Early M3P purchases

[Nocturnal]

Why are you writing all this nonsense? I just gave you a very clear case that you can easily check. Did I say that every single person lost money? Is that the argument you are trying to refute?

Also, your calculation is wrong. You do not account for the current rebate on the car.



So you agree that I'm right then

That first part wasn't directed at you, sorry if it seemed that way. Thanks for the correction. In my head I've had $4k in there for some time and was honestly confused why it was close to zero.

I don't agree that it was a loan. Just saying it's a weird thing to get hung up on. Regarding your net difference, yeah, you are somewhere in that 4-6k delta depending on how you want to slice and dice. Again, OP and many others like to claim 20k difference which is crazy. $5k difference for a year later for buying a 70k vehicle is not abnormal.

 

[Sutton 3P]

That first part wasn't directed at you, sorry if it seemed that way. Thanks for the correction. In my head I've had $4k in there for some time and was honestly confused why it was close to zero.

I don't agree that it was a loan. Just saying it's a weird thing to get hung up on. Regarding your net difference, yeah, you are somewhere in that 4-6k delta depending on how you want to slice and dice. Again, OP and many others like to claim 20k difference which is crazy. $5k difference for a year later for buying a 70k vehicle is not abnormal.

It's not life changing money we're talking about, but my argument is really that they acted in bad faith in order to get that money. They also continue to act in bad faith regarding rebates. They promote it heavily as if it's at least in part going to the buyer, but in the end what the buyer gets is an opportunity to give Tesla an interest-free loan.

This behavior is a sore spot for me with Tesla. It's a shame to have them trash the brand like this. I have to assume their calculus is that as they move to mass market burning some early fans will have essentially no effect on future business and obviously helps cash flow in the present. Hey, maybe you can argue it's even necessary for their survival. I'm willing to entertain all of that, but I don't like trying to sweep this under the rug. Let's call a spade a spade. People got burned a bit. No one lost $20k on a model 3, but $6k for eg is clearly a real thing. Now if we talk about model S that's another story. That's pretty egregious stuff and very hostile to those customers who supported them in buying their most expensive model.

 

[focher]

I'm starting to suspect that it's the same person creating a new account each time to post about this "unfairness". I don't recall seeing a single other early Performance buyer agree with the premise.

 

[SleeperService]

It's not life changing money we're talking about, but my argument is really that they acted in bad faith in order to get that money. They also continue to act in bad faith regarding rebates. They promote it heavily as if it's at least in part going to the buyer, but in the end what the buyer gets is an opportunity to give Tesla an interest-free loan.

This behavior is a sore spot for me with Tesla. It's a shame to have them trash the brand like this. I have to assume their calculus is that as they move to mass market burning some early fans will have essentially no effect on future business and obviously helps cash flow in the present. Hey, maybe you can argue it's even necessary for their survival. I'm willing to entertain all of that, but I don't like trying to sweep this under the rug. Let's call a spade a spade. People got burned a bit. No one lost $20k on a model 3, but $6k for eg is clearly a real thing. Now if we talk about model S that's another story. That's pretty egregious stuff and very hostile to those customers who supported them in buying their most expensive model.

That really was the point of the tax credit though...to help subsidize the development and adoption of electric vehicles. The whole point was so that the manufacturers could sell the car for a higher (and at least CLOSER to profitable) price than they otherwise would have been able to without the credit. It was (and is) meant to help Tesla, not the purchaser of the car. I would much rather give my $7500 to Tesla than to the US government. Again, and to reiterate: the credit worked exactly as intended: to allow Tesla to stay in business during scale up and development by expanding their addressable market with a lower cost of entry for the consumer of the product while still obtaining that income for themselves during that phase.

 

[MXWing]

All of these threads, that happen way too often here, can be summed up as "I am bad at math and mad about that fact"

It's more basic than that.

I am not happy with the contract I signed.

If the Federal rebate came back as 7500 in 2020, Tesla would also raise the price by some amount - probably half that.

Lots of people bad at math, bad at economics, bad at common sense, bad at being an adult.. goes on and on.

 

[Nocturnal]

It's not life changing money we're talking about, but my argument is really that they acted in bad faith in order to get that money. They also continue to act in bad faith regarding rebates. They promote it heavily as if it's at least in part going to the buyer, but in the end what the buyer gets is an opportunity to give Tesla an interest-free loan.

This behavior is a sore spot for me with Tesla. It's a shame to have them trash the brand like this. I have to assume their calculus is that as they move to mass market burning some early fans will have essentially no effect on future business and obviously helps cash flow in the present. Hey, maybe you can argue it's even necessary for their survival. I'm willing to entertain all of that, but I don't like trying to sweep this under the rug. Let's call a spade a spade. People got burned a bit. No one lost $20k on a model 3, but $6k for eg is clearly a real thing. Now if we talk about model S that's another story. That's pretty egregious stuff and very hostile to those customers who supported them in buying their most expensive model.

That isn't how it works though. A company can only receive all/most of a credit/subsidy if buyers are not price sensitive. We bought Model 3s when demand was very high and were willing to pay those prices. Tesla isn't doing anything nefarious, just basic capitalism. If demand takes a nosedive next week then the "benefit" of the current credit would shift more towards the buyer.

A classic example is a cigarette tax. People won't stop buying cigarettes because they are addicted, so a $1 tax is mostly paid for buy the buyer. The seller doesn't need to drop the price (and lower profits). If a $1 tax is added to something that the buyer could easily replace (say we tax menthols but not regular cigarettes) then the seller has to lower prices and most of that tax is born by the seller.

With Tesla and the 3, the market was acting closer my first example.

 

[AdamVIP]

Sharing this again for the 10th time because these "My car is 20k less now!" posts never seem to go away.
View attachment 476622I paid $71,500. Minus 5k refund. Minus $7500 tax credit = 59k.

View attachment 476624
Same exact car costs $58,990 now, but it does have basic autopilot. I paid 7k for EAP after the fact and 2k for FSD, so since FSD is 7k now I'll say that basic AP is valued at 2k.

So I paid 59k....car now is 56k (with 2k ap valuation reduction) - $1875 tax credit. If we want to be persnickety, I've saved 2k in fuel over the past year as well so my car is either 3k less now or $4875 less now.


I don't think it makes sense at all to call that a loan but whatever. Either way, 6k or 6k plus a few bucks in interest. OP said 20k. That's a big difference isn't it?

The 58990 does not include the current $1200 destination fee. The true cost is 60190.

 

[Nocturnal]

The 58990 does not include the current $1200 destination fee. The true cost is 60190.

The price I posted didn't include the destination fee either. I made sure to account for that.

 

[MXWing]

That isn't how it works though. A company can only receive all/most of a credit/subsidy if buyers are not price sensitive. We bought Model 3s when demand was very high and were willing to pay those prices. Tesla isn't doing anything nefarious, just basic capitalism. If demand takes a nosedive next week then the "benefit" of the current credit would shift more towards the buyer.

A classic example is a cigarette tax. People won't stop buying cigarettes because they are addicted, so a $1 tax is mostly paid for buy the buyer. The seller doesn't need to drop the price (and lower profits). If a $1 tax is added to something that the buyer could easily replace (say we tax menthols but not regular cigarettes) then the seller has to lower prices and most of that tax is born by the seller.

With Tesla and the 3, the market was acting closer my first example.

I suspect people won't care at all to educate themselves but I'll try anyway.

What you are describing is what we call Price elasticity of demand in economics. Anyone who wants to understand why Tesla (or anyone really) prices products how they do can start with some light reading below.

Price elasticity of demand - Wikipedia

 

[AdamVIP]

but it was cheaper back then. You add the change in destination fee and the removal of homelink and you got $500 difference. All those little changes add up. Theyve made a bunch of changes to tweak where they put money now. Now they wont let you do the credit card deposit towards the car. No getting cash back. Its also basically like an additional 100 since you now pay for the reservation not the car. The newest seems to be they've stopped putting in dead pedals, ambient door lights and liners and bag hooks in the frunk. Who knows what else they do to pull that extra 1k out of the price. Theyve also had 2 cost raises on the Performance within a year.

Long story short the delta you paid vs what a new one costs is a lot smaller than initial calculations show. Its no different than buying a regular car and the next buyer working a better deal on a 4th of July sale or something.

 

[Sutton 3P]

I am not happy with the contract I signed.

That is correct, and it is a valid opinion as well. For example, I think what happened with the P100D was an egregious violation of the customer's trust in the brand. You may not agree and are welcome to pontificate about your perceive superior intelligence, maturity etc. I have my opinion, which I've reasoned here and no amount of sanctimony from you will change that. Also, it's not a form of rebuttal.

What we are talking about is brand reputation and customer satisfaction. It's about what a customer can expect from a company on good faith. It is not legally binding and there is no recourse other than voting with your future purchasing behavior. I see this behavior as damaging to the brand, exploitive of customers and personally I'm slightly annoyed to have got swindled a bit (though given the circumstances of January this year I would make the same choice). Can Tesla do this kind of stuff? Sure they can. We could make a very long list of companies that behave unethically and operate completely within the bounds of the law. My expectations are higher than simply meeting the legal bar of what is permissible and I think that is the case for many other consumers too.

 

[hydro 481]

I recall doing calculations when the price cut was first announced and it came out to a difference of 10-12k. I purchased my P3D+ (White on white, EAP, no FSD) in Dec 2018. Purchase price was around 73K. Minus 10K incentives = 63K.

Wasn’t the tax credit $3750 at the time of the price cut announcement? Also, white exterior was an additional 1.5K I think.

Anyways, yea it sucks but that’s life. I don’t even think about it at this point. Just enjoy your car.

 

[Garlan Garner]

They gave us $5K back, that should be the end of this discussion as that was more than enough IMO

Also, unlike FSD price changes, they never said the car would cost more later so it's not really fair to be upset. We got what we paid for.

Who got $5k?

For free?

What did you trade for it?

 

[Garlan Garner]

GOD F#%$#@%ING DA##$$IT.

PERFORMANCE 3s ARE NOT 20K LESS NOW. It's a 4 or 5k max delta between August 2018 and Today. Either OP literally can't add or this is a troll post.

'

Simple.

P3D =$80k all buttons checked ( deposit in March 2016. )

What's the price on the same car today? $64,990 ( without the destination price ).

That's comparing apples to apples.

No trollin about that.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Why are you writing all this nonsense? I just gave you a very clear case that you can easily check. Did I say that every single person lost money? Is that the argument you are trying to refute?

Also, your calculation is wrong. You do not account for the current rebate on the car.



So you agree that I'm right then

The rebate on a car has nothing to do with the selling price.

 

[brianman]

Simple.

P3D =$80k all buttons checked ( deposit in March 2016. )

What's the price on the same car today? $64,990

No trollin about that.

Speaking as a buyer from August and October 2018, $80k was not the effective price for me due to the $7,500 rebate. Additionally, on one of the cars I chose to take in the $5,000 and give up the FUSC.

So, effectively …
(2 x ($80k - $7.5k) - $5k) / 2 = $70k / car (with only one of the two having FUSC)

Both are Red Multi-Coat with B&White interior, with FSD.

Configured today that comes in as $66,990 and, if ordered before December effectively $65,115.

So $4,885 cheaper without FUSC and lifetime internet that one of our two cars has. And Homelink that they both have. Etc.

 

[brianman]

The rebate on a car has nothing to do with the selling price.

Yah, you're wrong on that. The market reacts when the federal rebate changes. Tesla does as well.

The federal rebate status absolutely affects buyer and seller mindsets. For most of the $7,500 period it was hard if not impossible to find a used Tesla that was a better value to me than an inventory new vehicle. Come 2020 that changes.

 

[Araex]

That is correct, and it is a valid opinion as well. For example, I think what happened with the P100D was an egregious violation of the customer's trust in the brand. You may not agree and are welcome to pontificate about your perceive superior intelligence, maturity etc. I have my opinion, which I've reasoned here and no amount of sanctimony from you will change that. Also, it's not a form of rebuttal.

What we are talking about is brand reputation and customer satisfaction. It's about what a customer can expect from a company on good faith. It is not legally binding and there is no recourse other than voting with your future purchasing behavior. I see this behavior as damaging to the brand, exploitive of customers and personally I'm slightly annoyed to have got swindled a bit (though given the circumstances of January this year I would make the same choice). Can Tesla do this kind of stuff? Sure they can. We could make a very long list of companies that behave unethically and operate completely within the bounds of the law. My expectations are higher than simply meeting the legal bar of what is permissible and I think that is the case for many other consumers too.

From what I see, Tesla wasn't trying to skim the incentives from the early buyers, but they were simply following rules of supply and demand.

There's a lot of variables at play. Toward the end of 2018, they started making 1,000/week (which I think is still the case), but demand from NA region alone wasn't enough, and this led to a build up of inventory. Compounded by the demand drop from rebate halving in the beginning the year, they had to make heavy price cuts to move all the inventory cars.

With fixed supply (1,000/week that we know of), and increasing demand (by opening it to more countries) over time, the price is probably stable now (and actually increased over the last few months). I wouldn't be surprised if there's no further price drop until GF3 starts producing in quantity (aka increase in supply.)

You should also know that all car manufacturers make the same price adjustment based on supply and demand, they are just hidden behind incentives and dealership kickbacks. For example, right now there's dealership kickback/incentives on VW e-Golf ($10k) and the 2018 Audi A6 ($15k), but they will happily sell you the car at MSRP if you aren't the negotiating type.

Although, as some already pointed it out, price was at its highest back in early 2019 Q1. So condolences on that if you bought during that time.

 

[MXWing]

The rebate on a car has nothing to do with the selling price.

It has a relationship. The percentage delta of relationship is calculated by the price elasticity of demand.

I might disagree with @Sutton 3P on other points but he is completely correct when asking the question of what your rebate was.

 

[MXWing]

Oh and buyers prior to September 2019 win because their car doesn’t make stupid ass ufo sounds whenever they are putzing around.