Not too tough to understand this, actually. Let's see... for purposes of this argument... GM... Toyota... they're all the same. They're all major auto makers. For my Prius my Toyota dealership wants me to come in and spend ~$100 every 5k miles primarily for oil changes and other little peripheral stuff. They also want me to come in and spend ~ $500 every 30k miles for other regularly scheduled preventative maintenance. Over 100k miles this comes to about $3200 (not including "non-scheduled" service) which represents roughly 12-13% of the cost of the vehicle. And that's only for regularly scheduled preventative maintenance, assuming you keep the vehicle for 100k miles. Any non-scheduled service, or maintaining the vehicle beyond 100k miles increases that percentage. This suggests the revenue stream from service is significant.

Now, we go online and do a little research to see what the experts say about the revenue auto dealerships generate from service. 30 seconds of searching on "dealership revenue" brings the following article which supports the argument in question:
http://www.asashop.org/autoinc/april98/mech.htm
The article states:
"Although service and parts revenue accounted for only 12.4 percent of the average dealership's total revenue in 1996, profits from service and parts departments represented 53 percent of a dealership's total profit."

Read the article for the details.

So, GM (and the other major auto manufacturers) (or at least their dealerships) do indeed generate quite a bit of revenue "repairing old cars" (and relatively new ones, for that matter).

You have to talk true EV here. Hybrids (or PHEV's) aren't part of this argument. Since they have an internal combustion engine, they get all the same service an ordinary vehicle gets. Therefore, the major automanufacturers don't have a problem selling them to you, because they don't threaten this revenue stream. It's probably not a coincidence that this is why you can buy a Prius from Toyota, but you can't buy a RAV4-EV.

So now, back to the question - how much service does an EV get?
Well, as a little exercise, go back through your car's service records. You'll probably find most service visits were for:
- oil changes (not req'd for EV)
- muffler/exhaust system (not req'd for EV)
- engine tune ups (not req'd or likely simplified for EV)
- radiator/cooling system/water pump (not req'd or likely simplified for
EV)
- fuel delivery system (not req'd for EV)
- brakes (service requirements greatly reduced w/ regnerative breaking)
- transmission/clutch/etc. (not req'd or likely simplified for EV)
- tires (yup-same for EV as for ordinary car)
- shocks/struts/suspension (yup-same for EV as for ordinary car)

So, it's safe to conclude that the service requirements for an EV would be very significantly reduced from that of current product provided by the major auto manufacturers.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the GM or Toyota executive who has to decide whether to pursue the EV program that you know is going to threaten the 12.4% of revenue that generated 53% of the profits at your dealerships in 1996. Of course you kill it! The only reason you pursue it is if you are mandated (for example by the state of CA in the 90's), or if you think you need to in order to protect future markets from competitors who you know are going to introduce EV's competitive with your major product lines (hasn't happened yet).

I have to admit that I don't really understand the relationship between the revenue generated by the dealerships and the revenue generated by the mother corporation. But working on the assumption that the corporations revenues and profits are pretty much linked to those of the dealerships, it doesn't seem like conspiracy theory to me. - Seems kind of like common sense.

GET THE DENOMINATOR TO ZERO.