FSD Subscription

[Mattopotamus]

Real FSD will certainly cost more than $100/month, in parking costs alone. I mean, if I can leave my car and let it park itself somewhere and later pick me up, it not only saves parking costs, but time as well. Certainly more than $100/month.

Now, I don’t expect it to happen, practically speaking (I mean not some city, geofenced, etc, but really any city, including NYC) until 2030.

So we are left with EAP level of functionality, when person sits behind the wheel. Well, if Tesla can charge 8,000 upfront, that clearly means many people will happily pay $100/month. Especially if some transferability between cars will be included.

I think you are confusing level 5 autonomy with FSD in it's current state. Everyone in this thread is talking about FSD related to it's present state. It cost $10K as of next week, and that package (or very similar) is what will be offered in subscription form. I don't think anyone here is actually talking about a car that can be summed to your location (more than the current summon). The $100/month+ price is referring to current FSD offered in subscription form.

 

[SageBrush]

One interesting addendum to that though.

They seem to keep putting off the subscription offering until FSD on city streets is ready for wide release (they've already bumped offering the subscription from this year to next)

Possibly they are thinking they need to offer some day to day value for people to make them want to keep it beyond the once or twice a year roadtrip to make offering a subscription service worthwhile at all.

If they were ONLY aiming for the "I want this once a year for a highway trip" crowd they could've launched THAT subscription quite a while ago.

Speaking only for myself (I have no idea if my opinions are held by others) and as someone who up until now has not bought any AP package, I've gotten to an age and driving competency where I feel less than comfortable when I have to change lanes in congested traffic. I was actually thinking about buying full FSD specifically for its lane changing assist. I held back after I looked into it and realized that lane change assist requires that AP be enabled.

I suppose my point is that city FSD is a much more mixed bag than trip FSD. I suspect that Tesla is going to struggle to offer up attractive package(s).

 

[SageBrush]

I was toying with the idea of swapping my Model 3 for a Model Y this week, and it made me realize that if I had FSD in the Model 3 I would have a good reason to not upgrade

 

[HyperionMark]

I was toying with the idea of swapping my Model 3 for a Model Y this week, and it made me realize that if I had FSD in the Model 3 I would have a good reason to not upgrade

That's our exact scenario. But to capitalize on the $2k discount currently on FSD (half glass full) we will probably buy the Y and just keep the 3 which already has FSD. Will try to loan it out to friends or even put it on Turo. At some point it becomes an appreciating asset if FSD keeps increasing in price.

 

[SlimJim]

• 
  
• 
  
• Only plan to keep my 3 for 3-4 years.

there it is. 3-4 years. that's the difference. you are not like me.

 

[prettig]

Charge per driven mile on FSD and let us buy the hardware if needed (if you have HW2.5 car). Makes it more future prove and on-demand is a very lucrative model (instant availability, you will start using it).

 

[DrtyJrze]

Charge per driven mile on FSD and let us buy the hardware if needed (if you have HW2.5 car). Makes it more future prove and on-demand is a very lucrative model (instant availability, you will start using it).

For the 10th time, Tesla WILL NOT use any financial model that brings in less than what people are willing to pay to purchase FSD upfront. Period.

This is similar to people only buying an FSD monthly subscription for the 3-5 summer travel months, but worse.

FSD WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE.

FSD is worth more commercially than it is to private citizens. Meaning companies will pay more than $10k (or $20k...or $30k) to have an autonomous (or even semi autonomous) fleet. If you’re only willing to pay $15, or even $200, for FSD YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC FOR THIS FEATURE.

Of course at some point WAY in the future when true FSD is a standard across multiple manufacturers we will see prices that low, or even standard. But until then don’t expect Tesla to make a move that isn’t in their own best financial interest.

 

[prettig]

For the 10th time, Tesla WILL NOT use any financial model that brings in less than what people are willing to pay to purchase FSD upfront. Period.

This is similar to people only buying an FSD monthly subscription for the 3-5 summer travel months, but worse.

FSD WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE.

FSD is worth more commercially than it is to private citizens. Meaning companies will pay more than $10k (or $20k...or $30k) to have an autonomous (or even semi autonomous) fleet. If you’re only willing to pay $15, or even $200, for FSD YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC FOR THIS FEATURE.

Of course at some point WAY in the future when true FSD is a standard across multiple manufacturers we will see prices that low, or even standard. But until then don’t expect Tesla to make a move that isn’t in their own best financial interest.

I got the same reactions over a year ago: make it a subscription I said (now we get it).
Make it transferable: now thinking about it.

He just outsold dream v1.
Now he is selling v2 (rewrite) for even more (always people that want to buy it)
And tapping into the market of people that will never buy: subsciptions.
Gues what happens if the subscriptions market dries out........ new model (maybe on demand.......).
Not rocket sience.

So for the 10th time, I disagree and keep doing so.

 

[Fernand]

If you step back a bit, seeing what street level NOA can do right now - as a preliminary beta - is nothing short of stunning. I didn't expect it to handle turns on multi-lane congested city intersections like that for a good while. The fact that it's also running on Model S and X that are many years old, at the mere cost of a CPU board upgrade, is also amazing. Bravo!

But IMHO at $10K it's offensively priced. Why? When Tesla "gave away" Basic AP they created this problem, in that the incremental value of "FSD" over Basic AP is unclear to many. And there's no obvious solution in subscription.

If they had sold the Model 3 SR+ with zero autopilot, then $8k or even $10k would make sense to most anyone.

But, as it is, someone without deep pockets buying a $40k SR+ that includes basic AP is looking at adding 25% of the car price for what they see as "a little more, maybe". As we can see here, it's creating contention and stress.

It will be interesting to see how Musk deals with this situation.
.

 

[DrtyJrze]

I got the same reactions over a year ago: make it a subscription I said (now we get it).
Make it transferable: now thinking about it.

He just outsold dream v1.
Now he is selling v2 (rewrite) for even more (always people that want to buy it)
And tapping into the market of people that will never buy: subsciptions.
Gues what happens if the subscriptions market dries out........ new model (maybe on demand.......).
Not rocket sience.

So for the 10th time, I disagree and keep doing so.

ummm, there’s no subscription service or transfer ability...I guess someday you’ll be right, but probably best to wait until then before you beat your chest over something that’s been predicted by tons of other people.

You continuing to disagree with facts and math doesn’t surprise me.

 

[DrtyJrze]

If you step back a bit, seeing what street level NOA can do right now - as a preliminary beta - is nothing short of stunning. I didn't expect it to handle turns on multi-lane congested city intersections like that for a good while. The fact that it's also running on Model S and X that are many years old, at the mere cost of a CPU board upgrade, is also amazing. Bravo!

But IMHO at $10K it's offensively priced. Why? When Tesla "gave away" Basic AP they created this problem, in that the incremental value of "FSD" over Basic AP is unclear to many. And there's no obvious solution in subscription.

If they had sold the Model 3 SR+ with zero autopilot, then $8k or even $10k would make sense to most anyone.

But, as it is, someone without deep pockets buying a $40k SR+ that includes basic AP is looking at adding 25% of the car price for what they see as "a little more, maybe". As we can see here, it's creating contention and stress.

It will be interesting to see how Musk deals with this situation.
.

It is possible as Tesla continues to push the car price down that basic AP could be stripped and the gulf becomes larger (or they create a 3 tier FSD package)

 

[prettig]

ummm, there’s no subscription service or transfer ability...I guess someday you’ll be right, but probably best to wait until then before you beat your chest over something that’s been predicted by tons of other people.

You continuing to disagree with facts and math doesn’t surprise me.

Subscription we get (announced), transfer of ownership...... Elon's answer to a question (earnings call): we are thinking about it

Disagree......why do we have forums? To agree with the status quo? You think Tesla ingnores forums (it is customer feedback)?

 

[base_two]

It is possible as Tesla continues to push the car price down that basic AP could be stripped and the gulf becomes larger (or they create a 3 tier FSD package)

While Autopilot is clearly at the top of the industry at its base functionality TACC + Autosteer, other car manufacturers (including EVs) already include some form of these features as standard. Tesla cannot seriously offer even a $30K car without at least those features in today's market.

On the question of the FSD Subscription, I have reservations about whether it should've ever been sold in the manner that it has. It should have launched as a subscription and received price adjustments under that model. I don't believe the hype that Tesla wouldn't have been able to fund development without it. Tesla is currently basically giving away FSD on its used inventory right now, so if FSD has some residual value at the moment, Tesla doesn't think much of it.

 

[prettig]

It is a balance between money and data:
- Not enough users --> no data to make it better (or way to slow development)
- Expensive just means less data
- Subscription or on-demand means lots of data and less money in the beginning

Will never be 100K: not enough data to develop it futher.
They are balancing between selling and subscription, just to get a good base and enough funding.

 

[Knightshade]

It is a balance between money and data:
- Not enough users --> no data to make it better (or way to slow development)
- Expensive just means less data
- Subscription or on-demand means lots of data and less money in the beginning

Will never be 100K: not enough data to develop it futher.
They are balancing between selling and subscription, just to get a good base and enough funding.

I'm confused why you think they need you to have paid for FSD to "collect data"

ALL cars can collect data, they don't need to have FSD turned on.

Individual cars don't "learn" from the driver or anything like that- they just do things like capture static pictures of specific things Tesla asks them to look for, then sends them back to the mothership to be manually labeled, and then used to train the master NNs for future updates.


I feel like this has been posted more than once already in the thread, but once again here's Green explaining what data collection actually happens, and why virtually none of it requires you to have paid for FSD.

https://twitter.com/greentheonly/status/1096322810694287361?lang=en

 

[prettig]

Data is not the same as people actually using FSD (the data does not show the mistakes it can make if you do not drive it on FSD).
But agreed, they get a lot already. But they can only use it for simulations.

 

[Phlier]

Tesla are about to be hit by a VW train in 2021

I'm sorry to go off topic, but...

Where are they going to get the batteries from? Tesla didn't build a huge battery production facility for the heck of it.

There just simply isn't enough battery supply in the world for another auto maker to come out with a mass market vehicle that directly competes with Tesla. The emphasis is on "directly", because IMO, for another car to be considered competition to Tesla products, the car has to have extremely similar stats: BEV (not hybrid), similar size, similar range, similar performance, similar features, similar price. So Leaf type cars need not apply.

Until another auto manufacturer invests in the battery production needed to produce the batteries necessary to support the manufacture of a mass market BEV, there simply will not be any truly competitive (vs. Tesla) mass market alternatives.

Yes, other companies are going to seriously market their vehicles as Tesla competitors, but don't buy into the marketing wanketeering; they just don't have the battery supply necessary to do it. Any of these so-called "Tesla Killers" will end up being either: 1. Not a true competitor 2. Halo products never meant to be a mass market car. These will be cars that truly do compete with Tesla's products, but the manufacturer will be so constrained by battery supply that they'll never be able to produce them in any meaningful numbers. The Taycan, IMO, is the closest anyone has come to an actually competitive alternative to Tesla, but even that can be argued due to the price difference. And again, Porsche is limited in the number of these that they can produce because there just isn't enough batteries available. It remains to be seen exactly which of these two categories VW's product(s) will fall into, but I'd be willing to bet it exactly fits one of them.

Once a legacy auto maker actually breaks ground on a new battery factory, I'll stand up and take notice. Until then, I'll just laugh at all these new "Tesla killers" as they come to market, one by one.

Right now, Tesla is in the unique position of being the only auto maker that has enough battery production to actually produce BEV's in meaningful numbers.

The low production volumes of these Tesla alternatives just won't be enough to take any significant market share away from Tesla. IMO, the worst financial hit these cars will be to Tesla is that the competing manufacturers won't need to purchase as many carbon credits from Elon.

A few months ago, I remember reading an article that GM was looking at investing in a battery production facility, but I haven't seen any updates.

Back on topic...

Today's world of "death by monthly subscription" drives me nuts. I hate being nickled and dimed to death by the currently en vogue monthly subscription paradigm.

I understand that it is helpful for a rather large percentage of the population in order for them to have access to products that they wouldn't otherwise have, so to me it's a necessary evil.

As such, I hope that Tesla will offer many different ways of getting customer's hands on FSD. Personally, I'd love to have a "by once, cry once" lifetime subscription option that would allow me to take my subscription with me... if I have to travel and rent a Tesla somewhere, I could activate my sub on that car while I was renting it. And since I have no plans on driving any other marque until the end of my days on earth, it would be great to be able to carry my sub with me from car to car as I upgrade to new Teslas along the way.

Hopefully, they'll have enough options out there that pretty much anyone that truly wants FSD will be able to get it in a way that keeps them happy and makes financial sense.

 

[SageBrush]

As such, I hope that Tesla will offer many different ways of getting customer's hands on FSD. Personally, I'd love to have a "by once, cry once" lifetime subscription option that would allow me to take my subscription with me... if I have to travel and rent a Tesla somewhere, I could activate my sub on that car while I was renting it. And since I have no plans on driving any other marque until the end of my days on earth, it would be great to be able to carry my sub with me from car to car as I upgrade to new Teslas along the way.

Hopefully, they'll have enough options out there that pretty much anyone that truly wants FSD will be able to get it in a way that keeps them happy and makes financial sense.

1+

 

[Knightshade]

Data is not the same as people actually using FSD (the data does not show the mistakes it can make if you do not drive it on FSD).
But agreed, they get a lot already. But they can only use it for simulations.

Again you appear to think there's some functionality that does not exist.

The car has no idea when it makes a "mistake"

I'd encourage you to read the link I posted- it explains how, why, when, and what data Tesla collects- and why the driver having FSD or not makes basically 0 difference to their ability to collect it.

 

[willow_hiller]

Again you appear to think there's some functionality that does not exist.

The car has no idea when it makes a "mistake"

I'd encourage you to read the link I posted- it explains how, why, when, and what data Tesla collects- and why the driver having FSD or not makes basically 0 difference to their ability to collect it.

I thought user disengagements during AP use were within the realm of campaign triggers. A user without AP won't be able to trigger that.

And to be honest, I think it's fair to assume that Tesla's data collection methodology is going to change quite a bit once they incorporate dojo.