enthusiasm for climate protection. Merz also sparked controversy when he dismissed plans to hoist an LGBTQ rainbow flag on the parliament building by saying the Reichstag was 'not a circus tent.' The biggest coalition crisis came last month, sparked by what should have been routine parliamentary business – the nomination of three new judges to Germany's highest court. Right-wing online media had strongly campaigned against one of them, SPD nominee Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, calling her a left-wing activist on abortion and other issues. The CDU/CSU withdrew support for her and postponed the vote, sparking SPD fury. The issue looked set to fester until Brosius-Gersdorf withdrew her candidature on Thursday. Other trouble came when the CDU's Bavarian sister party demanded sharp cuts to social benefits for Ukrainian refugees, a position the SPD opposes. Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil of the SPD warned the conservatives to refrain from further provocations, telling Welt TV that 'we already have far too many arguments in this government.' Both coalition partners know that open squabbling will turn off voters after discord brought down Scholz's three-party coalition, and play into the hands of the AfD, their common foe. For now Merz and most other politicians are on summer holidays, leaving unresolved issues lingering. Merz will need to pay attention, said Wolfgang Schroeder of Kassel University. 'The chancellor's attitude is: I think big-picture and long term, I'm not interested in the small print,' he said. But Schroeder added that all the coalition's big troubles so far – from the judge row to Ukrainians refugees – 'have been about the small print.'
