-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I fully agree that it would have been dead simple and fully accepted by the buying public if they simply said "for personal use only". They'd even still attract commercial users if they had a modest rate applicable for them.
But of course they can't go back now. Those cars were purchased in good faith based on the rules at the time and Tesla needs to honor that. But going forward, they'd do themselves a huge favor by adding in a commercial use clause.
Frankly, the commercial use is on mission for Tesla, so I don't expect it to change.
What's inappropriate here is taking the spots without charging.
What's inappropriate here is taking the spots without charging.
What is also inappropriate- even if it is legal - to suck Tesla's teat and make money
It's still on mission for Tesla. If they are displacing the use of fossil fuels, it's working. And if every single speck of charging is done at a Supercharger for a 200k lifetime of a car, at 15c/kwh they are paying around $8,000 for the electricity.
About Tesla | Tesla
"Tesla’s mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy."
Hard to argue with that.... but I'll try 
lol, really just playing Devil's advocate here, but I'm going to argue that by "abusing" the charging scheme - and I think commercial use is that - they diminish Tesla's larger picture ability to achieve said goal. Forest for the trees, sort of thing. Obviously $8k (assuming your math is correct) isn't going to break the bank, but times X? They sent out those notices asking regular Joe's to stop "abusing" the chargers, so...
Anyway. I went through charger Hell today, so yesterday's minor inconvenience is nothing more than a giggle at this point.
lol, really just playing Devil's advocate here, but I'm going to argue that by "abusing" the charging scheme - and I think commercial use is that - they diminish Tesla's larger picture ability to achieve said goal. Forest for the trees, sort of thing. Obviously $8k (assuming your math is correct) isn't going to break the bank, but times X? They sent out those notices asking regular Joe's to stop "abusing" the chargers, so...Anyway. I went through charger Hell today, so yesterday's minor inconvenience is nothing more than a giggle at this point.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
I see it differently. This is not consistent with Tesla's mission if they are displacing private customers from using Superchargers.
Crowded SCs will ultimately discourage other potential owners from buying a Tesla and transitioning to sustainable energy.
Exactly. Commercial enterprises sucking up money that was meant to encourage long distance travel for general consumers, is a lose-lose situation for Tesla's missions
The issue of taking up Supercharger space is separate from the issue of using the energy for commercial gain. The folks who started this thread would be jerks no matter what they were using the energy for, since they are taking spots while not charging.I see it differently. This is not consistent with Tesla's mission if they are displacing private customers from using Superchargers.
Crowded SCs will ultimately discourage other potential owners from buying a Tesla and transitioning to sustainable energy.
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
Maybe it is not just the money, but those commercial vehicles need to be topped up between gigs. Don't know how this could be done without Superchargers.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Not that livery has been or is a problem *outside the top handful of SCs, since density goes hand in hand with livery*, Tesla has already subtly provided a solution to, in part, stop the incessant kvetching from those who feel compelled to complain about perceived edge cases.
Note that since *almost a year ago* (15th January 2017), Teslas no longer include SCing past the original owner. The majority of livery vehicles, historically, have been lease returns or fleet cars (see, for example, law enforcement). Which is to say NOT new cars. Sure, a few private operators bought or leased new Teslas for their operations (see Tesloop), but that’s not the norm.
Point being that livery will soon have to pay for their juice at SCs just like Model 3 owners. At least until Tesla makes SCing free for all Tesla owners again as they did after a brief flirtation with billing this Spring (to the material detriment of all of the owners who bought to preserve that feature only to see it go away 6 weeks later). But that competitive advantage lever won’t need to be pulled for *years* yet.
Oh, it could happen.
But if it does, it won’t be for awhile yet. Way too much nervousness about infrastructure balancing yet, plus there’s so much work to do to retrofit/enhance pretty much every MDU (apartments, condos) on the continent/planet.
From a margin perspective, one wonders what breakeven will be for the top 50 biggest livery companies in North America to get some variant of a megacharger for their taxi barns/limo depots. Could be an interesting competitive differentiator, and all the while the air gets cleaner.
I’d call that multiple wins for Tesla, not to mention TSLA.
In the meantime, no fine print or other scurrilous weaselry necessary.
Note that since *almost a year ago* (15th January 2017), Teslas no longer include SCing past the original owner. The majority of livery vehicles, historically, have been lease returns or fleet cars (see, for example, law enforcement). Which is to say NOT new cars. Sure, a few private operators bought or leased new Teslas for their operations (see Tesloop), but that’s not the norm.
Point being that livery will soon have to pay for their juice at SCs just like Model 3 owners. At least until Tesla makes SCing free for all Tesla owners again as they did after a brief flirtation with billing this Spring (to the material detriment of all of the owners who bought to preserve that feature only to see it go away 6 weeks later). But that competitive advantage lever won’t need to be pulled for *years* yet.
Oh, it could happen.
But if it does, it won’t be for awhile yet. Way too much nervousness about infrastructure balancing yet, plus there’s so much work to do to retrofit/enhance pretty much every MDU (apartments, condos) on the continent/planet.
From a margin perspective, one wonders what breakeven will be for the top 50 biggest livery companies in North America to get some variant of a megacharger for their taxi barns/limo depots. Could be an interesting competitive differentiator, and all the while the air gets cleaner.
I’d call that multiple wins for Tesla, not to mention TSLA.
In the meantime, no fine print or other scurrilous weaselry necessary.
What?? That is absolutely not true. The car can change hands 100 times and free SC is valid for the life of the car, irrespective of how many owners it changes hands.
Tesla could have done a lot of things in fine print, to ward off teat suckers, but still could have kept the sound bite, "free long distance travel', going
Hard to argue with that.... but I'll try
Anyway. I went through charger Hell today, so yesterday's minor inconvenience is nothing more than a giggle at this point.
Agree. How can they tell locals to not use the supercharger due to overcrowding but say it's fine for businesses.
Given the lack of fine print, I don't think there is much they can do. But I view it as a bad thing. They may get some good press from the mileage these companies are putting on, but compared to the negative press from supercharger crowding...
Good point. I did hear that Tesla has sold superchargers to businesses in the past. They could also charge a per kWh for business use, which would allow Tesla to expand charging. However, the complaint about them sitting there for extended durations doesn't sound like that is the problem the majority of the time.
Even a simple max per year, but that may backfire as it would make more folks feel entitled.
Cars purchased after *roughly* Jan 2017 with unlimited supercharging due to a referral will not transfer to subsequent owners.
Initially those cars purchased Jan/Feb had 400kWh free. Then they grandfathered them with the exception of "will not transfer with car" when they added the referral bonus free supercharging.
Here it the text on my tesla.com page
Supercharging
You have free, unlimited Supercharging for your current Tesla vehicle as well as any new Model S or Model X purchased before December 31, 2017. If you choose to sell your current Tesla, free Supercharging will not transfer to the next owner. Also, up to five friends you refer will also receive free Supercharging. Any Supercharging payments made have been automatically refunded. Read our Supercharging terms.
Yeah. I bought a Model X with 400 kWh/year in April, but since I used a referral I ended up getting unlimited supercharging anyway, as long as I own it. That was a pleasant surprise.
Most likely free unlimited supercharging will be gone for good on new cars January 1st.
Thank you. I didn't know that.
Thats a good start. Slowly when the current set of 'unlimited SC for unlimited owners' are taken off the road, then this problem should ease.
So people are complaining that someone bought a car and is using the system that is within their rights and privileges they paid for? Who cares if the company bought one or one hundred, the price of super charging was built into the car, this is no different than anyone using a local super charger instead of charging at home, an Uber driver using it, or any other person. They paid for the use of the supercharger if they are just sitting there like it's a parking spot and there is nothing against it, once again you have no argument. If they are parked in the spot and there is something against it then go that route.
While I agree that the livery firms have the privilege of using the superchargers, i also sympathize with the complaints that a commercial business is taking up spaces that the general public could use. And if they are just parked, that is even worse.
So, one approach -- aside from complaining to Tesla, as suggested above -- is posting a comment in social media. Does the company have a Facebook page, or Twitter? Then consider posting a comment (preferably with a recent photo) on their page that their behavior is less than desirable, attracting negative attention, etc. I would suggest a gentle persuasion approach at first, and then escalate if they do not respond or the response is dismissive. Most companies would rather not have negative publicity, even if what they are doing is perfectly legal and within their rights.
Posting something gives them a chance to state their case, too.
So, one approach -- aside from complaining to Tesla, as suggested above -- is posting a comment in social media. Does the company have a Facebook page, or Twitter? Then consider posting a comment (preferably with a recent photo) on their page that their behavior is less than desirable, attracting negative attention, etc. I would suggest a gentle persuasion approach at first, and then escalate if they do not respond or the response is dismissive. Most companies would rather not have negative publicity, even if what they are doing is perfectly legal and within their rights.
Posting something gives them a chance to state their case, too.
Crazy amount of commercial use from the Los Vegas SC thread:
Supercharger - Las Vegas, NV (Town Square)
Supercharger - Las Vegas, NV (Town Square)
davewill
Active Member
Tesla is perfectly capable of excluding these cars if they wanted to. They obviously don't want to.
Similar threads
