Interesting, i am going to guess you are not an automotive manufacturing engineer? An EV is actually easier from design, and engineering standpoint when it come to assembly.
I was actually an automotive manufacturing engineer but that was many years back. A lot of it was in engine manufacturing but I am sure manufacturing and supply chain technology has changed since then. When we did it, there was a lot of vertical integration, now there is more assembly with whole systems being sub-contracted. You even have companies like Magna who assemble the car for you.
I can see why an EV will easier to build. Less parts, less moving parts, less precision parts (no engine and transmission parts). Many of the components are purchased I guess. From what I have heard about Tesla, was that tried to automate many parts of the line in addition to battery manufacturing and that the automation failed. Again this is what I heard. I also was not aware that Magna was manufacturing this and I realize that Magna has made EV's before. I do not have the depth of knowledge you have on the I-Pace. So I guess that the I-Pace will be able to solve production bottlenecks faster. But one thing in what you said is difficult to understand
The reason companies are slow to build more EV's has nothing to do with Assembly complexity, or having factories, it is because the battery, drive units, and controller are too expensive.
Why is the fact that battery, drive units being expensive be an issue with manufacturing bottlenecks. As look at the whole chain, if the product has been proven, the causes for limiting production come under the four major areas: parts supply issue (quantity and/or quality), manufacturing limitations (lack of capacity or inability to manufacture to quality or quantity required), distribution problems and lack of demand. From what you say, it is not one these four.
That leaves a finance problem i.e. a cash flow problem, that they do not have money to buy so many batteries etc. and then wait for for customer payments. If there is a pent up demand, and there are favorable margins on the product, why would Jaguar not borrow money to keep production going at at least a steady rate? I would guess battery manufacturers and others may not agree to normal payment terms that manufacturers demand, so working capital needs are high. I can also understand that no company wants to invest in finished goods inventory and that is the whole concept of lean production. But what is the opportunity cost. If I put on my marketing hat, here is what I would see. "We have an entrenched competitor, Tesla over which we might have an price advantage especially if the incentives decrease for Tesla. However Tesla is developing economies of scale as they are increasing volumes. We on the other hand also have Audi, Mercedes and others planning to enter the same high end market, in which we are in.". Reason would suggest that Jaguar needs to build as much as an advantage as it can by having more cars in the hands of consumers as soon as possible. In other words, build market share. There is a small window for Jaguar to build a reputation as a quality BEV manufacturer, there are not the market leader and if they do not move fast they will be an also ran. Tesla is going to do something to defend their position. Audi and Mercedes have deeper pockets then Jaguar and might be willing to do what it takes to get cars faster into the market. To me limiting production to conserve cash does not make much sense in this situation. Or I may be off base and am missing something.
