An Update to our Supercharging Program

[ohmman]

It's probably obvious that I continue to be skeptical that Tesla will keep unlimited Supercharging tied to the vehicle. The main reason is that if I were running their program, that's how I'd handle it. I disagree with the notion that it's equivalent to them removing headlights or a battery. It's a license to use the network, not a physical item. As mentioned above, I don't think it generates much "bad blood" because owners with those vehicles will get to travel with unlimited Supercharging as long as they own the car.

If the argument is that there's some premium on the cars because they have "unlimited long distance for life," that premium only exists because Tesla changed the policy of their network. So it's not a premium that owners should feel entitled to. If the network change hadn't occurred, there would be no premium.

I support having unlimited Supercharging end with vehicle ownership change. And personally, I think it'll be very interesting to see how things change over the upcoming year(s) with those Supercharger locations that seem to have constant issues.

 

[David99]

Tesla needs to stop putting superchargers in urban and suburban locations. If you are on a trip, there might be a supercharger location along the interstate, but why would they put one in town? I hope they have learned that lesson: There are obviously more drivers who can afford a $100,000 car who can't afford to pay to plug in at home ($5?), than there will ever be superchargers.

Superchargers are needed in areas with lots of traffic not just between cities. Not having Superchargers isn't a solution. Just having to pay for Supercharger is a perfect locution.

 

[robby]

I'm not convinced that early adopters should be classified as 'least desirable".

I'm referring to the vehicles themselves (i.e. the oldest hardware), not their owners.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I don't understand the confusion. Look at your purchase paperwork. Supercharging is clearly tied to the car, just as every other included feature and purchased option is. They can't take supercharging away from you post hoc any more than they can take away your automatic headlights or your battery. And they can't stop you from selling what is legally yours.

The only open question about legacy supercharging right now is what will happen to CPOs. They can take supercharging away from CPOs when they secure ownership of them if they want to eat that loss.

As pointed out by others, what was purchased was the supercharger hardware and software enabled. There is no network access guarantee or network subscription that was also purchased, nor did any purchase paperwork said network access would be unlimited. Thus Tesla is legally free to restrict access to the supercharger network (or even to close down the entire network if they felt the need to).

PR wise, it'll be bad, but I don't think Tesla has any legal issue with restricting network access, esp. for second owners.

 

[Canuck]

I don't understand the confusion. Look at your purchase paperwork. Supercharging is clearly tied to the car, just as every other included feature and purchased option is. They can't take supercharging away from you post hoc any more than they can take away your automatic headlights or your battery. And they can't stop you from selling what is legally yours.

Your argument is fundamentally flawed because they are not taking it away from "you". They are taking it away from the next person who owns the car. As to "they can't stop you from selling what is legally yours" they never said it would pass to the next owner of the vehicle in your paperwork or mine, so "yes" they clearly can. Are you going to sue Tesla because they are not supercharging someone else's vehicle after you sold it? And, does the new owner even have privity of contract to sue Tesla?

I just can't see how Tesla can allow it continue for people they never sold the vehicle to, who will be able to pick these vehicles up relatively cheap a few years down the line, and then charge for free at the supercharger down the street, which will clog it up for travelers -- and that's exactly who free supercharging older vehicles will appeal to -- those who want them for that purpose only. It's a recipe for disaster for Tesla with no benefit to Tesla at all. So like @ohmman I just don't see it happening. It's just like I said about the Model 3 when a lot of people here said that the Model 3 would have free supercharging and I said there was no hope in hell it would because Tesla would have said so.

The silence by Tesla on this issue is also deafening. That answers the question right there for me.

But only time will tell who is right.

 

[jgs]

I just can't see how Tesla can allow it continue for people they never sold the vehicle to, who will be able to pick these vehicles up relatively cheap a few years down the line, and then charge for free at the supercharger down the street, which will clog it up for travelers

Easy. They will have to expand the Supercharger network to accommodate the hundreds of thousands of Model 3s and other cars they plan on selling in the coming years. The number of pre-2017 cars, on the other hand, will remain fixed or will actually dwindle as they go out of circulation for various reasons. Therefore the amount of harm they can do is already at its peak and will dwindle with time.

Besides which, it's still the case that in general abusing Supercharging is a stupid thing to do if your time is worth at least minimum wage. So the motivation to do it is still weak, it's not like every pre-2017 car is suddenly going to switch to doing all its charging at the SC just because it can.

 

[Canuck]

Easy. They will have to expand the Supercharger network to accommodate the hundreds of thousands of Model 3s and other cars they plan on selling in the coming years.

If it was "Easy" as you say free Supercharging would not be ending very soon.

The Model 3 will cost to enable Supercharging and then cost again to Supercharge. All S's and X's will pay to Supercharge after the initial free 1000 miles, which isn't all that much for travelling. So obviously the answer is not "Easy" -- just expand the network.

Besides which, it's still the case that in general abusing Supercharging is a stupid thing to do if your time is worth at least minimum wage. So the motivation to do it is still weak, it's not like every pre-2017 car is suddenly going to switch to doing all its charging at the SC just because it can.

Not every one but a whole lot -- since an old electric vehicle that gets free Supercharging will be very compelling for that one reason only to many people. And people do a lot of stupid things to save a buck. Greed is built into us genetically and often overrides our intelligence.

But no point in arguing the issue. I said the Model 3 won't have free supercharging, and I was of the very few who kept repeating it, despite people saying I was making up a problem that didn't exist with locals charging, and crowded superchargers that were limited to only a few in CA. I know I won't convince you of this issue -- so let's just wait and see. I could be wrong but again if Tesla plans to have free Supercharging pass with the vehicles, as they have been doing to date, why not just tell us that? I say that, in itself, answers the question -- for me at least.

 

[Spidy]

If the argument is that there's some premium on the cars because they have "unlimited long distance for life," that premium only exists because Tesla changed the policy of their network. So it's not a premium that owners should feel entitled to. If the network change hadn't occurred, there would be no premium.

Free supercharging always had a value. Even without the change a used Model S would still have that value over a new Bolt.

 

[jgs]

If it was "Easy" as you say free Supercharging would not be ending very soon.

The "easy" was "it's easy to see how this isn't a problem". In any situation where you have a fixed number (that may look large at some point in time, that's the pre-2017 fleet) and a number increasing at a more-than-linear rate (that's the 2017-and-later fleet) then pretty soon, the former will start to look laughably small and people will wonder why you ever thought it mattered.

The Model 3 will cost to enable Supercharging

I'm not aware of any evidence of this and I've been keeping track. Not obsessively so, but still.

and then cost again to Supercharge. All S's and X's will pay to Supercharge after the initial free 1000 miles, which isn't all that much for travelling. So obviously the answer is not "Easy" -- just expand the network.

It's completely obvious that they will be expanding the network, is my point. Immaterial whether you view that as easy or not. If you don't agree that the network will be expanding, I'll concede that we have no common ground for a discussion and will stop wasting your time.

Not every one but a whole lot -- since an old electric vehicle that gets free Supercharging will be very compelling for that one reason only to many people. And people do a lot of stupid things to save a buck. Greed is built into us genetically and often overrides our intelligence.

Evidence does seem to indicate this is true. But the other points still stand -- by the time these cars are in the hands of the people you describe they will constitute a tiny and dwindling percentage of the total fleet.

But no point in arguing the issue.

Oh well, I already typed all this! Might as well hit "post".

I said the Model 3 won't have free supercharging, and I was of the very few who kept repeating it,

I see you still are! I'm curious if you have evidence?

despite people saying I was making up a problem that didn't exist with locals charging, and crowded superchargers that were limited to only a few in CA. I know I won't convince you of this issue --

A point on which we agree!

so let's just wait and see.

A strategy on which we agree!

I could be wrong but again if Tesla plans to have free Supercharging pass with the vehicles,

Well they patently aren't planning on this for 2017+ vehicles, since they've said as much.

as they have been doing to date, why not just tell us that? I say that, in itself, answers the question -- for me at least.

OK. For my part, I tend to interpret no news as no news, and think Occam's Razor suggests Tesla is making stuff [1] up as they go along, not executing on some elaborate and carefully-hidden plan.

[1] I cannot ****ing believe TMC substitutes the string "*sugar*" for a common expletive meaning feces. I can't wait to see how it bowdlerizes this line.

 

[robby]

I disagree with the notion that it's equivalent to them removing headlights or a battery. It's a license to use the network, not a physical item.

What does physicality have to do with it? The car is a computer on wheels; a lot of its value is in software. Automatic headlights, bluetooth streaming, keyless entry, premium lighting, power liftgate, homelink, and Autopilot are all rooted in software. That doesn't give Tesla the right to take those things away post hoc, or to forbid you from transferring them to a new owner, or to charge future owners to use them.

I think what makes supercharging feel different is that it has different economics for Tesla, and botching the policy has negative short term effects on many of us. But these things aren't germane to how contracts and licensing work, and in my view, they're not an excuse to pull a bait and switch on existing owners.

 

[ohmman]

What does physicality have to do with it? The car is a computer on wheels; a lot of its value is in software. Automatic headlights, bluetooth streaming, keyless entry, premium lighting, power liftgate, homelink, and Autopilot are all rooted in software. That doesn't give Tesla the right to take those things away post hoc, or to forbid you from transferring them to a new owner, or to charge future owners to use them.

None of that is externally provided, except arguably AP.

If you have a cell phone that you bought with an unlimited data plan, what is the likelihood that plan would transfer when you sold the phone on Gazelle? Would you expect it to transfer? If so, I'll deal with the Massachusetts winters. You seem to have found utopia.

 

[brkaus]

Interesting comparison - Phone & Data Plan. I can kinda see it. But phone is pretty clear that your purchasing a plan separate from the phone. The car purchase is much more open to interpretation. Of course, what really matters is how Tesla clarifies this as its rolled out.

My tendency is to believe they will keep it with the car through sales (except possibly CPO). As someone else pointed out, the quantity of legacy cars will get swamped by model 3s that will also have access to superchargers (for a fee).

 

[CalBlue 85D]

If Tesla wants to restrict Supercharger access for the existing fleet with "unlimited" usage, then the easy path is to deal with the cars that Tesla resells themselves. Removing the option from a car transferred in a private sale would reduce the price the seller can get for the car and I think Tesla would have a fight on their hands. I don't know exactly what the Supercharger access legal language says for the unlimited cars, but Elon was pretty clear that the existing cars were sold with unlimited Supercharging forever. Taking that away from a car in Tesla's inventory only impacts Tesla with a reduced price on the used market and makes the new cars more competitive. Combine that with offering owners a fair price on a trade-in when they buy a new car and it's a win for everyone.

 

[Lloyd]

If these cars last as long as I think they will, there comes a time that Tesla's profit on the car from its original sale is diminished or overshadowed by the cost to keep supplying electricity and demand charges for it.

Estimating that the average profit on each car sold is $20K and the average cost for electricity and demand charge is .27 per kWh( PGE California) and all your charging was for free on a supercharger, then Tesla's profit would be gone after about 225,000 miles of driving. This is not sustainable!

 

[MP3Mike]

If these cars last as long as I think they will, there comes a time that Tesla's profit on the car from its original sale is diminished or overshadowed by the cost to keep supplying electricity and demand charges for it.

Estimating that the average profit on each car sold is $20K and the average cost for electricity and demand charge is .27 per kWh( PGE California) and all your charging was for free on a supercharger, then Tesla's profit would be gone after about 225,000 miles of driving. This is not sustainable!

Which is why I think Tesla will give a premium trade-in offer and then disable free unlimited Supercharging to reduce/eliminate them.

 

[Canuck]

If you don't agree that the network will be expanding, I'll concede that we have no common ground for a discussion and will stop wasting your time.

Nice straw man you built there. Right, I don't think one more supercharger will be built. Good way to debate the issue.

I said the Model 3 won't have free supercharging, and I was of the very few who kept repeating it,

I see you still are! I'm curious if you have evidence?

Really? After I battled all those people who said the Model 3 will have free supercharging like the Models S/X, before it was cut off from the Model S/X, you now claim I was wrong and you need evidence? If you think supercharger credits will only apply to the Models S/X then you are living in dreamland. And if you think 1000 miles per year is free long distance travel then you don't travel long distance. And if you think the Model 3 will have free long distance travel when the Model S/X does not, and you need "evidence" then I agree: we have no common ground at all.

 

[Troy]

Which is why I think Tesla will give a premium trade-in offer and then disable free unlimited Supercharging to reduce/eliminate them.

I agree. I wrote the same thing here a month ago: Quote: "Let alone offering a new unlimited package, Tesla needs to offer high trade in prices to get those cars back that already have unlimited supercharging so they can cancel that option." I think it's likely that lots of old Teslas will end up as taxis in developing countries like Mexico, China, Romania, Turkey, Bulgaria, Serbia. Tesla is planning to build superchargers in these countries according to the maps here on the Tesla website. Older Model S cars with free supercharging are going to become a bigger problem as the number of superchargers in these countries increases and the price of old Model S cars continue to drop. There is already an aftermarket industry that converts ICE to EV with custom battery packs. I'm sure they will offer refurbished Model S packs to keep the cars on the road for 15-20 years to compensate for degradation.

 

[jerry33]

I'm referring to the vehicles themselves (i.e. the oldest hardware), not their owners.

The problem is that they have just made a big disincentive for early adopters to ever trade up.

 

[Saghost]

None of that is externally provided, except arguably AP.

If you have a cell phone that you bought with an unlimited data plan, what is the likelihood that plan would transfer when you sold the phone on Gazelle? Would you expect it to transfer? If so, I'll deal with the Massachusetts winters. You seem to have found utopia.

If I paid for an unlimited data plan as a one time purchase that lasted forever when I bought the phone, I would expect it to transfer with the phone if I sold it. If I'm paying a monthly fee for it, then it not transferring is more logical.

 

[tga]

If I paid for an unlimited data plan as a one time purchase that lasted forever when I bought the phone, I would expect it to transfer with the phone if I sold it. If I'm paying a monthly fee for it, then it not transferring is more logical.

Except that no provider ever tied unlimited data to a particular phone, but to your account. You could move the SIM to a different phone and transfer the unlimited data.