Should Tesla Reconsider Policy re: Credit for 19" Sig|Perf Wheels?

[Warrenbonz]

Not offering a credit when opting for 19" rims on Sig & Perf; good policy or unwise/unfair poicy?

Let's help Tesla decide.

My thoughts: From a stock a holder and a reservation holder perspective I believe a credit should be offered.
From a manufacturing/efficiency/simplicity standpoint I think it is very smart for Tesla to start with the Sig. Model; fewer variables to complicate things/higher price point etc. It makes perfect sense to me that options such as the tech package, air suspension etc. would not be changeable or eligable for a credit. Tire/rims on the other hand are so easy to change at the factory that is just doesn't seem worth creating the bad feelings and mess of "wheel trading" that will ensue if a credit is not offered. Instead of losing $3,500 many people will order thier sig. / perf with 21" rims planning to swap them with owners of 19" rims. I believe this would lead to a lot of frustration from wasted time/energy and take away from the good feeling and excitement new owners have for both their new car and Tesla. From a revenue perspective, a number of people will simply choose a base model instead of a sig. or Perf. Perhaps with there being a Sig. waiting list it may seem like there wouldn't be a loss there; I am not so sure. There are those that will downgrade from Perf to a base model or perhaps change their mind and not purchase the car at all. I envision many Tesla employees (store/service) ending up spending countless hours trying to lessen the frustration of customers over this policy by trying to justify/explain/sympathize and by kindly helping coordinate rim swaps. Not the best use of thier time, especially when it could all be so easily avoided by simply allowing for a credit.

Tesla has an amazing resource in all our excitement and passion for the company. Not offering a credit feels unfair to me and I believe would damper some of the excitement many of us feel. I believe there is no better or more powerful way for a company to grow than from genuine excitement from it's customers and supporters.

My vote is that it is an unwise/unfair policy. It just feels wrong to have to pay for something you aren't getting.

Please share your thoughts and vote in the poll.

[ckessel]

I'm not sure there's much more to be said on it. God knows I stated my opinion more than vigorously enough .

There's another thread already that's beaten this horse dead, resurrected it, and then beat it again:
Model S Wheel Pricing Performance: Std|Perf|Sig

[bonnie1194]

[Mod note: Modified thread title, since (to the best of my knowledge) Tesla has not stated they are reconsidering changing policy.]

[gg_got_a_tesla]

I'm not a stakeholder per se in this argument but, I do think it's unwise and bordering on unfair. Instead of offering a credit up front, Tesla could perhaps allow the buyer to offset additional accessories or service in the future - sort of like a store credit.

[ckessel]

Instead of offering a credit up front, Tesla could perhaps allow the buyer to offset additional accessories or service in the future - sort of like a store credit.

I hadn't really thought about store credit as an option. I've been waffling back and forth on the tech package, if they did a credit that'd almost certainly tilt me to adding the tech package (not mention I'd get the Perf rather than not, so a big win for Tesla as far as my individual purchase).

[Larry Chanin]

Not offering a credit when opting for 19" rims on Sig & Perf; good policy or unwise/unfair poicy?

It makes perfect sense to me that options such as the tech package, air suspension etc. would not be changeable or eligable for a credit. Tire/rims on the other hand are so easy to change at the factory that is just doesn't seem worth creating the bad feelings and mess of "wheel trading" that will ensue if a credit is not offered.

Hi Warren,

I think your remarks quoted above nicely sum up this entire issue.

Even for financially comfortable Signature reservation holders this policy unnecessarily gives the impression that Tesla is nickel and diming their prospective customers. This issue could definately have been better handled by Tesla.

Larry

[Warrenbonz]

[Mod note: Modified thread title, since (to the best of my knowledge) Tesla has not stated they are reconsidering changing policy.]

FYI, I was told from someone at Tesla that this topic was being reconsidered .

[stopcrazypp]

I find that if they never offered the option to downgrade wheels (which is what most other makes do), they probably would have less/no issue. Or if they never offered 21" wheels as standard in any trim level (and stuck with more common 19" or 20").

I think Tesla marketing allowed the downgrade option to:
A) allow more options to the buyer
B) make it seem like the included wheels are of added value to the car that the buyer gets for "free" or a discount.

Instead, it got customers to unexpectedly feel like they got ripped off by having wheels they don't want/need (mainly because they are 21" wheels) bundled with the car and being charged full price for them.

[Larry Chanin]

Instead, it got customers to unexpectedly feel like they got ripped off by having wheels they don't want/need (mainly because they are 21" wheels) bundled with the car and being charged full price for them.

True, it's certainly much more difficutl for Tesla to change the production line to accommodate different roof packages than to change wheels/tires. Yet, somehow Tesla deemed that they would make the panoramic roof an option even for the Signatures.

Larry

[Tommy]

I think those wanting Tesla to credit them $3500 for down grading to 19" wheels are looking at it from the wrong perspective; I sense many believe Tesla is pocketing $3500 by not allowing a credit for the downgrade. That is not the case, looking at the $3500 markup on the wheels for the non sig/perf versions and asking that amount as a credit, in effect is expecting Tesla to give back their markup margin and lowering the overall margin on the car. IMO, the fair way to both parties (Tesla & purchaser) would be to credit the actual cost difference between the standard and downgraded wheels, which is certainly much less than $3500. In reality, this is not practical as it would more than likely alienate the non sig/perf purchasers for having to pay a markup to upgrade the wheels rather than the actual cost difference.