Tesla won't sell me a 90 kWh pack unless I give them my old pack for 12% market value

[JOEV1]

They were working on the paperwork for a deposit and such when the word came down that they couldn't sell me the pack without the $2,500 sell back. Was literally minutes from being signed paperwork.

- - - Updated - - -



Exactly. At the same time, you're under no obligation to bring your old battery back to Auto Zone if you don't mind not getting the core charge reimbursed, but you probably will since the old battery is likely less useful to you than the amount of money they'll give you in return for it.

In the case of the Tesla core reimbursement, $2500 is way less useful to me than my fully functional 85 kWh battery pack.

I understand TESLA if You are going to use Your old Pack for Your Solar Project (I had the same idea for my PV) You are simply "sabotage" their Powerwall business. Maybe You are planning to have Your own Supercharger at home. You just wait until the GIGA factory is in full production...

 

[ChadFeldheimer]

It's obvious that $2.5k is grossly underpriced for the used pack.

It's also clear to me that $25k is grossly underpriced for a 90kwh pack. They charge $13k for the upgrade from 70kwh->90kwh - why would the whole 90kwh pack be only $25k?

Furthermore, Tesla has a vested interest in not advertising the true price of the pack. It would adversely affect sales.

If I were in wk057's shoes, I would try my luck at the next service center over. He was minutes away from signing a sales agreement before corporate stepped in - maybe he'll have better luck the next time!

 

[wk057]

It's obvious that $2.5k is grossly underpriced for the used pack.

It's also clear to me that $25k is grossly underpriced for a 90kwh pack. They charge $13k for the upgrade from 70kwh->90kwh - why would the whole 90kwh pack be only $25k?

Furthermore, Tesla has a vested interest in not advertising the true price of the pack. It would adversely affect sales.

If I were in wk057's shoes, I would try my luck at the next service center over. He was minutes away from signing a sales agreement before corporate stepped in - maybe he'll have better luck the next time!

I've considered that. I'm also considering the "hmm... oh darn, someone stole my pack/it fell out on the highway/gnomes ate it. where do I get a new one?" avenue.

 

[ChadFeldheimer]

I've considered that. I'm also considering the "hmm... oh darn, someone stole my pack/it fell out on the highway/gnomes ate it. where do I get a new one?" avenue.

Not a bad tack!

Some people steal catalytic converters for the scrap platinum in them. They'll crawl under a truck or SUV and saw off the converter. Given how the pack was designed for easy swap/replacement, it seems plausible for a Tesla battery pack to be stolen in similar fashion.

 

[Discoducky]

Second hand information. Just quoting what I was told, hence the quotes.

Sorry, by who did you hear this? It is worrying actually from TSLA standpoint...

 

[luvnMyTS]

Really??? I mean really??? You want the government dictating to private business how they must operate? Um... last time I checked, this is America, not communist China... I think 'wk057's' post was very reasonable, and I understand the purpose of posting it. Tesla doesn't have to sell a battery separately and can place any terms it wants to on that purchase, provided those terms are legal which it would certainly appear they are. Whatever the reasoning is for Tesla not wanting to sell a Model S battery separately, it's their choice to make. I won't get into any potential reasons for their decision as that's a can of worms I'd rather not be responsible for opening.

Jeff

So you'd rather let Tesla keep a monopoly on it and let them say "It's $100,000 for a new battery or buy a new car" rather than have the government step in to stop their monopoly? Sorry, not me. The government does a good job in this area in preventing companies like Tesla from not being fair to the consumer. All I'm saying is that Tesla either needs to start being reasonable, so as not to project the appearance of a monopoly as they are already strongly showing or the government will step in and put a stop to it to protect the consumer.

This thread is a perfect example of it. The guy has a P85D, meaning the car is no more than 13 months old. Hence the battery is a newer version and not that old and still VERY valuable. Tesla wants to force him to give up his $20,000 battery for $2,500 so they can turnaround and sell it to a consumer for $20,000. Sorry, don't see how that's at all fair or reasonable. If my car has a problem, I certainly don't want Tesla telling me, "your motor broke, it's $50,000 for a new one!" Right now, there's nothing stopping them from doing that. As a consumer in America, I expect to be protected by the laws in place to prevent companies from ripping off consumers. So yes, IF, big IF, Tesla will not start doing the right thing and being reasonable, either in allowing others to work on their vehicles or charging "REASONABLE" prices for replacement parts, then yes, I DO want the government I pay 40% of my income to, to step in and protect my investment.

And I can understand them not wanting to sell a new battery pack outright. But if they're going to force you to give up your original part, then they need to pay a reasonable prorated price for it. If the battery pack new is $25,000 and has an estimated 5 year life, then depreciate it by 20% per year. Even that is extreme considering it has an 8 year warranty. But $20,000 would certainly be far more reasonable for a 1 year old battery than $2,500!!!

 

[kirkbauer]

So you'd rather let Tesla keep a monopoly on it and let them say "It's $100,000 for a new battery or buy a new car" rather than have the government step in to stop their monopoly? Sorry, not me. The government does a good job in this area in preventing companies like Tesla from not being fair to the consumer. All I'm saying is that Tesla either needs to start being reasonable, so as not to project the appearance of a monopoly as they are already strongly showing or the government will step in and put a stop to it to protect the consumer.

This thread is a perfect example of it. The guy has a P85D, meaning the car is no more than 13 months old. Hence the batter is a newer version and not that old and still VERY valuable. Tesla wants to force him to give up his $20,000 battery for $2,500 so they can turnaround and sell it to a consumer for $20,000. Sorry, don't see how that's at all fair or reasonable. If my car has a problem, I certainly don't want Tesla telling me, "your motor broke, it's $50,000 for a new one!" Right now, there's nothing stopping them from doing that. As a consumer in America, I expect to be protected by the laws in place to prevent companies from ripping off consumers. So yes, IF, big IF, Tesla will not start doing the right thing and being reasonable, either in allowing others to work on their vehicles or charging "REASONABLE" prices for replacement parts, then yes, I DO want the government I pay 40% of my income to, to step in and protect my investment.

The free market will make sure Tesla figures out how to treat us well or they will go out of business, that simple.

I agree that requiring a $2500 trade-in is crazy but $25k for a new battery pack is crazy cheap in my opinion. We don't have enough info to determine if that is a reasonable price though.

 

[luvnMyTS]

The free market will make sure Tesla figures out how to treat us well or they will go out of business, that simple.

I agree that requiring a $2500 trade-in is crazy but $25k for a new battery pack is crazy cheap in my opinion. We don't have enough info to determine if that is a reasonable price though.

While Tesla won't reveal the exact price of a new battery, they have already stated that current costs are less than $300 per kWh, so it's simple math. At the full $300 per kWh, that would $25,500 for an 85 kWh battery pack. So $25,000 for a new battery is actually still expensive. Chevy just said they are at around $150 per kWh for the new Bolt they are building. I doubt Tesla is paying twice as much for their batteries. So their cost is likely less than $15,000 for a battery pack. Of course they have a right to make a profit on it, so I don't have a problem with them charging $25,000 grand for it, but any more than that would be price gouging. instead, they are gouging in the mandatory return for only $2,500. Tesla has also stated that once they get the gigafactory open, they expect to get battery prices down below $100 per kWh. So, $25,000 is NOT CHEAP for a battery pack. Chevy sells a Volt battery pack (17 kWh) for $3,800 ($224 per kwh).

And yes, Tesla will go out of business if either, they don't clean up their act and stop aggravating their customers with this kind of crap or the government steps in and puts a stop to it and orders them to either allow other companies to service their vehicles or to charge prices that are reasonable to do it themselves. All other car manufacturers are REQUIRED to produce replacement parts for any car they produce and to do so for a given number of years after the car is produced (10 years I believe). There is no provision that the parts a customer seeks have to replace "broken" parts. Thus if an owner wants to replace a part that's not broken, with any other car manufacturer, they are able to do so with no problem. Certainly not the case with Tesla at this time.

 

[wk057]

Sorry, by who did you hear this? It is worrying actually from TSLA standpoint...

I'm not going to name specifics in an effort to protect the innocent. Suffice it to say it was someone I spoke to at Tesla in California and not someone at the service center.

 

[rEVhappy]

So you'd rather let Tesla keep a monopoly on it and let them say "It's $100,000 for a new battery or buy a new car" rather than have the government step in to stop their monopoly? Sorry, not me. The government does a good job in this area in preventing companies like Tesla from not being fair to the consumer. All I'm saying is that Tesla either needs to start being reasonable, so as not to project the appearance of a monopoly as they are already strongly showing or the government will step in and put a stop to it to protect the consumer.

This thread is a perfect example of it. The guy has a P85D, meaning the car is no more than 13 months old. Hence the battery is a newer version and not that old and still VERY valuable. Tesla wants to force him to give up his $20,000 battery for $2,500 so they can turnaround and sell it to a consumer for $20,000. Sorry, don't see how that's at all fair or reasonable. If my car has a problem, I certainly don't want Tesla telling me, "your motor broke, it's $50,000 for a new one!" Right now, there's nothing stopping them from doing that. As a consumer in America, I expect to be protected by the laws in place to prevent companies from ripping off consumers. So yes, IF, big IF, Tesla will not start doing the right thing and being reasonable, either in allowing others to work on their vehicles or charging "REASONABLE" prices for replacement parts, then yes, I DO want the government I pay 40% of my income to, to step in and protect my investment.

And I can understand them not wanting to sell a new battery pack outright. But if they're going to force you to give up your original part, then they need to pay a reasonable prorated price for it. If the battery pack new is $25,000 and has an estimated 5 year life, then depreciate it by 20% per year. Even that is extreme considering it has an 8 year warranty. But $20,000 would certainly be far more reasonable for a 1 year old battery than $2,500!!!

I think you misunderstand the concept of monopoly. There are many options in the marketplace to buy another vehicle and government involvement in something like this will simply muddy the waters. If you are talking about monopoly on available battery packs, sure.. you have a point. But then again, no one is stopping you from building a pack of your own with several thousand 18650's and mounting it under a Model S, knowing of course you will void the warranty. This car is a high cost item, your mention of $50,000 for a new motor is commonplace for exotic supercars out of warranty.

Free market and government interference philosophy aside, I do disagree with Tesla's tactics of not being transparent and changing their tune at the drop of a dime. Clear cut prices and fine print should be mentioned up front and coherently to build trust with the consumer. They're only doing themselves a disservice in the long run by being hush hush and secretive over things like these.

 

[Chris TX]

I wonder if you remove your 85 battery at your house, then trailer/truck your MS to the service center and ask them for a new battery (85 or even a 90) and see what they say. Just tell them "I think it just fell out in my garage, but no biggie"

 

[jeffro01]

So you'd rather let Tesla keep a monopoly on it and let them say "It's $100,000 for a new battery or buy a new car" rather than have the government step in to stop their monopoly? Sorry, not me. The government does a good job in this area in preventing companies like Tesla from not being fair to the consumer. All I'm saying is that Tesla either needs to start being reasonable, so as not to project the appearance of a monopoly as they are already strongly showing or the government will step in and put a stop to it to protect the consumer.

This thread is a perfect example of it. The guy has a P85D, meaning the car is no more than 13 months old. Hence the batter is a newer version and not that old and still VERY valuable. Tesla wants to force him to give up his $20,000 battery for $2,500 so they can turnaround and sell it to a consumer for $20,000. Sorry, don't see how that's at all fair or reasonable. If my car has a problem, I certainly don't want Tesla telling me, "your motor broke, it's $50,000 for a new one!" Right now, there's nothing stopping them from doing that. As a consumer in America, I expect to be protected by the laws in place to prevent companies from ripping off consumers. So yes, IF, big IF, Tesla will not start doing the right thing and being reasonable, either in allowing others to work on their vehicles or charging "REASONABLE" prices for replacement parts, then yes, I DO want the government I pay 40% of my income to, to step in and protect my investment.

Wow... Just wow... Are you sure you live in LA??? Sure sounds like Beijing CN... Protect the consumer? From what? Being able to buy a high voltage battery pack off the shelf which could kill him in an instant if not properly handled? Yes I know the OP is highly skilled and knowledgeable in this area but the policy wasn't written for the OP it was written for Joe Shmoe off the street... You do realize that businesses have a right to refuse to sell a product? You also realize they have a right to set whatever price they want for the product they are selling? Who are you, or the government for that matter, to dictate these terms? Who are you to decide what's reasonable? You make a number of claims that you have no foundational ability to back up. Do you know for sure what Tesla does with battery packs they take in upon swap? I don't, and neither do you.

The battery pack belongs to the OP as it's the OPs car. No one is disputing that, but on the flip side, the battery pack needs to be in the car for the car to be functional. Tesla has every right to restrict how it chooses to sell it's new battery packs and if that new sale requires turning in of your previous pack then so be it, that's the policy they have set forth. Don't like it? Instead of running to the government for help, take your business elsewhere. Nowhere else to go? That's not Tesla's fault that they are the only player in the market and again, running to the government to force them to do something because they lack competition is fundamentally wrong.

Jeff

 

[luvnMyTS]

I think you misunderstand the concept of monopoly. There are many options in the marketplace to buy another vehicle and government involvement in something like this will simply muddy the waters. If you are talking about monopoly on available battery packs, sure.. you have a point. But then again, no one is stopping you from building a pack of your own with several thousand 18650's and mounting it under a Model S, knowing of course you will void the warranty. This car is a high cost item, your mention of $50,000 for a new motor is commonplace for exotic supercars out of warranty.

Free market and government interference philosophy aside, I do disagree with Tesla's tactics of not being transparent and changing their tune at the drop of a dime. Clear cut prices and fine print should be mentioned up front and coherently to build trust with the consumer. They're only doing themselves a disservice in the long run by being hush hush and secretive over things like these.

No, actually we're on the same page based on the rest of your statement. Couldn't agree more that their prices should be established up front. Sure a $50,000 motor for exotic cars that cost $250,000 is not unreasonable. Not for a $5,000 motor in a $75,000 electric vehicle. And asking someone to figure out how to develop a battery to fit into their Tesla because Tesla won't sell them a replacement without raping them is off topic. Of course everyone has a choice to purchase a car from another manufacturer or go spend millions in development costs to create your own replacement parts. My point was, once your in, for them not to rape you afterward. Your point about being transparent is a very good point. Their prices for replacement parts should be very well known so that buyers interested in purchasing a Tesla at least have an idea of the costs it will take keep the car running should it break down outside of the warranty. That way they can make a well-informed decision. As it is now, as you stated, they don't share anything and you're stuck with whatever they decide to charge you. Either that or junk the car.

- - - Updated - - -

Wow... Just wow... Are you sure you live in LA??? Sure sounds like Beijing CN... Protect the consumer? From what? Being able to buy a high voltage battery pack off the shelf which could kill him in an instant if not properly handled? Yes I know the OP is highly skilled and knowledgeable in this area but the policy wasn't written for the OP it was written for Joe Shmoe off the street... You do realize that businesses have a right to refuse to sell a product? You also realize they have a right to set whatever price they want for the product they are selling? Who are you, or the government for that matter, to dictate these terms? Who are you to decide what's reasonable? You make a number of claims that you have no foundational ability to back up. Do you know for sure what Tesla does with battery packs they take in upon swap? I don't, and neither do you.

The battery pack belongs to the OP as it's the OPs car. No one is disputing that, but on the flip side, the battery pack needs to be in the car for the car to be functional. Tesla has every right to restrict how it chooses to sell it's new battery packs and if that new sale requires turning in of your previous pack then so be it, that's the policy they have set forth. Don't like it? Instead of running to the government for help, take your business elsewhere. Nowhere else to go? That's not Tesla's fault that they are the only player in the market and again, running to the government to force them to do something because they lack competition is fundamentally wrong.

Jeff

You COMPLETELY missed the point of my post Jeff. You also cut out the last paragraph of my post that completely negates your argument as well. Need to re-read it more carefully. Your assumption as to the intention of my post makes your argument irrelevant as it doesn't at all relate to the intent of my message.

THE MISSING PARAGRAPH--- FOLLOWED BY AN IMMEDIATE FOLLOW UP POST. GET THE WHOLE STORY JEFF BEFORE MAKING ASSUMPTIONS PLEASE.

And I can understand them not wanting to sell a new battery pack outright. But if they're going to force you to give up your original part, then they need to pay a reasonable prorated price for it. If the battery pack new is $25,000 and has an estimated 5 year life, then depreciate it by 20% per year. Even that is extreme considering it has an 8 year warranty. But $20,000 would certainly be far more reasonable for a 1 year old battery than $2,500!!!


IMMEDIATE FOLLOW UP POST -----

While Tesla won't reveal the exact price of a new battery, they have already stated that current costs are less than $300 per kWh, so it's simple math. At the full $300 per kWh, that would $25,500 for an 85 kWh battery pack. So $25,000 for a new battery is actually still expensive. Chevy just said they are at around $150 per kWh for the new Bolt they are building. I doubt Tesla is paying twice as much for their batteries. So their cost is likely less than $15,000 for a battery pack. Of course they have a right to make a profit on it, so I don't have a problem with them charging $25,000 grand for it, but any more than that would be price gouging. instead, they are gouging in the mandatory return for only $2,500. Tesla has also stated that once they get the gigafactory open, they expect to get battery prices down below $100 per kWh. So, $25,000 is NOT CHEAP for a battery pack. Chevy sells a Volt battery pack (17 kWh) for $3,800 ($224 per kwh).

And yes, Tesla will go out of business if either, they don't clean up their act and stop aggravating their customers with this kind of crap or the government steps in and puts a stop to it and orders them to either allow other companies to service their vehicles or to charge prices that are reasonable to do it themselves. All other car manufacturers are REQUIRED to produce replacement parts for any car they produce and to do so for a given number of years after the car is produced (10 years I believe). There is no provision that the parts a customer seeks have to replace "broken" parts. Thus if an owner wants to replace a part that's not broken, with any other car manufacturer, they are able to do so with no problem. Certainly not the case with Tesla at this time.

 

[Ryan MF]

This is really just an issue of communication. Upgrading battery packs is a very new phenomenon and clearly the service centers haven't been through the nuances of how the core refund works. This might be the first time it's even been requested.

 

[hockeythug]

Really not liking the inter workings of this company. Scary to think what will come with more cars on the road if this trend continues.

 

[Mark Z]

It's a P85D dual motor pack. Pretty sure the suffix is "E", but it's unrelated to any of the old "A" pack supercharging stuff...

Now that is sad. You have an "E" version that can charge at 120 kW and my old "A" pack can only charge at 90 kW. There IS a market for getting your old battery into my car! I'm the one with a slow battery that needs an upgrade!

Think the battery is the only item that depreciates? Think again! Tesla Motors offered $51,000 trade-in value for my Sig Red P85 @ 55,000 miles.

PS: When the Power Switch Upgrade was done for my "A" pack, the loaner "B" pack Supercharged at the 120 kW rate, so the Signature Model S can support a newer battery pack version.

 

[wk057]

Now that is sad. You have an "E" version that can charge at 120 kW and my old "A" pack can only charge at 90 kW. There IS a market for getting your old battery into my car! I'm the one with a slow battery that needs an upgrade!

Think the battery is the only item that depreciates? Think again! Tesla Motors offered $51,000 trade-in value for my Sig Red P85 @ 55,000 miles.

PS: When the Power Switch Upgrade was done for my "A" pack, the loaner "B" pack Supercharged at the 120 kW rate, so the Signature Model S can support a newer battery pack version.

Yeah, for sure. I'd glady sell you my pack if I could get a 90 pack for my car

Anyway, I didn't expect to start a huge battle here over this. I just found it interesting that they wouldn't follow through with the original plan of allowing me to keep my old pack. I'm still half hoping they come to their senses and I get a call tomorrow about it telling me they're ready to go with the original deal. If not, I'll be in the market for a salvage pack probably Q1.

Edit: I'll probably follow up with them on it tomorrow anyway and offer to sign a liability waiver, waiver of warranty on the old pack, NDA, or whatever else they'd want to allow me to just not have to trade in my old pack and see if that gets things moving at all.

 

[Mark Z]

Yeah, for sure. I'd gladly sell you my pack if I could get a 90 pack for my car ...

The Model X should arrive soon, so the pack upgrade issue can pass to a new owner of my Model S.

I asked Tesla Motors what the cost would be for a 90 kW pack several weeks ago. They never got back to me!

I wonder if the Petersen Automotive Museum could give me more donation value for Signature Red P85 than what the public will pay?

 

[AmpedRealtor]

The actual cost is not really $25,000. I read here or at TM Forums that someone was recently told by his or her service center that the replacement cost for an 85 kWh pack is approximately $40,000 or so. If true, there is no way a 90 can be only $25k. This is very strange to me. I agree with those who say why not just price the battery pack properly and offer a proper credit for the trade-in of the old pack? So if the 90 pack costs $45,000, quote that price and offer a $22,500 trade-in value for the old pack. Easy.

 

[DriverOne]

I'll give you $5K for your 85 battery, assuming it's in good condition. You can keep whatever core price Tesla gives you for my 60. We both get upgraded, you get double dollars.