Garlan Garner
Banned
If Tesla is in the business of making money...then which option would they be more prone to sell?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Prolly already been said, but here's my opinion -- pay up front for the option then pay per use. The pay up front is for the hardware to allow supercharging and the per use is to provide the ongoing coverage of costs.
Costs would seem really high and they'd get beat up in the press if the per charge fee had to cover putting the hardware in every single car even in most would use rarely if ever.
Tesla has the infrastructure, via the myTesla account that is already tied to every car (I recall that didn't exist 3 years ago) to flip a charge on per Kwh if they wanted.
Costs would seem really high and they'd get beat up in the press if the per charge fee had to cover putting the hardware in every single car even in most would use rarely if ever.
Tesla has the infrastructure, via the myTesla account that is already tied to every car (I recall that didn't exist 3 years ago) to flip a charge on per Kwh if they wanted.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Yes, I'm 100% aware of that, which is why I choose phrasing carefully in the original post:
"Although this was not a randomly selected poll, that is not how statistics work."
My point was the size of the sample is not a problem in this case. It is sufficiently large enough to yield useful results.
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I guess we are talking past each other. Is GM going to lose money on their car if they decided not to charge the $750 for DC charging (but included the hardware)? The answer is also no. But that is beside the point. There are probably a bunch of options an automaker can bundle with the car and still not "lose money" at the base price.
What I am discussing is the marginal cost of the feature itself. Even if the hardware is included in the car, Tesla is justified in charging a hardware activation fee (as they did in S60 and likely will do in Model 3) because there is a marginal cost to it that they are recovering with that fee. That's all I'm saying.
Talking about the 40kWh vs 60kWh and 70kWh vs 75kWh probably is more clear (those involve even larger marginal costs with software locked hardware).
Last edited:
roblab
Active Member
It is so simple to just go plug in on a trip. And it is so cool when people learn you don't have to swipe a card and pay a fee every time you use it. And it is so sensible that Tesla has chosen to eliminate the hassle and cost of identifying, collecting, and billing. That actually makes it cheaper.
Compare the cost and hassle of using any J17772 charging system. Tesla's system is superior in every way.
This whole credit card, bill-me-later stuff is why a great many people are unable to meet any type of emergency, as they are tapped out, have used up their equity, and are paying ridiculous fees for the "privilege" of paying per use.
The Secret Shame of Middle-Class Americans Living Paycheck to Paycheck
Compare the cost and hassle of using any J17772 charging system. Tesla's system is superior in every way.
This whole credit card, bill-me-later stuff is why a great many people are unable to meet any type of emergency, as they are tapped out, have used up their equity, and are paying ridiculous fees for the "privilege" of paying per use.
The Secret Shame of Middle-Class Americans Living Paycheck to Paycheck
And these are the people who will have an extra $2,000 handy to pre-pay their free supercharger access?
diamond.g
Active Member
Even more to the point should they be getting 35000 dollar cars?
I'm willing to pay the $2000 one time SC fee even though I will home charge 98% of the time. I look at this activation as paying up front for the SC network and electricity use and for my convenience instead of having to pay each time, even if I never break even.
But I don't see the charging hardware in the car as a cost that is recouped by the SC fee. That hardware cost was baked into the base price of the car. So Tesla is not accruing a cost that was not already budgeted into the base price. Heck it's probably cheaper for Tesla to have it installed in all the cars, then having to have different production runs with one run for cars that want SC so they have the hardware installed and a second production run without the hardware installed.
Last edited:
I still want to know what is up with panel 2.1.5 on your PV array
Now on to replying to your post:As stated before, the reason I am pro "pay as you go" is to reduce congestion without relying on "build more superchargers" as the road to no congestion.
Building more superchargers to relive congestion is fine after we reach route saturation. The Superchargers that are going in to fill in gaps in the travel routes will do absolutely zero to relive congestion in urban areas. My fear is that congested Supercharger areas will draw off resources that should be used to expand the network into routs that are currently unavailable.
If the money earmarked for filling in gaps in Arkansas instead goes to build more Superchargers in downtown LA so locals can charge for free without making long distance travelers have to wait to charge it would please a lot of people... what is the incentive to fill in the gaps?
There are already Superchargers that are less than an hour walking distance apart in Los Angeles... Adding "anti congestion" Superchargers will slow down expansion of the network into the fly over states.
Keith
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Didn't you say that you would be the only Tesla within 100s of miles ?
Just how much money do you think Tesla (and by extension the car owning populace) should spend to make yours truly happy ? And then you pile on and expect to only pay for kWh ?
Crazy
Last edited:
alseTrick
Active Member
Per Tesla/Musk, they're not in the business of making money on Service Centers.
alseTrick
Active Member
Using an established fact to make an entirely unrelated point doesn't work.
alseTrick
Active Member
So because someone doesn't plan on using their car to make frequent and/or long road trips, they're too poor or in debt to buy a Tesla? It's not that they'd rather refrain from buying something they won't use enough to recoup their initial expense? That is the opposite mentality of people spending money they don't have.
Tell me with a strait face that the only people using the LA Superchargers are people taking long road trips... would you even say a majority of use in LA is people on long road trips? If so, speak up and dispel the myth of extra Supercharges being built in Urban areas to relive wait times due to locals using them.
Something wrong with wanting to pay for what I get? I would prefer pay for use for every new Tesla, current owners would be grandfathered in on the unlimited.
The unlimited argument: "pay your $2000 for infrastructure, we all need to contribute it is only fair"
In reality who knows how much of each car sale goes where? Who knows what it will cost to build a Model 3? Nobody, not even Elon since the damn thing is still a prototype with no set in stone specifications, features, or anything. So far, the stock holders in Tesla get zero, because all profits are being rolled back into the company for build out of car factory, battery factory, and supercharger infrastructure. How much of a model S or X sale price goes to Superchargers? I don't know and neither do you. How much of a non-supercharger enabled 3 will go to Supercharger infrastructure? It will be less than an enabled car, but by how much?
The reality of the unlimited argument: "my Supercharger in LA is crowded, build me another one (actually several more) so I don't have to wait to charge locally Tesla! Screw people in the fly over states unless they are ones I want to visit!!!"
I am actually impressed with Tesla for not caving completely to the pressure to build more on the coasts and not build any elsewhere. I am very pleased with Tesla's commitment to expand the network. I would prefer that the "local" to me Supercharger was cancelled and that they put one in Birmingham Alabama instead. I don't need local charging and Birmingham would cut around 4 hours off of the only road trip I would plan on taking... but this would benefit me and perhaps not others trying to span the mid-south so I will leave it up to Tesla rather than complaining about it.
Keith
That link is totally horrifying mostly because the author claims to accept the blame while giving several reasons why living on the edge isn't really his fault!
I don't own a Tesla yet... one of the reasons is that I actually have retirement savings. I could purchase a Model X with every bell and whistle cash next month by cashing in my retirement. Looking at the Author sending his kids to private school and living in the Hampton's "year round like a poor person" and complaining that it is the economies fault that he has no retirement or vacations... WTF is wrong with people?
I understand low income people having trouble making ends meet, it sucks not having a good reliable job. But the idea that people with good jobs can't come up with $400 at the drop of a hat, and couldn't come up with $1000 in a months time is mind blowing to me. Having a months income or more in my savings account is the "norm" for me... if I get down to a months income in my savings I take a look to see if it is due to "unexpected but planned for" items (car repair, new tires, appliance repair/replacement, home repair, medical expense) or if the depletion is due to frivolous spending. On the "big end" of dealing with the unexpected, after a decade of steady saving I have access to over a years income with a months notice. I didn't have that when I first started working a "real" job after getting out of the Navy, but I had a "comfortable" amount in retirement funds after only a few years of working.
Yes, I have credit card debt, mortgage and car payment... credit card debt is going down steadily and when I pay off stupid purchases from my miss-managed youth they will reach and stay at zero. Just like purchasing a Model X I could be debt free (including house payment) by cashing in my savings... but I live well and am paying the credit debt off as is, so no need to screw my future for increased disposable income now. It makes me ill to think of the money I wasted on stupid stuff when I was young... I traded in cars like they were toys, and spent unholy amounts of money making fast cars even faster. I don't regret the car modification hobby but the trading in cars every couple years was a wasted drain on income. I grew out of this behavior... is the rest of the country stuck in adolescence?
Anyway, this is probably way off topic and I have no idea if there is an appropriate place for it on these forums.
Moderator, if you delete this I understand, if you move this please PM me where it goes
Keith
melindav
☰ 2018
@Fourdoor - reminds me of a friend who lives paycheck to paycheck, has a very small, low value home, with multiple loans against it (often on a 'plan' to catch up on past payments), her and her spouse each have a new car on loans, credit card debt, often we've gone to events together where she offered to cover the gas if I drove, only to have her debit/credit card declined... and when she was saying they were expecting a sizable tax return was excited they could plan to take an expensive trip. Not catch up on past payments, not pay something off, not to save, but to immediately spend it.
diamond.g
Active Member
Honestly, I would look at getting a Tesla just like getting a BMW or M-B. I think that is where the disconnect comes from. Maybe folks are more hoping Tesla would position the 3 against the Caddilac ATS, and use packages instead of making all the optional stuff separate like the Bavarians.Though folks are likely to complain no matter what direction Tesla chooses.
Similar threads
- Poll
