Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Discussion on this WSJ article

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I think the sentiment of this article is on key, but details seem so wrong.


I always thought of WSJ as a reliable source.
- first LFP?
- $7500 tax credit in 272 mile range lease in 2024. Am I wrong here?
- 272 mile range for 2024? Didn’t that go up w new RWD model?

Those are items that jumped out to me, a November 2023 RWD buyer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rpiotro
I think the sentiment of this article is on key, but details seem so wrong.


I always thought of WSJ as a reliable source.
- first LFP?
- $7500 tax credit in 272 mile range lease in 2024. Am I wrong here?
- 272 mile range for 2024? Didn’t that go up w new RWD model?

Those are items that jumped out to me, a November 2023 RWD buyer.

The wall street journal is paywalled content.

You cant copy the contents of the article and paste it here, and any links to it are going to require people to get past the paywall. So, you are going to have to summarize the article, in your own words, to discuss it here.
 
I think the sentiment of this article is on key, but details seem so wrong.


I always thought of WSJ as a reliable source.
- first LFP?
- $7500 tax credit in 272 mile range lease in 2024. Am I wrong here?
- 272 mile range for 2024? Didn’t that go up w new RWD model?

Those are items that jumped out to me, a November 2023 RWD buyer.

Not sure where you are getting your info, but almost all of the WSJ points are correct:
  • $7,5000 tax credit ON A LEASE – yep
  • 272 mile range on the RWD - yep
  • LFP – yes, it’s LFP. And it is a new (refreshed) model, but you are correct that the switch to LFP in the RWD 3 happened prior to the release of the highland. So WSJ is slightly off on it being “new,” but probably right to inform their readers of how the LFP is different.
 
The wall street journal is paywalled content.

You cant copy the contents of the article and paste it here, and any links to it are going to require people to get past the paywall. So, you are going to have to summarize the article, in your own words, to discuss it here.
That link actually does show the full article in the Apple stocks app. I guess it's a perk of Apple devices?
 
The wall street journal is paywalled content.

You cant copy the contents of the article and paste it here, and any links to it are going to require people to get past the paywall. So, you are going to have to summarize the article, in your own words, to discuss it here.
Gift link: https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/cars/...i23g33lcdu0&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Haven't had time to read the article but yes on the below:
Not sure where you are getting your info, but almost all of the WSJ points are correct:
  • $7,5000 tax credit ON A LEASE – yep
OP can Google for commercial lease loophole ev $7500. It allows BEVs that don't meet requirements at Credits for new clean vehicles purchased in 2023 or after | Internal Revenue Service (as well as people who don't meet it) to sorta get it. Leasing company receives the $7500 and they can choose to pass along $0 to the full amount to the lessee.
 
Not sure where you are getting your info, but almost all of the WSJ points are correct:
  • $7,5000 tax credit ON A LEASE – yep
  • 272 mile range on the RWD - yep
  • LFP – yes, it’s LFP. And it is a new (refreshed) model, but you are correct that the switch to LFP in the RWD 3 happened prior to the release of the highland. So WSJ is slightly off on it being “new,” but probably right to inform their readers of how the LFP is different.
Thank you! I forgot about the plug on the wall charger too, but I had no idea these things were true.
 
I think the sentiment of this article is on key, but details seem so wrong.
...
- 272 mile range for 2024?
https://www.tesla.com/model3/design#overview says 272 right now.

3-rwd.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure where you are getting your info, but almost all of the WSJ points are correct:
  • $7,5000 tax credit ON A LEASE – yep
  • 272 mile range on the RWD - yep
  • LFP – yes, it’s LFP. And it is a new (refreshed) model, but you are correct that the switch to LFP in the RWD 3 happened prior to the release of the highland. So WSJ is slightly off on it being “new,” but probably right to inform their readers of how the LFP is different.

Thanks for this! About the only thing that stands out to me (as an error) is the statement about the "wall charger" being "plugged into a 240V socket". Highly doubtful that they are using a corded Wall Connector but I guess that's me being nit-picky.
I didnt read the article. Does this mean that the thread title of "so much wrong in this WSJ article" is in fact wrong?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rpiotro and mknmike
I didnt read the article. Does this mean that the thread title of "so much wrong in this WSJ article" is in fact wrong?
I guess I should clarify that the only thing I know for sure is wrong, is that statement about the wall "charger" being plugged into a socket. Here's a quick rundown on some of the points (facts?) that were stated in the article:
  • "Tesla models have earned five-star ratings from regulators in every global market": Note "Tesla models", so maybe not necessarily exclusive to Model 3.
  • "a three-year lease on a 2024 Tesla Model 3 Rear-Wheel Drive: $331 per month, with a $4,400 down payment. Their modest monthly includes a $7,500 federal tax credit, a 15,000-mile annual mileage allowance and $1,000 incentive from Tesla, since expired.": I don't know enough about the current leasing arrangements but all this seems to have been confirmed by @fronesis . The article's date is April 5th, 2024.
  • "This is the first U.S.-market Tesla to rely on lithium iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries, which are broadly superior to nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) cells in cost, safety, climatization, charging speed and durability. My sister’s car extracts 272 miles of range from a comparatively small battery, a reported 57.5-kWh of usable storage. At a Tesla Supercharger it can add up to 175 miles of range in 15 minutes.": This last detail is under ideal conditions and not indicative of always being true.
  • "Weighing a trim 3,841 pounds, the RWD is propelled by a single rear-mounted permanent-magnet motor, producing 276 hp and 257 lb-ft. And it scoots: 0-60 mph takes six frictionless seconds.": Can be verified true or false by looking up some published specifications but I haven't done this myself. Note that this is for a 2024 Model 3 Highland.
  • "The interior noise level is lower and the cabin isolation more thorough, at all speeds, marking the use of acoustic glass around and above the cabin, in the frameless panoramic roof.": No detailed measurements cited for the noise level but I believe that the general consensus is that the Highland is at least a bit quieter than previous models.
  • "Haters also complained the Model 3’s interior materials felt and looked cheap, complaints not without merit.": Personal judgement on this so there's many opinions.
  • "New for 2024 are a touch-screen display for the rear cabin; ventilated front seats; and dual wireless charging pads.": All true from what I understand having test driven a Highland a couple of months ago.
  • "There are no control stalks on the steering column (turn-signal controls are built into the steering wheel), nor a gear selector (the PRNDL is integrated into the touch screen), nor a Start button.": Again, true from my experience. However, there are PRNDL buttons available above the rear view mirror.
So, overall, I'd rate the article as being fairly truthful and accurate.

edit: Edited to remove "L" from "PRNDL" as I don't think Model 3 has a "Low" gear.
 
Last edited:
"New for 2024 are a touch-screen display for the rear cabin; ventilated front seats; and dual wireless charging pads.":

Pretty sure my 2023 has dual wireless charging pads. So at least that is not “all new.”


This is the first U.S.-market Tesla to rely on lithium iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries,

I’m pretty sure my 2023 and even earlier RWD M3 used LFP. Also, not all 2024 M3 are LFP. Correct? The performance isn’t LFP if it’s getting $7500 at purchase. Correct?

I started this thread having no idea you can get (up to) $7500 doing a lease. That seems crazy to me when you can’t get the $7500 by purchasing. I had no idea.

I also had no idea they decreased the rates range to the same as the 2023. I thought the 2024 was supposed to be like 5%+ more efficient with less drag and should therefore have more range without any change to the battery or motor. I was surprised to see the 272 rating, same as 2023 on the Tesla. Website. Does anyone know why thi s changed?
 
I also had no idea they decreased the rates range to the same as the 2023. I thought the 2024 was supposed to be like 5%+ more efficient with less drag and should therefore have more range without any change to the battery or motor. I was surprised to see the 272 rating, same as 2023 on the Tesla. Website. Does anyone know why thi s changed?

I don’t know. But a few points I *do* know that might be relevant:
  • The EPA website doesn’t have data on the 2024 Model 3. It’s as if they just used the info from 2023 for the Moroney sticker.
  • From anecdotal reports from a large number of new highland owners and testers, it DOES seem to be a bit more efficient.
  • One anecdote of my own: I drove 147 miles and used only 29 kWh. If you do the math that would give a total range closer to 300 than 272.
 
I think the sentiment of this article is on key, but details seem so wrong.
I always thought of WSJ as a reliable source.
- first LFP?
- $7500 tax credit in 272 mile range lease in 2024. Am I wrong here?
- 272 mile range for 2024? Didn’t that go up w new RWD model?

Bro, you so mad at WSJ that you decided to pro-actively denounce it without summarizing the gist of the article?
Really?

The details are accurate.
The sentiment may, or may not be, something that everyone will agree on.

The sentiment:
  • Families are sitting around the proverbial kitchen table having to weigh the Model 3’s remarkable value proposition against Elon’s latest reprehensible posts
  • His sister bought a Model 3 anyway.
  • If Tesla is going to lower prices every time he (Elon) says something hurtful, hateful or dumb? Keep talking, dude. I need a car too.
The gist being that Elon's talk has no impact on Tesla demand, as its offset by lower prices.
Q1 results testify otherwise, with first Quarterly drop in deliveries post-Covid.
I would not argue that the drop can be attributed to Elon's personal Tesla brand debasement, but whatever the cause, the demand for Teslas has declined.

It is what it is.

1714954319295.png

 
Last edited:
Bro, you so mad at WSJ that you decided to pro-actively denounce it without summarizing the gist of the article?
Really?

The details about are accurate.
The sentiment may, or may not be, something that everyone will agree on.

The sentiment:
  • Families are sitting around the proverbial kitchen table having to weigh the Model 3’s remarkable value proposition against Elon’s latest reprehensible posts
  • His sister bought a Model 3 anyway.
  • If Tesla is going to lower prices every time he (Elon) says something hurtful, hateful or dumb? Keep talking, dude. I need a car too.
The gist being that Elon's talk has no impact on Tesla demand, as its offset by lower prices.
Q1 results testify otherwise, with first Quarterly drop in deliveries post-Covid.
I would not argue that the drop can be attributed to Elon's personal Tesla brand debasement, but whatever the cause, the demand for Teslas has declined.

It is what it is.

View attachment 1044707
It's multifactorial like everything in life. It's naive to assume that Elon has zero effect - a lot of people rightfully hate him. But beyond that, the market is getting saturated. And Tesla basically osbourned themselves by releasing the Highland without having the equivalent Y update ready shortly after. And all of this is in a high interest rate environment when people just don't have as much disposable income. And because existing resale absolutely tanked, a lot of people who may have been tempted to upgrade are holding onto their cars.
 
Ah..! Cool. I didn’t know you could get those things straight from the EPA site.

EDIT!! Wait...I've read that first document for the 2024 Model 3 RWD and the range numbers reported there are certainly higher than 272. I don't know what to make of them, but they reported two instances of "charge depleted range" – 408 miles, and then 364 miles.

Both say they are for 68.879 kWh of charge, and obviously the RWD doesn't have a battery that big, but if you calculate the effective range for a 57.5 kWh batter, you still get over 300.

When I wrote above I was looking here, FuelEconomy.gov - The official U.S. government source for fuel economy information., and if you search for 2024 there are no ratings for Teslas.

So I'm only more confused, but I still feel like it's pretty likely that the Highland Model 3 is using fewer Wh/m than the 2023 Model 3, so with the same size battery it's probably got slightly better range.
 
Last edited:
It's multifactorial like everything in life. It's naive to assume that Elon has zero effect - a lot of people rightfully hate him. But beyond that, the market is getting saturated.

Indeed.
I'm not arguing Elon has zero effect. He has some. It's more negative now relative to the effect he had before he went hog-wild on Twitter.
Is it net negative or net positive overall? I'm not certain.
I suspect it is very net positive among white supremacists', but I don't know how large of an addressable market that is.

EV and car market are still growing, overall. But there are a LOT more options for us, the consumers, than there were a few years ago. Thus Tesla's market share and sales are declining.

That's net positive for EV market, and us, the consumers. EV sales in the US rose 2.6% year over year in Q1'24. The increase last quarter was well below the previous two years.
It is net negative to Tesla. Tesla sales in the U.S. were down 13.3% year over year in Q1'24.

And Tesla basically osbourned themselves by releasing the Highland without having the equivalent Y update ready shortly after.

Not just that.
For many, Highland was a bust. Degraded user experience (removal of stalks) and lower quality of the interior materials (cheap fabric in place of suede) are bad moves. Not a reason to upgrade.

Model Y is still selling OK-ish. Personally, I would not touch it with a ten-foot pole, but others are buying it.
Tesla's attention has been focused on releasing the debased Cybertruck, and now on anything else other than selling more cars: robots, AI, autonomous fluff, fraudo-taxi. Whatever it takes to spin-up the excitement in the market to juice-up the stock price.

In the mean time, the vehicle portfolio is aging, and the few models that got upgraded have become less desirable.
It is what it is.

And all of this is in a high interest rate environment when people just don't have as much disposable income.

US vehicle sales are UP overall, month over month, and quarter over quarter, in March'24.
Most global auto giants have reported impressive U.S. sales growth in the first quarter of 2024. Sales of Toyota, Honda , Volkswagen and Nissan have seen significant year-over-year improvements. But not everyone is a winner. General Motors and Tesla have recorded decline in the sales volume.

I would not overplay interest rate card. Elon does that way too much.
It has become a lame excuse for poor execution by Tesla.

Interest rates are higher, but economy is growing strong, so more people are earning more.
They are buying more vehicles. Just not Teslas.

And because existing resale absolutely tanked, a lot of people who may have been tempted to upgrade are holding onto their cars.

Tesla has consistently debased its residual values with price cuts. That is true.
Another significant contributing factor are new Federal EV credit rules, that bar most upper-middle-class buyers from being eligible for EV credit. Lease pass-through is a loop-hole, but not everyone wants to play the leasing game.

a
 
Last edited:
"I started this thread having no idea you can get (up to) $7500 doing a lease. That seems crazy to me when you can’t get the $7500 by purchasing. I had no idea.
The lessee cannot file for the Federal tax credit in this case since they don't own the car. The owner (e.g. leasing company) receives it. It's been YMMV how much (if any) the automakers pass along to the lessee in the form of a cheaper lease. In the distant past, AFAIK, Tesla passed along $0 (this is all before the commercial lease loophole). I received the full benefit on a Leaf lease in 2013 and a Niro EV lease in Jan 2022, but no loophole was needed back then as the requirements were nowhere near as strict on purchases.

As for crazy yes, Unfortunately, if you wish to purchase your Tesla at end of lease, it's not been possible for 3 and Y. It became impossible for any leases delivered on or after April 15, 2022 (see https://www.tesla.com/support/leasing/lease-end-options).