Hidden 72 amp charging option

[MichealW]

I'm on the fence regarding this development. Not as to who is correct/has the inside scoop/etc., although that in itself is worth an aside: many statements by esp. Service Center employees over the past three or so years have turned out to be variably either not true, 180º not true, or, at best, still not the case. And not statements from junior SC employees, either.

What concerns me is the seeming pricing iniquity* I am reading into this hardware/software development, if it is true. As follows:

It used to be the case in the United States, under federal statute - from my grad or undergrad economics classes - that extracting economic rent by creating a price discrimination situation such that different persons paid a different price for the same product, was illegal. Cannot remember if it was civil or criminal penalties that applied.

Now, if Tesla Customers A and B receive the same hardware product - a 72A charger - but A doesn't need beyond the 48A default and so opts out of paying the $1,000 enabling charge; B sees utility in being able to charge at 72A and so she pays the additional amount, then, in my eyes, Tesla Motors is performing precisely this price discrimination. Worse, TM is acting out of a knowledge imbalance: TM knows that both customers possess the same item but, presumably, the customer does not.

So: as a shareholder, I am happy to learn that TM has the ability to achieve a higher gross margin. Yay!
But, as a long-distance traveler through esp SpC-impoverished Canada where Sun Country's 70A chargers are the best one can hope for....I'm a Customer B. Boo!

My two cents. Get three more and you can buy a nickel.

*iniquity AND inequity. Again, if true, then to my eyes it is both.

Those of you still uncertain and are willing to bet money please message me asap. I need help paying for my Ludicrous mode upgrade. Lol...

 

[EboMike]

Now, if Tesla Customers A and B receive the same hardware product - a 72A charger - but A doesn't need beyond the 48A default and so opts out of paying the $1,000 enabling charge; B sees utility in being able to charge at 72A and so she pays the additional amount, then, in my eyes, Tesla Motors is performing precisely this price discrimination. Worse, TM is acting out of a knowledge imbalance: TM knows that both customers possess the same item but, presumably, the customer does not.

How is this any different from autopilot?

 

[ohmman]

How is this any different from autopilot?

Or, it could be argued, Supercharging. That said, this is the kind of conversation I love to have over a beer or two. Audie is right that there's some level of inequity in the arrangement. But, is the inequity towards the over-payer (the consumer who chose 72A but got the same product), or the limited consumer (who has the same hardware but is limited because of their financial means, knowledge about the option, etc.)?

 

[ptsagcy]

As a famous philosopher once said (or maybe it was one of us) "show me the pictures" . Or if someone knows an auto repair shop, have them look up the part numbers for the 72A and 48A chargers to see if they are different. Until I see proof of this theory, I choose to remain skeptical.

 

[Chris TX]

Or, it could be argued, Supercharging. That said, this is the kind of conversation I love to have over a beer or two. Audie is right that there's some level of inequity in the arrangement. But, is the inequity towards the over-payer (the consumer who chose 72A but got the same product), or the limited consumer (who has the same hardware but is limited because of their financial means, knowledge about the option, etc.)?

The main difference is the price to enable Supercharging "helps" to pay for the consumed infrastructure.

 

[ohmman]

The main difference is the price to enable Supercharging "helps" to pay for the consumed infrastructure.

Well, one could argue that the AP charge pays for the additional development work. Or the charger 'fee' (if we are to believe the direction this thread is headed) pays for the theoretical additional service.

 

[Chris TX]

Well, one could argue that the AP charge pays for the additional development work. Or the charger 'fee' (if we are to believe the direction this thread is headed) pays for the theoretical additional service.

This gets into the whole Autopilot and S40 vs S60 discussion: Do the buyers of Autopilot cars, S40 cars, and Model X with 48A chargers actually cost Tesla money if they don't activate the hardware? Additionally, do the buyers/activators of S40->S60s (of old), Autopilot, and 72A actually pay a fair price for the functionality, or do they pay more to make up for those that choose to run around with the disabled, "expensive" hardware?

Questions that probably can't be answered in a forum thread, I know. I just felt the need to ask them

 

[spentan]

This is stupid in my opinion. Why wouldn't they allow you to upgrade at a later date for say $1500? or even $2000? (If the hardware is the same)

 

[MichealW]

This is stupid in my opinion. Why wouldn't they allow you to upgrade at a later date for say $1500? or even $2000? (If the hardware is the same)

I was told the software upgrade will likely not cost much more then you would pay now if you order it with the car. They mentioned around $1200 and remember you don't pay tax like you do when you are purchasing the car.

 

[Merrill]

I'm close to finalizing and was wondering about the 72 amp charger. I do not have dual chargers on my Model S and have never needed it I close to 3 years of ownership, and this is with the 60. I received info back from Tesla as to the possibility of purchasing this option in the future and was told not possible, only available when you order.

 

[aesculus]

If you don't need it now the only reason you might need it on the X would be if you change your driving paradigm or distance (ie drive longer distances or travel more to destination chargers).

 

[faktor]

I have an open design studio and trick with the word "charger" does not work. Ordering the Model X in Europe ...

 

[satheesh.net]

I have an open design studio and trick with the word "charger" does not work. Ordering the Model X in Europe ...

That's because all cars delivered to Europe are included with 16,5kW charger. Which is a better option than the regular single charger and less than the dual charger which has 22kW.

 

[JanoSicek]

US Model X charger is 12kW default and 18kW with secret option. EU default is 16.5kW (and only option)

 

[ptsagcy]

That's because all cars delivered to Europe are included with 16,5kW charger. Which is a better option than the regular single charger and less than the dual charger which has 22kW.

There is no dual charger. The US options are 48 amps or 72 amps, but both are single chargers.

 

[satheesh.net]

There is no dual charger. The US options are 48 amps or 72 amps, but both are single chargers.

Yes, I know. Sorry for not pointing out that I meant comparison to the dual charger for the Model S.