BP Pulse Orders $100 Million worth of Superchargers for US Network

[gnuarm]

Oh I'm sorry I forgot this was all about you and how you get free stuff and you deserve to get free stuff the rest of your life, at the expense of all the rest of us. My apologies.

Carry on.

You are making no sense. YOU are talking about the free charging, but limiting what they have already given. They can't limit what they've already agreed to.
WTF are you talking about???

 

[gnuarm]

Let me play devil's advocate and ask you: at the time you bought your vehicle with free Supercharging, were you guaranteed a specific growth rate in the network? Did you even have any assumptions about how much the network would grow over the lifetime of your vehicle?

The size of the network when most people with FUSC bought into it was a fraction of what it is today. The benefit has grown significantly since most of those vehicles were purchased, possibly at an unexpected rate (in the early days it certainly was not a done deal that Tesla would grow into what it is today). Of course each individual might have had their own expectations about Supercharger network growth rates, but as far as I know, Tesla never promised any specific growth rates, so if they immediately stopped deploying new sites today, do you feel that you were somehow wronged by Tesla?

Taking it even a step further, if the network already allows pretty much freedom of travel across the US today, and we are mainly at a point of adding redundancy, is there actually any incremental benefit to a FUSC user if new stations are added to the network? The returns gained from each additional station added to the network now are diminishing as the size of the network grows...eventually it reaches a point where it is effectively saturated and having more sites starts to become the equivalent of having two Starbucks located across the street from each other.

I'm not sure how to respond to your post. I knew the "unlimited free" charging was a crap shoot. At any time, they could simply shut down the network, if they felt like it. That is exactly my concern. Now that the charging networks are talking about supporting Tesla cars, and Tesla is planning to support other brands, the availability of the chargers I use for free will become more limited in the future. Add on the Tesla units operated by BP, which will be available to Tesla drivers, but not support the Tesla "unlimited free" charging, and I become concerned this is Tesla's path out of continuing to expand the Tesla network and possibly selling it off entirely, ending the promise to me and others.

Is that more clear?

 

[Dracaris]

Maybe Tesla took a look at the ChargePoint business model and decided they want a piece of that? As I understand it, ChargePoint locations are owned and maintained locally by whatever location features them. However, it's also my understanding that as a result of that model, many ChargePoint locations are in poor condition and unreliable - the local owner doesn't maintain them, or doesn't add a service contract with ChargePoint to do so. On the plus side, all ChargePoint locations use ChargePoint as a payment clearing house, so your ChargePoint account works at all of them even though each charger may be independently owned.

So, if maintenance of the BP Pulse-branded superchargers is as bad as maintenance of ChargePoint locations is alleged to be, they won't become part of the picture for Tesla owners who will stick with Tesla-branded locations. If BP takes good care of them, builds a good reputation for reliable charging, and those locations become a good revenue stream for BP, that'll be interesting for a whole bunch of reasons - especially as more and more cars come with NACS sockets.

 

[SageBrush]

I'm pretty stoked by the news

• Tesla gets another revenue stream
• NACS adoption will be accelerated
• Much needed competition is added to DC fast charger equipment
• Tesla equipment may raise the bar of generic DC charging reliability. My impression is that poor non-Tesla EV network reliability is mostly explained by EV owners damaging CCS plugs, crappy software, and poor upkeep mostly related to ventilation. The Tesla plug is much less susceptible to damage from ignorant EV owners, and I'm hopeful that Tesla software will find its way into these chargers

Imagine if Tesla were to train a corps of hardware technicians to service and maintain all their Tesla branded and generic charging equipment. I would jump at that opportunity. A couple hundred well trained techs could do wonders for the DC fast charging landscape.

 

[Earl]

Imagine if Tesla were to train a corps of hardware technicians to service and maintain all their Tesla branded and generic charging equipment. I would jump at that opportunity. A couple hundred well trained techs could do wonders for the DC fast charging landscape.

Great Idea!

However, I think you're about a decade late. Tesla has has a team of technicians who continuously check on Superchargers and respond quickly when one is determined to be out of order.

 

[RTPEV]

Maybe Tesla took a look at the ChargePoint business model and decided they want a piece of that? As I understand it, ChargePoint locations are owned and maintained locally by whatever location features them. However, it's also my understanding that as a result of that model, many ChargePoint locations are in poor condition and unreliable - the local owner doesn't maintain them, or doesn't add a service contract with ChargePoint to do so.

This is mostly true, but the model is changing. ChargePoint realizes this and is now taking a more proactive role at many sites (of course this means that they are definitely abandoning existing ones where the host shows no interest in actually hosting). Also keep in mind that most of the hosts that are guilty of neglecting their equipment are either (a) car dealerships that never wanted the thing in the first place and were only forced to install it by their affiliated manufacturer and (b) small operators wooed by grant money without really learning much about what would go into hosting or the benefits of doing so.

The BP deal feels much different than that, although I do worry about BP mandating their installation at stations that still are resistant to the idea of providing charging. I do hope they carefully select their outlets and provide proper training and set expectations.

 

[Earl]

lso keep in mind that most of the hosts that are guilty of neglecting their equipment are either (a) car dealerships that never wanted the thing in the first place and were only forced to install it by their affiliated manufacturer and (b) small operators wooed by grant money without really learning much about what would go into hosting or the benefits of doing so.

Also, aggressive salespeople pushed a lot of site owners to become hosts with promises of making a lot of money while taking grants to help with initial installation. Unfortunately, the huge returns never materialized and, even worse, the poor material quality of the charging stations led to a lot of required maintenance which, of course, the hosts did not want to bear.
Basically, Chargepoint is, for the most part, a scam that was arguable almost as bad for EV proliferation as it was good. I actually think it was about 3 steps forward and 2 steps backward for a possible net gain but at a ridiculous overall cost to society.

 

[gnuarm]

Great Idea!

However, I think you're about a decade late. Tesla has has a team of technicians who continuously check on Superchargers and respond quickly when one is determined to be out of order.

I don't know why you say a "decade" late. Do you think there was a time when they had no repair teams???

 

[Earl]

I don't know why you say a "decade" late. Do you think there was a time when they had no repair teams???

Yes, before there were Superchargers, there were no repair teams.
There have only been Superchargers for about a decade.

 

[davewill]

I'm not sure how to respond to your post. I knew the "unlimited free" charging was a crap shoot. At any time, they could simply shut down the network, if they felt like it. That is exactly my concern. Now that the charging networks are talking about supporting Tesla cars, and Tesla is planning to support other brands, the availability of the chargers I use for free will become more limited in the future. Add on the Tesla units operated by BP, which will be available to Tesla drivers, but not support the Tesla "unlimited free" charging, and I become concerned this is Tesla's path out of continuing to expand the Tesla network and possibly selling it off entirely, ending the promise to me and others.

Is that more clear?

BP could have bought anyone's hardware. The fact that bought they bought hardware from Tesla doesn't factor into anything that I can see. Tesla has always been clear that they wanted other vendors and manufacturers to adopt the Tesla charging standards and build out their own networks. I seriously doubt that it has anything to do with Tesla trying to get out of "free" supercharging...there just aren't enough cars with it out there to matter.

I do share your curiosity on how billing will evolve. Will most commercial chargers keep using credit cards and network specific payment accounts, or will they do it through the connection to the car to duplicate the Tesla experience?

 

[gnuarm]

Yes, before there were Superchargers, there were no repair teams.
There have only been Superchargers for about a decade.

So, what are you talking about "a decade late"???

 

[gnuarm]

BP could have bought anyone's hardware. The fact that bought they bought hardware from Tesla doesn't factor into anything that I can see. Tesla has always been clear that they wanted other vendors and manufacturers to adopt the Tesla charging standards and build out their own networks. I seriously doubt that it has anything to do with Tesla trying to get out of "free" supercharging...there just aren't enough cars with it out there to matter.

I do share your curiosity on how billing will evolve. Will most commercial chargers keep using credit cards and network specific payment accounts, or will they do it through the connection to the car to duplicate the Tesla experience?

Here's the deal on the free Supercharging. Only so many chargers are needed. If others build more, Tesla can build less. So that's fewer chargers providing the free Supercharging. Is that more clear?

I never said Tesla is "trying" to get out of free Supercharging, but don't think it is not a consideration. Tesla has offered to transfer free Supercharging with a catch. On the new car, it's no longer "unlimited", only lasting a few more years. That clearly shows they want to put caps on the liability.

I recall when I realized why many practices in business are the way they are, in order to obtain financing, you have to show profitability and many other numbers, but it is important to provide solid numbers. "Unlimited" Supercharging is something to avoid in this context. Not sure how significant this is to Tesla, but clearly it's enough to make them consider it.

 

[Supcom]

Here's the deal on the free Supercharging. Only so many chargers are needed. If others build more, Tesla can build less. So that's fewer chargers providing the free Supercharging. Is that more clear?

I never said Tesla is "trying" to get out of free Supercharging, but don't think it is not a consideration. Tesla has offered to transfer free Supercharging with a catch. On the new car, it's no longer "unlimited", only lasting a few more years. That clearly shows they want to put caps on the liability.

I recall when I realized why many practices in business are the way they are, in order to obtain financing, you have to show profitability and many other numbers, but it is important to provide solid numbers. "Unlimited" Supercharging is something to avoid in this context. Not sure how significant this is to Tesla, but clearly it's enough to make them consider it.

BP was going to buy DC fast chargers from someone. Regardless of whose chargers were purchased, assuming they keep them maintained, they will end up in Tesla's route planner. So, the fact that they chose to purchase the equipment from Tesla is immaterial to Tesla's expansion plans.

 

[Unclepaul]

For legacy FSL they will still get what they were offered. Free Tesla Supercharging for life.

These new BP chargers will be branded as pulse high speed EV charging stations.

Imagine they will set their own pricing and policies.

If you have a gas vehicle, you may have a discount Shell gas card. That only works at Shell branded gas stations. Another brand station might be selling the exact same blend of gas, but your discount card will not work.

In other words, you are entitled to use Tesla Branded Superchargers on their network for free. If you pull up to another brand station, you must go by their policies.

 

[gnuarm]

BP was going to buy DC fast chargers from someone. Regardless of whose chargers were purchased, assuming they keep them maintained, they will end up in Tesla's route planner. So, the fact that they chose to purchase the equipment from Tesla is immaterial to Tesla's expansion plans.

The devil is in the details. If BP were providing Tesla equipment, that clearly leaves the door open to be more tightly integrated with the Tesla network. My concern is that the BP chargers become a synonym for Tesla chargers, but not providing the free charging I currently enjoy.

Some people seem to think that more chargers is always better, but that's not reality. If Tesla ends up building fewer Superchargers because there are BP faux Superchargers, that diminishes the charging facility for me.

 

[RTPEV]

The devil is in the details. If BP were providing Tesla equipment, that clearly leaves the door open to be more tightly integrated with the Tesla network. My concern is that the BP chargers become a synonym for Tesla chargers, but not providing the free charging I currently enjoy.

Some people seem to think that more chargers is always better, but that's not reality. If Tesla ends up building fewer Superchargers because there are BP faux Superchargers, that diminishes the charging facility for me.

You're definitely a glass half empty type...as I said before, and I'll say again, Tesla has significantly expanded their network since you bought into the FUSC. So you are already seeing an increased "charging facility" from that point. The only possible truth is that the rate at which they expand the network may potentially be slower than would otherwise be the case, but that is why I asked whether you were ever promised (or even expected in your own mind) a given growth rate, because the way I see it, your charging facility has actually improved.

Not only that, but as a pessimist is wont to do, you are assuming a negative outcome, that is, that your charging facility will be diminished. There are less pessimistic potential outcomes as well. One is that the true Tesla Supercharger sites become less congested due to more non-Tesla branded sites coming online. This would be a net positive for you. Another is that revenue gained from opening up Superchargers (and selling Supercharger hardware sites to third parties) actually incentivizes and allows Tesla to increase the rate of expansion of their network.

Nobody can really predict what will happen in the future. You immediately assumed a negative outcome. But that isn't necessarily the only possible coutcome.

 

[gnuarm]

You're definitely a glass half empty type...as I said before, and I'll say again, Tesla has significantly expanded their network since you bought into the FUSC. So you are already seeing an increased "charging facility" from that point. The only possible truth is that the rate at which they expand the network may potentially be slower than would otherwise be the case,

Yes, that's exactly the point.

but that is why I asked whether you were ever promised (or even expected in your own mind) a given growth rate,

No one is talking about taking this to court.

because the way I see it, your charging facility has actually improved.

Not because of BP.

Not only that, but as a pessimist is wont to do, you are assuming a negative outcome, that is, that your charging facility will be diminished.

You continually read into what I'm saying, things I did not say. I've not made assertions as if they are fact. I'm pointing out likely outcomes.

There are less pessimistic potential outcomes as well. One is that the true Tesla Supercharger sites become less congested due to more non-Tesla branded sites coming online. This would be a net positive for you.

I've not had issues with crowding to any significant degree.

Another is that revenue gained from opening up Superchargers (and selling Supercharger hardware sites to third parties) actually incentivizes and allows Tesla to increase the rate of expansion of their network.

This is a false assertion. Tesla can do anything they want with the money. I'm sure Tesla has specific goals for their charging network and will not invest a penny that is not warranted.

Nobody can really predict what will happen in the future. You immediately assumed a negative outcome. But that isn't necessarily the only possible coutcome.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I'm sorry you can't simply discuss the facts.

 

[Dracaris]

What percentage of current Tesla owners have FUSC?

 

[RTPEV]

Not because of BP.

This is not what I said. What I said is that your "charging facility" likely has improved greatly from the time you first got FUSC to the present. And it will almost certainly continue to improve. The only variable is whether the rate of improvement will increase, decrease, or remain the same due to the BP purchase. And nobody knows what the outcome of that will be.

You continually read into what I'm saying, things I did not say. I've not made assertions as if they are fact. I'm pointing out likely outcomes.

If I am misinterpreting what you are saying, then perhaps you should be clearer in how you phrase things, because these statements don't appear speculative, but rather definitive to me. Not only that, but I never said you made assertions anyway. In the post of mine that you quoted, I literally said you "assumed" certain outcomes.

From post #1:

If Tesla is going to start selling Superchargers to private companies, that provides less incentive for them to install more Superchargers.

From post #8:

Of course there will be a loss over time.

From post #22:

the availability of the chargers I use for free will become more limited in the future

I've not had issues with crowding to any significant degree.

So why the concern about others getting into the Tesla Supercharger hardware game? If you are getting adequate "charging facility" now, why do you need an improvement? Is there some other aspect of the experience that you think will degrade?

This is a false assertion. Tesla can do anything they want with the money. I'm sure Tesla has specific goals for their charging network and will not invest a penny that is not warranted.

So speaking of putting words into someone's mouth--if you look at the sentence preceding the two that you just quoted above, here is what I said:

There are less pessimistic potential outcomes as well.

This is by no means an assertion. This is simply pointing out that there are potentially negative AND positive potential outcomes, and I listed a few possible positive outcomes that you may not have considered. If you had stated that you were worried about the potential of some of the negative outcomes you list, then that's one thing. But based on what you are saying, it appears you are mostly certain, if not completely certain, that your charging experience will be diminished.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I'm sorry you can't simply discuss the facts.

Nobody can discuss the "facts" because this is all just speculation on everyone's part, since we are talking about the future.

 

[gnuarm]

This is not what I said. What I said is that your "charging facility" likely has improved greatly from the time you first got FUSC to the present. And it will almost certainly continue to improve. The only variable is whether the rate of improvement will increase, decrease, or remain the same due to the BP purchase. And nobody knows what the outcome of that will be.


If I am misinterpreting what you are saying, then perhaps you should be clearer in how you phrase things, because these statements don't appear speculative, but rather definitive to me. Not only that, but I never said you made assertions anyway. In the post of mine that you quoted, I literally said you "assumed" certain outcomes.

From post #1:


From post #8:


From post #22:




So why the concern about others getting into the Tesla Supercharger hardware game? If you are getting adequate "charging facility" now, why do you need an improvement? Is there some other aspect of the experience that you think will degrade?


So speaking of putting words into someone's mouth--if you look at the sentence preceding the two that you just quoted above, here is what I said:


This is by no means an assertion. This is simply pointing out that there are potentially negative AND positive potential outcomes, and I listed a few possible positive outcomes that you may not have considered. If you had stated that you were worried about the potential of some of the negative outcomes you list, then that's one thing. But based on what you are saying, it appears you are mostly certain, if not completely certain, that your charging experience will be diminished.


Nobody can discuss the "facts" because this is all just speculation on everyone's part, since we are talking about the future.

Sorry, this discussion is getting far too intricate to be useful.