Time to replace Elon Musk. He has lost the vision.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Time to replace Elon Musk. He has lost the vision.
The rumor before this rumor was that the Model 2 was being scrapped....that turned out not necessarily true. So I would wait for more information
Why would they pull back? Adopting NACS was a condition for getting supercharger access. Even if the supercharger network is frozen to what it is today, it's still a major advantage to gain access to it.My concern is how this might affect NACS adoption. Other manufacturers agreed to use NACS in the US because of its dominance... but it hasn't even happened yet.
Might they pull back and decide to switch back to CCS? That would *really* suck.
If the network is frozen then the other automakers won’t have access. They have not finalized the software part with Tesla in order to have access yet. Only Ford and Rivian have it working right now.Why would they pull back? Adopting NACS was a condition for getting supercharger access. Even if the supercharger network is frozen to what it is today, it's still a major advantage to gain access to it.
Looks like the entire network.Is this world wide or USA only?
We desperately need more chargers in Australia!
I'm talking about amount of stations/stalls, not talking about stuff like software access.If the network is frozen then the other automakers won’t have access. They have not finalized the software part with Tesla in order to have access yet. Only Ford and Rivian have it working right now.
Even if the supercharger network is frozen to what it is today, it's still a major advantage to gain access to it.
How is the physical network going to be a major advantage to other automakers if they can’t access it without the right software?I'm talking about amount of stations/stalls, not talking about stuff like software access.
Agreed. As a new Tesla owner, I find the supercharger system really useful and simple to use. It gives me warm fuzzies about the company, to counter all the mediocre to awful stuff.Axe a core competency and brand differentiator that's essential to your long term mission? Absolute idiocy.
Again, I'm not talking about the software team freezing, I'm not considering that as a possibility nor did I ever suggest that as a possibility. The rumor doesn't suggest that is what is happening. I'm talking about how even if the physical network itself stays the same (same amount of stations and stalls), it will still be a useful network to the other automakers. Elon's tweet suggests the largest cut were to the ones installing the new stations, but they are still maintaining the network and updating existing stations (just slowing down the pace of new stations). Hopefully the point is clear?How is the physical network going to be a major advantage to other automakers if they can’t access it without the right software?
Why would they pull back? Adopting NACS was a condition for getting supercharger access. Even if the supercharger network is frozen to what it is today, it's still a major advantage to gain access to it.
Again, it doesn't seem like they canned the entire team. If that was the case, superchargers would very quickly start failing (as there would be no personnel to maintain them). Us Tesla owners have taken it for granted the high uptime, but looking at accounts of how other charge networks operate, there is a maintenance team doing rapid repairs/replacements that makes that possible. My point there is even if the network stays with the same number of stations and stalls today, it's still a big advantage to gain access to it. Personally I would not consider another EV that doesn't have access to superchargers. Switching to NACS is a small cost to pay for that.Although I wholeheartedly believe that NACS is the better connector, I also believe that the other manufacturers only switched to NACS because Tesla's Supercharger network is much larger and better maintained than any other.
Elon canning the entire supercharger team and then announcing that they're going to slow down on growing the network does *NOT* bode well for manufacturers switching to NACS. Not that Tesla needs to be the only one.
Almost all charge networks are huge money losers once you consider the installation costs. I highly doubt the supercharger network is an exception, especially given superchargers tend to have high availability (which is a negative for profitability, you instead would prefer they are almost always fully occupied even though user experience is worse).I'd like to think that this is somehow a good decision for the company, even though it seems callous and cruel to treat people like meatbots that you can just throw away when you no longer need them.
Perhaps none of us really know enough about the financials of the charging network. Perhaps it actually operates at a loss or very small margins. Possibly Tesla doesn't actually *WANT* to own any more chargers, they just wanted enough to make EVs viable and sway the US towards NACS... and perhaps they've achieved their goal and will now just slow down and let others fill in the gaps.
The hardware does not work without the software? I’m not taking about the software team that works on teslas own software.Again, I'm not talking about the software team freezing, I'm not considering that as a possibility nor did I ever suggest that as a possibility. The rumor doesn't suggest that is what is happening. I'm talking about how even if the physical network itself stays the same (same amount of stations and stalls), it will still be a useful network to the other automakers. Elon's tweet suggests the largest cut were to the ones installing the new stations, but they are still maintaining the network and updating existing stations (just slowing down the pace of new stations). Hopefully the point is clear?
Maybe Elon is just transferring responsibility and cost to those auto makers who want to joinThe hardware does not work without the software? I’m not taking about the software team that works on teslas own software.
The supercharger team was responsible for working with the other automakers to get their cars and back end software compatible with the Supercharger network. How does that happen for the remaining automakers that don’t have access yet now that the supercharger team is gone?
Ya think?!!!Possibly Tesla doesn't actually *WANT* to own any more chargers, they just wanted enough to make EVs viable and sway the US towards NACS..
i don't know about that ... lots of superchargers are just not that full all the time. For me, superchargers are only for road trips. I imagine that's the case for a lot of people. Gas stations famously don't really make money off the gas ... they make it off the attached stores.Ya think?!!!
Didn't the big E say Tesla wasn't a car company it was a tech company?
As to economics of fast DC chargers, I know they cost a lot to install but they charge more than plenty of margin on the power they sell.
Seems like you should make bank when you sell power for 5 or 6 times what you pay for it even if the upfront investment is up there. Pretty sure they won't be paying rent on the carpark spaces.
Ongoing maintenance may be killing it otherwise?
Sure it’s their responsibility to create their own solution but they still need someone on the Tesla side to give them information on what their software needs to do and how it needs to communicate with Tesla on the back end for plug and charge, as well as to test and validate the software before it goes live.Maybe Elon is just transferring responsibility and cost to those auto makers who want to join