"Finalize" concerns

[kevincwelch]

i am confused on this as well. I got my invite to finalize back in August, but I haven't pulled the trigger. Am I missing something and need to finalize by 12/31/12 now?

Heems, I think there were a few different emails that went out. I don't think it matters what your configuration is, because if you haven't finalized yet, how would Tesla know what you want?

All I can say is that I got my finalize offer Nov 19. Then I got another email on Nov 29 that appears to be a general email announcing the price increase. On Dec 3 I got an email that said I had until 31 Dec to finalize.

I suppose the final answer would be to call Tesla and hear it directly from them.

If you switch colour to red you won't get it till April or May. I'm in the same boat you are, and I really don't want a red car.

I'm not sure I want the red either. I think I still want blue.

Sent via Tapatalk.

 

[heems]

Interesting. I have not received the email you got on 12/3. I wonder why. I'll ask and also check the spam folder in the meantime.

 

[kevincwelch]

Interesting. I have not received the email you got on 12/3. I wonder why. I'll ask and also check the spam folder in the meantime.

Although it seems pretty definitive for me, please post what you find out from Tesla.

Sent via Tapatalk.

 

[hvb]

Switch back later?

Beware that Tesla has been reluctant to allow configuration changes after people have finalized their order. And I have a feeling they will be less likely to do so as time goes on.

 

[jerry33]

Switch back later?

I doubt that would be possible.

 

[metafor]

I'm roughly in the same boat (P11317) and got my finalize email a week back. My date to finalize without being subject to the price increase is January 9th of 2013. I think it just varies for everyone.

I did make a second reservation (P15063) just in case and may cancel my previous one. I don't want such an early delivery -- at this point, it's looking like march/april -- for various reasons. At the rate of production, I may very well get the car at my originally projected June/July timeframe anyway with the second reservation.

 

[Brian H]

Seems to me it would help all concerned if at time of reservation a "earliest preferred" delivery window could be chosen. That way, TM would know in advance of someone who didn't need/want the car for (e.g.) 6 or 9 months. And customers wouldn't be pushed into these rush-rush dilemmas.

 

[kevincwelch]

Seems to me it would help all concerned if at time of reservation a "earliest preferred" delivery window could be chosen.

+1.

Good for me. Probably not for Tesla at this stage in their financial growth.

Sent via Tapatalk.

 

[ToddRLockwood]

I'm in a similar situation. I wasn't expecting to see my car until June, and I was actually a little concerned that I might not see it until July or August, depending on how quickly Tesla ramped up to 400 cars/week. Imagine my surprise when I received my finalize email a few days ago. I went right ahead and executed it, and now I've discovered that my delivery window is February-March.

This creates some interesting complications in terms of which wheels & tires are on the car when it arrives. (We already have snow on the roads here.) I ordered the 21-inch wheels, but wasn't planning to buy the 19's until next fall. Since the 21-inch wheels are standard on the Performance, I thought it made sense to get them with the car and add the 19's as an accessory item. To further complicate things, I'm not crazy about the snow tire options being offered by Tesla, so I'll probably just have the 19-inch wheels shipped here in January and mount my own tires on them. I plan to run Dunlop SP Winter Sport 3D. Then I'll have to deal with the TPMS... These are minor inconveniences compared to the gymnastics I did while owning a couple of Ferraris.

I guess I could let the car just sit in the garage for a month or two. Fat chance.

 

[jhs_7645]

Seems to me it would help all concerned if at time of reservation a "earliest preferred" delivery window could be chosen. That way, TM would know in advance of someone who didn't need/want the car for (e.g.) 6 or 9 months. And customers wouldn't be pushed into these rush-rush dilemmas.

That doesn't seem logically possible. I'm not sure how they can guarantee later 'slots' for production without having a known backlog that wants their car earlier than that, and without locking themselves into a specific production rate. This would effectively eliminate their ability to ramp production to reduce the backlog (which is what I believe they're doing now). They can't just let people order a car, and sit on the order for months on end either, unfinished orders are a cost to the company. They really need to get to as close to JIT as possible with just a couple/few months of backlog to be the most efficient.

Basically, when it comes to the finalizing/committing to your order process, think of it this way. If it's not scaleable (i.e. would it work if everybody decided to do it), then it's not going to work as a long-term process.

 

[kevincwelch]

I guess I could let the car just sit in the garage for a month or two. Fat chance.

More like Jabba the Hutt chance.

 

[Brian H]

That doesn't seem logically possible. I'm not sure how they can guarantee later 'slots' for production without having a known backlog that wants their car earlier than that, and without locking themselves into a specific production rate...

Well, given that there exists that backlog, and that it's apparently growing faster than the production rate, it would amount to "inserting" the production order at an appropriate (albeit approximate) later date. It might actually enhance planning. And it would reduce/minimize the kind of juggling and hassles (for both parties) that now seems to be happening for those with external issues that mitigate against early delivery.

 

[jomo25]

i am confused on this as well. I got my invite to finalize back in August, but I haven't pulled the trigger. Then on 11/29/12 got an email about the price increase with the following verbiage:

"You have already received your Invitation to Configure, so you can finalize your order at any time. In about a month or two, you will receive a "second invitation" that will begin a new three-week timeline"
I understood that to mean that in Jan/Feb I'd get the second invite with a 3-week deadline, potentially extending the ultimate deadline into March some time. Am I missing something and need to finalize by 12/31/12 now?

I think I might be able to explain the reason why some (like Kevin) have until 12/31 to finalize before the price increase vs. others (like heems and I) have until a "3 week window after a second 'Time to Finalize' email is sent to us in a month or two". I noticed that Heems and I are in the only 2 states where Tesla can't give test drives (TX and AZ). I was told that MA just approved Tesla's license to sell. And only AZ and TX remain. So, we could be in situations where we can't actually get test drives. (In my case, it's the main thing holding me back.) Whereas Kevin is in Chicago, where this isn't an issue. So, perhaps Tesla is accounting for this in their willingness to extend the period reservation holdouts can wait before the price increase impact.

This is just my guess.

 

[stenkb]

Since Tesla is very busy these days, I have been unable to get an estimate trade in value for my Roadster....3 weeks so far and counting.....with that said if I was to finalize my order, does anyone think it would increase my chances of them actually doing it? Of course I wouldn't have to sign the papers yet - but would I lose my deposit just hitting the finalize button?

 

[kevincwelch]

Interesting thought, jomo.

Sent via Tapatalk.

 

[ElSupreme]

And only AZ and TX remain. So, we could be in situations where we can't actually get test drives. (In my case, it's the main thing holding me back.) Whereas Kevin is in Chicago, where this isn't an issue. So, perhaps Tesla is accounting for this in their willingness to extend the period reservation holdouts can wait before the price increase impact.

This is just my guess.

Don't forget about Georgia. We have about the same laws that TX and MA have regarding dealers.

 

[HFh]

Don't forget about Georgia. We have about the same laws that TX and MA have regarding dealers.

As a GA resi
dent, I am suffering under those laws... but I don't actually understand what the laws *are*. What's the short version?

 

[ElSupreme]

As a GA resident, I am suffering under those laws... but I don't actually understand what the laws *are*. What's the short version?

In short only 'dealers' can sell cars in Georgia.
Manufacturers cant be 'dealers' in Georgia.
Because of that Tesla can't do a lot of the 'dealer' work in Georgia.
This is because the are selling a car in California for Georgia delivery.
So you have to pay your taxes, register your car, and a Tesla Rep can't be there at 'delivery'.

This is the basic system in Mass (now they can open up a puppet dealership/company there), TX, AZ, and GA. I think that is the extent of the states with this problem. Although I doubt we know about what happens in SD, ND, WY and other less populated states.

 

[gregincal]

As a GA resident, I am suffering under those laws... but I don't actually understand what the laws *are*. What's the short version?

Interestingly, although I'm not a laywer, reading the Georgia statue it actually seems to prohibit "Franchisors" from selling cars directly or owning a dealership in Georgia. And it defines a Franchisor as:

(A) Any person, resident or nonresident, who directly or indirectly licenses or otherwise authorizes one or more dealers to use a trademark or service mark associated with a make of motor vehicle in connection with the retail sale of new motor vehicles bearing such trademark or service mark;

Since Tesla does authorize even a single dealer to use their trademark, perhaps the Georgia law doesn't apply. By contrast the Texas law specifies that "Manufacturers" cannot sell cars.

 

[ElSupreme]

Interestingly, although I'm not a laywer, reading the Georgia statue it actually seems to prohibit "Franchisors" from selling cars directly or owning a dealership in Georgia. And it defines a Franchisor as:

(A) Any person, resident or nonresident, who directly or indirectly licenses or otherwise authorizes one or more dealers to use a trademark or service mark associated with a make of motor vehicle in connection with the retail sale of new motor vehicles bearing such trademark or service mark;

Since Tesla does authorize even a single dealer to use their trademark, perhaps the Georgia law doesn't apply. By contrast the Texas law specifies that "Manufacturers" cannot sell cars.

I think there is another statute that requires cars to be sold by 'dealers'. I am not sure though.