An Update to our Supercharging Program

[CmdrThor]

So, just a little perspective from the dense urban East Coast:

The standard rate for charging at parking garages in New York City is *$0.49/kWh*. The only one I have ever seen that's lower (with the exception of a very small number of stalls at municipal garages in the outere boroughs that are usually broken) is $35 flat rate -- which is cheaper only if you bring your Tesla in pretty much dead flat empty.

Tesla salespeople regularly put forth nearby Superchargers as the solution to this problem when they realize the prospective customer lives in Manhattan or Brooklyn. "Oh, most of my other customers just go to Paramus to get their groceries and stop at the supercharger on the way" etc. I don't know how it is in California but that is the reality here. It makes all the disgust and vitriol aimed at people using the SCs for local charging seem pretty disgusting to me. There isn't any charging *at all* within a 40 block radius of where I live. How exactly am I supposed to charge at night? I guess I'm a big jerk for using the SC exactly how the Tesla staff have told me to -- and exactly how I hear them tell other customers every time I'm in the store or service center.

The whole world is not California, shocking as it may seem. Sigh.

Just because for profit networks like Chargepoint and Blink charge $0.49 / kWh doesn't mean Tesla will. Tesla clearly states the charge will be less than the cost of gas. $0.49 / kWh equates to a nearly $4 gallon of gas depending on your efficiency assumptions. I think Tesla will still bake some of the cost of the Supercharger network into the price of the car and therefore charge a little less for charging.

 

[KublaConn]

400kWh hours is very small to support long distance trips. A 1000 mile road trip is 4-day weekend!

If Tesla needs to stop abuse of local supercharging, & I agree they SHOULD, geo-fence the owners home, and only permit free supercharging OUTSIDE of a 200 mile radius.

Just off of the top of my head, I can think of a couple of issues that render your proposal a bit ridiculous. If the intent is to limit supercharging to long-distant travel, then absent the crucial information as to one's end destination, how will they determine if your stop at the SpC is legitimate or not? Also, who on Earth would consider 200 miles from one's home to NOT be "long-distant travel"?

Here's a "for instance" for you that will demonstrate the folly of your proposal: If I wish to make a 320 mile trip west on I-10 from Houston, my SpC options are Columbus, which is 71 miles along the way and San Marcos, which is 170 miles. You're saying that I shouldn't ever be allowed to use either one of these two charging locations, so exactly how does that work out for me when it comes to pulling off my long-distance trip?

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Here's a "for instance" for you that will demonstrate the folly of your proposal: If I wish to make a 320 mile trip west on I-10 from Houston, my SpC options are Columbus, which is 71 miles along the way and San Marcos, which is 170 miles. You're saying that I shouldn't ever be allowed to use either one of these two charging locations, so exactly how does that work out for me when it comes to pulling off my long-distance trip?

You'd still be able to use any Supercharger location. I think @CJPonline was just suggesting that you'd have to pay for them if they were closer than 200 miles from your home.

 

[mhan00]

Don't like it. For me in Orange County, CA 1000kwh is going to San Francisco touring Napa Valley etc. and coming home on the coast route. Traveling across country, a real trip, is 6+ thousand miles. How about free, or reduced charging cost 500 miles beyond home. I own a S but also have a 3 reserved.

Why in the world are you or anyone entitled to drive long road trips, even going across the country, at zero cost for fill up? Seriously, how can anyone think that is something that is necessary or deserved? Tesla included it for early adopters because they needed the marketing and to overcome mental objections to EVs compared to ICE vehicles. As a bonus, those early adopters get to keep unlimited superchargering for their current vehicles. But the ability to drive across the country, spending zero on fuel, is in no way required or deserved.

This is why it can suck to go the extra mile. When I first started at one of my first jobs, I decided to bring in donuts for my coworkers and did so for a couple of months, just to be nice. My coworkers were appreciative and thanked me for a bit. Then my mom pointed out how, while the donuts were pretty cheap, the cost added up over time was a pretty big drain on my meager income as a high schooler. So I stopped. And a couple of my coworkers actually had the gall to complain to me about not buying them free donuts anymore. This wasn't an obligation on my part, just me trying to be nice and somehow a couple of ass holes got in in their head that they were entitled to free donuts. Free electricity isn't a necessity, not even if you don't have a place to charge at home. Please try not to get it into your head that it is.

 

[Vger]

And yep, it's going to impact me. I have a Model 3 reservation. (Guess I'm going to have to get my Founder X ordered before the end of the year, even though I don't have a way to easily charge at home at the moment.)

Wow! So you have held onto your Founder X slot this long?! Brava! Now you are going to get AP2 HW and 100 battery, yes?

And of course, well-said about the greedy local charging contingent.

 

[KublaConn]

You'd still be able to use any Supercharger location. I think @CJPonline was just suggesting that you'd have to pay for them if they were closer than 200 miles from your home.

How exactly does that ensure that superchargers are used solely for long-distance travel? It does just the opposite, actually, it's punitive to those travelling long distances. 200 miles is a ridiculously long distance to set and the idea that there could be a universally set distance is also ridiculous because not every person will have the same number of superchargers at the same set distances from their home. Setting universal rules for necessarily irregular use cases makes no sense at all.

 

[RogerHScott]

Also, who on Earth would consider 200 miles from one's home to NOT be "long-distant travel"?

People living in California's Central Valley and commuting nearly that far into the Bay Area to work every day?

 

[ohmman]

So are you saying more expensive cars don't yield more profit and that profit doesn't contribute to building superchargers?

I think this works against your argument for premium electrons (thanks, @jgs). Yes, the S and X base price already yields a higher profit if operating at the same margins. So why would they pay more for the electrons as well?

As far as your numbers on efficiency (assuming they're even close), it's mostly that they're different types of vehicles. A hypothetical high priced model 3 might be way more efficient because it could be all carbon and have exotic electrical components, etc. Are you saying it somehow makes sense the less expensive one just happens to be more efficient so you pay a bit less? Like that it's a natural law that cheaper products are more efficient so it always works out best for the user?

I was actually being generous to your argument here. I own an S and an X, and have a 3 reservation. My S has lifetime 299 Wh/mi over 35k miles. My X has lifetime 333 Wh/mi over 8k miles. I think it's clear the 3 will be much lower. Your hypothetical isn't a part of this argument because it has no logic built in. And I am not suggesting that it will always be the case that the least expensive car will be the most efficient. It is the case across the board on Tesla vehicles right now. Lower battery capacity vehicles have higher efficiency. Cheaper models have better efficiency. We're talking about right now, right? You said the S, X, vs the 3 in your original supposition.

Anyway S and X buyers are already paying a heavy extra premium to fund the company and build out superchargers. They might as well continue to do so with charging.

You're funny. As you mentioned in your opener, they will as a function of their purchase price.

One mistake people often make is in thinking that Tesla is running a wealth redistribution program. They're not. They're running a business, and when you have goals as a business, you generally try to fund them with product sales. When I bought my S and X, I didn't agree to paying a higher price than market value. I paid market value. Tesla decided to take those profits and use them to reinvest in the company in order to scale up. Scaling up has always been a goal, with the result being lower priced, mass production vehicles.

Model S and X owners didn't check a "donate X dollars to future Model 3 owners" box. And they're unlikely to do that when it comes to charging fees. That's not how the world works.

 

[AMPd]

Why in the world are you or anyone entitled to drive long road trips, even going across the country, at zero cost for fill up? Seriously, how can anyone think that is something that is necessary or deserved? Tesla included it for early adopters because they needed the marketing and to overcome mental objections to EVs compared to ICE vehicles. As a bonus, those early adopters get to keep unlimited superchargering for their current vehicles. But the ability to drive across the country, spending zero on fuel, is in no way required or deserved.

This is why it can suck to go the extra mile. When I first started at one of my first jobs, I decided to bring in donuts for my coworkers and did so for a couple of months, just to be nice. My coworkers were appreciative and thanked me for a bit. Then my mom pointed out how, while the donuts were pretty cheap, the cost added up over time was a pretty big drain on my meager income as a high schooler. So I stopped. And a couple of my coworkers actually had the gall to complain to me about not buying them free donuts anymore. This wasn't an obligation on my part, just me trying to be nice and somehow a couple of ass holes got in in their head that they were entitled to free donuts. Free electricity isn't a necessity, not even if you don't have a place to charge at home. Please try not to get it into your head that it is.

*high five*

 

[MorrisonHiker]

How exactly does that ensure that superchargers are used solely for long-distance travel? It does just the opposite, actually, it's punitive to those travelling long distances. 200 miles is a ridiculously long distance to set and the idea that there could be a universally set distance is also ridiculous because not every person will have the same number of superchargers at the same set distances from their home. Setting universal rules for necessarily irregular use cases makes no sense at all.

Ask @CJPonline . He's the one who made the suggestion. I was just trying to explain it to you.

 

[KublaConn]

People living in California's Central Valley and commuting nearly that far into the Bay Area to work every day?

Yeah, I guess this is where I take the opportunity to step in and, once again, remind those in California that there is, indeed, an entire country full of people out there that don't have the same situation as them. Doesn't seem to help much, but it kinda feels good.

 

[KublaConn]

Ask @CJPonline . He's the one who made the suggestion. I was just trying to explain it to you.

I suspect your mistake is that you're trying to explain a ridiculous idea and there's really no reason in that. I would also suggest that you may not understand that my questions are more rhetorical, meant to point out the weaknesses in his proposal, rather than expecting reasonable answers.

 

[brianman]

This will also likely lead to a HUGE Q4 as everyone tries to get in on the last "free" supercharging cars...

I think you mean Q1.

 

[mattr2]

Do we know if the free and unlimited supercharges will be tied to a VIN or to an owner? Will grandfathered vehicles still receive the benefit if the vehicle is sold?

 

[AMPd]

Yeah, I guess this is where I take the opportunity to step in and, once again, remind those in California that there is, indeed, an entire country full of people out there that don't have the same situation as them. Doesn't seem to help much, but it kinda feels good.

No there is not, quit saying such ridiculous things.

 

[Crispix]

[x] thread delivers

Had to head over to TMC after I saw this news. I think this was an inevitable move by Tesla for all the reasons already mentioned above, and early adopters are lucky to be grandfathered in.

 

[Matteo]

Does anyone know how much is the average use of Superchargers per vehicle per year is now?

Hi. Average supercharger use is 28.2 times/year based on this survey with 268 owners.

 

[Gwgan]

What happens to the incentive structure for partner locations like Ruby Tuesday restaurants? My nearby RT-SC has a sign which says "power supported by RT". The ploy was to attract diners with free charging, next year the carrot will be just a parking space (not an issue at RT usually?) but there might also also be a disincentive if the diner is charged for power at a rate more than they would get at their neighborhood home.

 

[jgs]

The included 400kWh annually, is the level that Tesla planned for in their cost model.

By the way, even if we suppose the average Supercharger utilization per vehicle is exactly 400 kWh, and their planning number was always 400 kWh, Tesla still ends up making more money under the announced model. This is because some drivers will exceed the mean, and pay usage charges (more money). Some will fall below the mean, but they won't get a refund (no less money). Heads I win, tails you lose. This is why retainers are a thing (the lawyer kind, not the orthodontist kind) and for that matter why my snow removal service likes to be paid for 10 clearings up front at the beginning of the season.

So, it's a price increase. (Which is fine as far as I'm concerned.)

 

[DIL]

Doesn't this make late 2016 models extremely valuable on resale market, if free supercharging for life transfers to new owners?