Supercharging letter from Tesla 8-13-2015

[ev-now]

I haven't gotten the letter (yet), but I did get pretty much the opposite email inviting me to a new supercharger unveiling.

Not really, they did not invite you to use it, but to attend the opening ceremony. The email says it's designed to allow people to make long distance trips.
That all said, I don't see anything in their promotional material which says SCs are only for that purpose ...

 

[NigelM]

If you want to contribute to another one-sided article about Tesla give them a call.
now we know how little research the writers actually do - read about a couple people complaining on a forum and than write an article. guessing they will put something negative out this evening or tomorrow morning.

To be fair, Dana has always been pretty balanced and even on her articles regarding Tesla and (IMO) overall positive to EVs. She used to report for the San Jose Mercury before Bloomberg and has always been transparent on TMC about who she is.....Case in point, Dana declared her position and e-mail in her post; many journalists wouldn't have declared themselves and just quoted us all regardless.

That said, I'm not sure there's even a story here other than some unfortunate syntax or mailing list error.

 

[stopcrazypp]

This is really poor communications on Tesla's part. Not only do they upset people who use the Superchargers for their rightful purpose, but those are abusing their use get painted with the same broad brush so as to mean practically nothing.

I agree. By botching it up, they go the worse possible result out of it. The idea of the letter is fine, it's just the implementation was done incorrectly.

 

[TexasEV]

Not really, they did not invite you to use it, but to attend the opening ceremony. The email says it's designed to allow people to make long distance trips.
That all said, I don't see anything in their promotional material which says SCs are only for that purpose ...

Then you haven't been looking very hard. As discussed in the very long thread about this when Elon first mentioned sending a letter, the purpose of the supercharger network was said to be to enable long distance travel ever since it was first announced. Let's not get into that again here-- anyone who is new to this topic is welcome to read the hundreds of posts in the thread about it.

 

[LetsGoFast]

If you want to contribute to another one-sided article about Tesla give them a call.
now we know how little research the writers actually do - read about a couple people complaining on a forum and than write an article. guessing they will put something negative out this evening or tomorrow morning.

I just checked out the author on Bloomberg. Their articles seem reasonably fair and balanced to me, from the few I perused. This one will undoubtedly slam Tesla, but I'm not sure it shouldn't. I, for one, didn't get the email, but I think I have my email preferences turned way down.

 

[Kbra]

Here's the jist of my response to them:

"Interesting. When i bought the car there was no talk of this "do not use your local charger" and "only for travelers" stuff. This is a new expectation that has only recently been announced and modified on the website. Supercharging was a cost factor in my purchase which I will continue to utilize to my convenience.


The hole in your argument is that I am NOT impacting travelers who need the supercharges. I fully sympathize with the need to have openings for travelers to continue on as quick as possible. That's why i primarily charge on week days when the 10 spots are normally empty and rarely ever exceed 2 at a time. If i arrive at the supercharge location and find it rather busy i simply skip it.


I utilize both home and supercharging. I travel close to 80 miles a day and the cost is quite a bit higher than 0.12/kwh when you have a tiered cost structure. Yes the first maybe 10 charges are 0.12 but can quickly exceed 0.20/kwh. So I generally split the charging 50/50 to maintain my 0.12 cost throughout the billing cycle.


Given that i live near the superchargers and shop in their general area, i see no reason to discontinue use as long as travelers are not impacted.


I'm rather insulted by this "newsletter" and suspect there's other reasons behind the letter than keeping spots open for travelers. Maybe your cost of electricity?"

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

To be fair, Dana has always been pretty balanced and even on her articles regarding Tesla and (IMO) overall positive to EVs. She used to report for the San Jose Mercury before Bloomberg and has always been transparent on TMC about who she is.....Case in point, Dana declared her position and e-mail in her post; many journalists wouldn't have declared themselves and just quoted us all regardless.

That said, I'm not sure there's even a story here other than some unfortunate syntax.

I don't it's a syntax issue. I think it's a recipient selection issue, or recipient content selection issue. Clearly there are people receiving the email who shouldn't have received one, or shouldn't have had the frequent user paragraph, but something more general instead.

 

[jeffro01]

Here's the jist of my response to them:

"Interesting. When i bought the car there was no talk of this "do not use your local charger" and "only for travelers" stuff. This is a new expectation that has only recently been announced and modified on the website. Supercharging was a cost factor in my purchase which I will continue to utilize to my convenience.


The hole in your argument is that I am NOT impacting travelers who need the supercharges. I fully sympathize with the need to have openings for travelers to continue on as quick as possible. That's why i primarily charge on week days when the 10 spots are normally empty and rarely ever exceed 2 at a time. If i arrive at the supercharge location and find it rather busy i simply skip it.


I utilize both home and supercharging. I travel close to 80 miles a day and the cost is quite a bit higher than 0.12/kwh when you have a tiered cost structure. Yes the first maybe 10 charges are 0.12 but can quickly exceed 0.20/kwh. So I generally split the charging 50/50 to maintain my 0.12 cost throughout the billing cycle.


Given that i live near the superchargers and shop in their general area, i see no reason to discontinue use as long as travelers are not impacted.


I'm rather insulted by this "newsletter" and suspect there's other reasons behind the letter than keeping spots open for travelers. Maybe your cost of electricity?"

Your already abusing the system from my perspective. 50/50 charging split? IMHO, that's exactly what Tesla is trying to guard against. From what I've read thus far your post is the only one that gave me pause...

I'll allow for others to chime in on their thoughts, it's quite possible my perspective is wrong.

Jeff

 

[Kbra]

Your already abusing the system from my perspective. 50/50 charging split? IMHO, that's exactly what Tesla is trying to guard against. From what I've read thus far your post is the only one that gave me pause...

I'll allow for others to chime in on their thoughts, it's quite possible my perspective is wrong.

Jeff

How am i abusing it? Theres 10 empty stalls and i plug in for 30 minutes once a week. Tell me what i'm missing here. Im not stopping anyone from getting their charge on. Im not slowing someone down...

 

[jeffro01]

How am i abusing it? Theres 10 empty stalls and i plug in for 30 minutes once a week. Tell me what i'm missing here. Im not stopping anyone from getting their charge on. Im not slowing someone down...

And all of the free electricity you are getting is obviously worth something to you or you wouldn't be doing it as is clear with your first post. Supercharger occupancy is only part of this equation. It's great that you appear to be courteous about when you use it but 50\50? Your exploiting the system to pay your electric bill, I just don't see how that's ethical.

Again, given the general tenner of the discussions I've been in recently I'd like to see others perspective. It's quite possible that my position is wrong.

Jeff

 

[danahull]

journalism

If you want to contribute to another one-sided article about Tesla give them a call.
now we know how little research the writers actually do - read about a couple people complaining on a forum and than write an article. guessing they will put something negative out this evening or tomorrow morning.

I'm not sure what you mean, exactly. Elon mentioned that the notifications were coming at the shareholders meeting. Now some people have gotten them. I'm not sure what's one-sided about reporting that.

 

[TaoJones]

As I posted at TM:

...

Except there is no crowding problem at SoCal SCs and nobody to speak of charges daily. Pretending that there is a problem and then producing a seemingly reasonable response does not make the perceived problem any less a work of complete fiction.

An apt analogy would be voter fraud. Often cited as a justification to reduce voter turnout, voter fraud simply does not present a statistically significant threat to the American way of life or any other grandiose claim.

Similarly, the vast majority of owners do not even use superchargers. Those that have no home charging option have been told by Tesla that using superchargers as their sole means is perfectly fine.

So who exactly other than the bogeyman is the problem? At best, commercial/livery may need a metered solution. But this needless broad-brush kvetching by the HBI (Handwringing Busybody Individuals) remains misguided and simply wrong.

 

[NigelM]

I don't it's a syntax issue. I think it's a recipient selection issue, or recipient content selection issue. Clearly there are people receiving the email who shouldn't have received one, or shouldn't have had the frequent user paragraph, but something more general instead.

Thanks, I edited my post accordingly.

 

[Kbra]

And all of the free electricity you are getting is obviously worth something to you or you wouldn't be doing it as is clear with your first post. Supercharger occupancy is only part of this equation. It's great that you appear to be courteous about when you use it but 50\50? Your exploiting the system to pay your electric bill, I just don't see how that's ethical.

Again, given the general tenner of the discussions I've been in recently I'd like to see others perspective. It's quite possible that my position is wrong.

Jeff

My $2000 payment for the software enabled privilege to use the SC is my reason to use it. I upgraded my 60 to us SC and you better believe im going to use it. Tesla said free SC for life. Not 100kWh/month for life.

 

[stopcrazypp]

And all of the free electricity you are getting is obviously worth something to you or you wouldn't be doing it as is clear with your first post. Supercharger occupancy is only part of this equation. It's great that you appear to be courteous about when you use it but 50\50? Your exploiting the system to pay your electric bill, I just don't see how that's ethical.

Again, given the general tenner of the discussions I've been in recently I'd like to see others perspective. It's quite possible that my position is wrong.

Jeff

We have a long thread on this specific subject already over here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...harging-to-reduce-ownership-cost-of-a-Model-S

Many agree with your perspective, but there's others that hold Kbra's perspective (that as long as he doesn't block anyone from charging, he's not abusing the superchargers even if he is using them to offset his charging costs). Probably not worthwhile to rehash here, but in the end neither side was able to convince the other about which perspective was right or wrong.

 

[vdiv]

Not really, they did not invite you to use it, but to attend the opening ceremony. The email says it's designed to allow people to make long distance trips.
That all said, I don't see anything in their promotional material which says SCs are only for that purpose ...

Missed the irony perhaps?

In order for me to attend I'd have to use at least two supercharging sessions as that would be a "long distance trip".

 

[No2DinosaurFuel]

And all of the free electricity you are getting is obviously worth something to you or you wouldn't be doing it as is clear with your first post. Supercharger occupancy is only part of this equation. It's great that you appear to be courteous about when you use it but 50\50? Your exploiting the system to pay your electric bill, I just don't see how that's ethical.

Again, given the general tenner of the discussions I've been in recently I'd like to see others perspective. It's quite possible that my position is wrong.

Jeff

Let's assume it's exploitation. But who is he exploiting by doing what he said he is doing, i.e. being courteous and such? He is exploiting ONLY Tesla. Yes the same Tesla that told its customer to exploit them all they want when they announce free charging for life for ALL model S.

So yes, I agree with you on his exploitation. But I don't see it as wrong when the entity you exploit wants you to exploit them.

 

[Owner]

A sad day for Tesla.

I have not received the letter, but I did start the thread on TMC two months ago about it.

Why can't they instead send a usage clarification note to all owners instead?

 

[snellenr]

Idle thought: has anyone been able to confirm -- with a real, live Tesla employee -- that Tesla actually sent this email?

There are some mischievous imps on this planet, after all, who enjoy stirring up... the pot.

 

[Patrick W]

Newsletter: The Best Way to Charge Your Model S

I just received an email "The Best Way to Charge Your Model S" from "[email protected]".

I've had the car for a few months but this is the first time I've received this particular newsletter.

Just curious but is everyone receiving this or maybe am I doing something wrong and this is Tesla's gentle way of warning that maybe I'm not charging my S properly?