-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
israndy
Supercharger Hunter
ChargePoint is making out like bandits, they bill people who install chargers and people who use chargers.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Chargepoint knows selling electricity is not a business, and they stay out of it, selling picks and shovels to the people instead.
FLO is similar though sometimes it sells electricity.
EVGo is the purest sell-electricity company.
EA is of course selling electricity but it's really all paid for by the VW penalties so it's hard to say what the business is.
Tesla started doing SC just to sell cars, at first giving charging free, then selling it at cost. However, recently prices have raised so their philosophy has changed but it's not entirely clear what mix it is now.
The weird thing is that they spend so much on r&d and overhead they they still lose a lot of money. It is a really strange business model, imo.
RTPEV
Active Member
Well, technically speaking ChargePoint has a set fee they charge and it's up to the site host to decide how to apportion that fee between the customer and the host themselves. And they can even tack on their own extra fee (that ChargePoint never sees) if they want.
This seems entirely reasonable and a low-risk business strategy. They pretty much have a stable and consistent profit margin. I can't fault them for that.
What I can criticize them for is that they aren't willing to take ownership/responsibility of the charging station. It's up to the host to do that and call ChargePoint when there is an issue. Granted, this is probably the way it should be, but results in a lot of finger pointing when the host doesn't want to be bothered with maintaining the station, and ChargePoint doesn't proactively reach out to hosts when the site is down. This leaves customers out in the cold sometimes.
I tend to think of EA as a startup funded by VW penalties, but once that funding disappears they need to be able to be self-sustaining. So while that initial influx of cash helps buy real estate deals and equipment, eventually they will have to be on their own. Yes, technically EA is a subsidiary of VW, but I suspect if EA can't be profitable by the time VW is no longer required to fund them, that they will be spun off anyway.
I think Elon/Tesla has been as clear on this as they are with anything else...they are looking for 30% gross profit margin for charging, and 10% margin overall. So not a huge moneymaker (compared to their core business), but something that is self-sustaining.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
I had not seen a figure quoted. As long as the SCs are for Tesla only they don't need to make any margin, because many people choose a Tesla because for a long time it was the only car you could road trip in, and it's still the best car to road trip in.
As Tesla accepts other cars at SC there is more need to make a profit from it, though it's a long time before most SC will take a CCS car unless the owner buys a Tesla to CCS adapter (the reverse of the one we're all craving.) However, Tesla could just put a lockbox with such adapters at every SC without a lot of cost, or at least at every SC that's not near a CCS station, or every SC that doesn't get full very often.
MLXXXp
Member
Here's how Tesla plans to allow other EVs to plug in at North American Superchargers - Magic Dock
Elon Musk said Tesla would open up its Supercharger network to owners of other electric vehicles (EVs) in the United States, after opening up their network in several European countries with the launch of the […]
driveteslacanada.ca
bradtem
Robocar consultant
I missed that report but some things about it don't make sense.Here's how Tesla plans to allow other EVs to plug in at North American Superchargers - Magic Dock
Elon Musk said Tesla would open up its Supercharger network to owners of other electric vehicles (EVs) in the United States, after opening up their network in several European countries with the launch of the […]
Almost no other EV has their charge port in a place that can be reached by the Tesla cable. Hell, I often don't back up quite enough to reach the port on my own car. You need at last a 10-15 foot extension cable to reach some other cars.
This is not small order with the V3 chargers which use liquid cooled cables. They would perhaps need to limit CCS cars to lower wattage.
The adapter needs to come with a cable. Now if the CCS owner buys the adapter, they could get one just long enough for their car. As I see it, no other CCS car could charge on the Tesla cable. Add about 5 feet to get maybe the Ioniq, Volvos, E-Tron, Kona and Niro. Maybe the EV6. A few more feet to get the red dot cars which are not common. Longer to get the iPace and Taycan.
That isn't what people experience in Europe. Sure they may end up blocking a stall, but most can plug in.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Are the cables longer? As I said, it's a bit of work to get a Tesla plugged in in the USA, forget a car with the port not at the RL or FR corners. If people block stalls they can put some poles between the stalls to prevent that, though it would piss off the people with trailers who park sideways when the charger is mostly empty.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Bjorn made some videos on this:
The cable length doesn't seem like an issue as long as the car is parked in the correct orientation. The bigger issue is that they may need to block another space. If Tesla follows the rollout in Europe, they will likely rollout in locations where they have a lot of stalls such that this is not as big an issue. If they do an adapter route, they can limit the amount of stalls that have this to only a subset of the total stalls in order to minimize impact on Teslas. The legislation only requires a location to have 4 stalls to qualify for funding.
That issue gets bigger yet- every personality type is on the road- blocking a needed stall is asking for all kinds of trouble at the SuC.
Not saying I have the layout answers but they can engineer big gas stations that work smoothly with all gas cap locations, there’s a starting place for design anyway.
For SuCs with enough acreage, a new row of CCS stalls with longer cables should have all EVs accomodated,
and side benefit, Teslas using adapters frees up TPC stalls lol
DeepBlueMN
2019 AWD Model 3
Do you have a reference for this 30% value?
On Tesla’s recent quarterly calls, Tesla/Elon have specifically said that “charging is not an intended profit center”, so this would mean about a 0% gross margin (or slightly positive %) in order to not lose money.
They have also specifically said that they are aiming to “not lose money“ on services and other similar business, which would also imply a small positive gross margin %.
I don’t recall any specific mention of a 30% gross margin, though they have talked about that value with respect to “new car sales”.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Maybe US would be different, but by controlling where they roll out, things seem to be doing fine in Europe, even though a lot of people had similar concerns before the roll out.
Existing CCS stations already have solutions like having longer cables and a cable on both sides on the charger (although only one can be used at a time). If Tesla wants to really accommodate all types I'm sure they can do similar, but I don't think that is the long term strategy (as in Tesla supercharger stations being another general network). I think Tesla will still be catering mostly to Tesla owners.
In Canada, they did similar programs where there were a couple of CCS-only stalls installed in a section to get the government funding. However, I don't see Tesla using this strategy for most existing stations. Just adding an adapter box (as per the linked article) in four or more stalls is the easiest way.
There are some indications that the stalls are a bit taller. The cable would be a bit longer too if this is true.
I don't think an adapter would qualify for the NEVI funds. It has to be a premenentally attached CCS cable. And the sites would have to be completely redesigned/rewired/rebuilt to meet the minimum power requirements.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Previous discussions I presumed he mean 10% gross margin (note some gross margin is required to even simply break even, with 0% gross margin it's impossible to break even because gross margin does not include all costs).
However the source appears to be this Tweet, where he said 30% GM and ~10% profit overall:
When you say "recent," how recent did your quote about "profit center" come from (a quick google didn't find that exact phrasing)? Do you have a link? Is it before and or after that tweet?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The document mentions "The CCS connectors are proposed for all DCFCs to accommodate a baseline of vehicles and to accommodate use of adapters that will provide EV charging for all vehicles". So it seems the plan is aware of use of adapters to accommodate various EVs.
Federal Register :: Request Access
If the adapter is permanently attached to the station (I presume it is not removable if only for theft concerns alone), or has a pigtail connector (like some EVgo stations with a CHAdeMO to Tesla dock), I don't see how that violates the spirit of the law. The goal of the law is to rapidly expand the availability of charging stations to all EVs, and I don't see why they would be against funding a simple solution like this.
In fact, from the reports, the White House specifically calls out: "Tesla will begin production of new Supercharger equipment that will enable non-Tesla EV drivers in North America to use Tesla Superchargers."
https://driveteslacanada.ca/supercharger/tesla-expected-to-open-u-s-superchargers-to-others-evs-later-this-year/
In context with the work on the "Magic Dock," I would be surprised if that was not a solution that Tesla has presented to the White House when they made that statement (given Tesla has been working on it since at least January and White House did not make that statement until July).
And that is probably true, but that doesn't say anything about it being funded by the NEVI program. Which congress with a lot of requirements that no Supercharger currently meets. And they won't be simple to resolve.
