Hybrids vs Electric: The Truth About Depreciation

The direction is very good.
The truth is that financially things are very clear: BEV (Battery Electric Vehicles) are a money pit, while hybrids are the best way to go (opposite use of money: lose or win).
But the devil is in the details:
1. The resale value reflects the most important indicators of the car: safety, reliability, TCO (Total Cost of Ownership), handling and other performance characteristics, practicality etc.
The resale value of BEV reflects their characteristics (important for good drivers, that are not brainwashed by the "eco"-Marxist propaganda, supported by most governments with subsidies - stolen from the tax-payers): very fast (the only strong attribute, especially vs. super-cars, but rarely put into practice by most drivers - that are driving behind trucks on the highway to save power = to recharge less = time & money saving), extremely dangerous (thermal runway and software hacking), very polluting (when produced, when charging from the electrical grid, when not recycled - the story about Redwood recycling is a drop in the ocean, more than 95% of the batteries do not get recycled), unreliable (according to Consumer Reports annual reliability survey - even Tesla is below average), with a huge TCO (the propaganda disregards the huge cost of replacing the battery, even it happens after more than 10 years, making the car single use - almost nobody will incurr that hug cost that is far higher than the BEV resale value), impractical for extreme temperatures or long distance driving or towing etc.
That's why (beside the technology advancements that make a few years old BEV be almost obsolete vs. new BEV) the resale value is awful, making the owners lose far more money than the operating savings (like on the stock exchange market, you lose/gain when you buy, sell or during the ownership time), thus being a financial nightmare (and leasing them is barely sweetening the big loss, as the leasing companies charge based on the faster depreciation);
2. I fully agree that the hybrids are the best of both worlds, being the way to go for the next few years, until some remarkable progress of ICE (internal combustion engine) or BEV will get to the market.
But the "hybrids" segment refers to the self-charging hybrids/SCH (the most reliable and with the lowest TCO, according to the Consumer Reports annual reliability survey) and NOT to the plug-in hybrids/PHEV, that are far too close to BEV (poor reliability and high TCO because of the quite large, expensive battery).
And it is logic: the hybrids purpose (to save fuel) is very different from the plug-in hybrids (to have an excellent performance, shadowing BEV, without getting the range anxiety).
However, just as the BEV, the PHEV are carrying a heavy weight (the large battery) with them ALL THE TIME, offsetting the electrical power savings.
Meanwhile, the SCH (or what we call hybrids) are far lighter (small battery) and efficient. Moreover, there are distinct benefits (I am writing this for those dumb snowflakes that say that hybrids are not good because they have two systems: an ICE and an electrical power system): the ICE cars have anyhow (nowadays) a complicated electrical system, thus the hybrids have a marginal additional complexity, but the additional battery, electric engines, inverter are taking out the starter, alternator etc. plus it helps the stop/start system to not damage anymore the ICE and it doesn't need anymore cylinders' deactivation etc.
As a special note: the same dumb snowflakes claim that the hybrids are not reliable because they have far more mechanical pieces than BEV. While the mechanical complexity does exist, it's reliability is proven in decades, while the modern car issues (ICE cars, SCH, BEV) generally spring from the ELECTRICAL SYSTEM (that has thousands of wires=hardware and imperfect software) that is a nightmare even for electricians and IT guys (just as the computers or smart phones, we all experienced the huge issues they create, especially when we are in a hurry). That's the main reason "the electric revolution" brings more problems than it solves.
Another deliberate confusion induced by the leftard propaganda is that they call "the electrified vehicles" market the reunion of SCH, PHEV and BEV, claiming that it is always growing, even if lately the BEV market is falling. That is a huge lie, as even the ICE cars are electrified, with plenty of electrical and electronic features at the board.
The truth would immediately come out if we would talk about the different segments separately: ICE, SCH, PHEV, BEV, hydrogen-fueled cars etc.
Because the truth is that BEV is not yet ready/good (thus is a scam), the ICE are still good (gas for normal cars, going short distances and diesel for the big trucks, going long distances), the hybrids are very good, the PHEV are rather in the same class as BEV, the hydrogen is too costly today etc.
That's why the hybrids (SCH) have the biggest chance to become dominant in a few years, being able to progress (grow efficiency=reduce bad emissions, not the not-polluting CO2) together with the ICE (that are still growing their efficiency - e.g. they are being used in the Atkinson cycle for hybrids, but this can be further extended to regular ICE cars if the regulations will move away from the stupid "eco"-Marxist globalists' mandate).