Is Tesla preparing to charge for Supercharging?

[roblab]

I want the Supercharger to be available for my use when I need it. Not ICEd, not blocked, not being used by someone who doesn't need it.
I'd also like more of them on secondary routes I like to travel, and with better restaurants and amenities nearby.

If paying per use helps with that, then I am 100% happy to pay per use. Don't give me a card, just set up auto billing because they know my car when I plug in.

I bet paying for use doesn't change anything. Unless you get to specify where they put your private supercharger, which you pay for. Nah. Not gonna happen.

You and I bought, never knowing of possible future super chargers. It was a freebie, a surprise. My wife and I drove to Canada a month after we bought our car and used friends, family, and fifty-amp outlets. What a kick!

Now, there are a couple hundred, with another couple hundred planned. But to think that the general non thinking, non caring public will even read, much less understand, a sign that says "EV Parking Only" when they pull into a spot? And the closer to that restaurant or amenity is that much more of a guarantee that it will be ICEd. Tesla can't fix stupid.

 

[green1]

. But to think that the general non thinking, non caring public will even read, much less understand, a sign that says "EV Parking Only" when they pull into a spot? And the closer to that restaurant or amenity is that much more of a guarantee that it will be ICEd. Tesla can't fix stupid.

Maybe people around your area are really bad, but around here most people (with some very minor exceptions) respect proper no parking signs, If only Tesla would consider using them....

 

[TaoJones]

There seems to have been a shift in TMC's company line free regarding " free for Life " supercharging. New position is that "long distance" supercharging will be free for life. They do not want owners that live near a supercharger using them as their primary charger for in town and short trips. Apparently they have notified the biggest abusers. Since they know where each Tesla is registered and when a car uses a supercharger, it seems like it would be pretty easy to lock out or charge people that are based within a certain distance of a supercharger ( say 25 miles ).

False. The "new" position is that Tesla now supports DENSITY as well as DISTANCE, and has welcomed the non-garaged local with open arms.

Specifically, Tesla has welcomed the non-garaged to use SCs as their primary charging mechanism when no option exists at home or at work. The only target of that poorly-worded letter which seems to have exacerbated posts such as the above was, and remains, those few garaged owners who choose to use SCs exclusively instead of charging at home. ICEing is a far bigger potential problem, and I agree that standard No Parking signs/zones would go a long way to solve the problem. I've seen this myself recently - towing companies love inconsiderate people who park in no parking zones.

I also consider livery to be a far greater concern in metro areas than the VERY few garaged local owners who would use SCs as their primary source. Geofencing the latter would not be worth the keystrokes. Frankly, I think Straubel was spot on when he eyeballed 1,000,000 cars (globally) as a tipping point for any kind of metering whatsoever. Please remember that most Tesla owners do not use SCs with any regularity whatsoever. And why would they, when they can wake up with a full charge every morning? People have lives - they generally don't drive 270 miles/day for the heck of it. The myth of locals supercharging daily en masse is just that - a myth.

It is somewhat disturbing that those not in the densely-populated areas in which Tesla has committed to DENSITY as well as DISTANCE would assert that it is somehow okay to restrict usage en masse in those very areas.

Let me repeat: Tesla has committed to DENSITY as well as DISTANCE. Anyone who does not have a garage at home should not worry about getting a letter anytime soon per at least one DS. Assertions to the contrary are... unhelpful.

As an aside, there remain several competing options for fast charging (Chademos, to name one). There also are already excellent full-strength and functional networks of these chargers in areas not served by SCs (see the entire Oregon Coast, for example). Is usage free? No - it's $19.95/month for unlimited usage. I'd still call that free by California standards.

The point is that SCs will not bear the burden of success and of livery and of the non-garaged and of the very few freeloading garaged locals over time. There will be plenty of options - and this doesn't include significant advances in technology such as even faster charging (less pressure upon available resources) and cool stuff currently being tested elsewhere such as embedded (in-road) charging. Yep - charge up while stuck in traffic. Not quite sure how *that* gets paid for, but I'm sure if it happens in California, a toll or increased tax will cover it quite... excessively.

 

[Panu]

They do not want owners that live near a supercharger using them as their primary charger for in town and short trips. Apparently they have notified the biggest abusers. Since they know where each Tesla is registered and when a car uses a supercharger, it seems like it would be pretty easy to lock out or charge people that are based within a certain distance of a supercharger ( say 25 miles ).

I also think that this is what is going to happen. Not a lock out but a fee for local supercharging. Then it's a fair option for owners who don't have home charging. There is no reason to provide them free local charging. They should pay for electricity like everyone else.

 

[mspohr]

I just got a mass e-mail from Tesla in Finnish language. It talks also about supercharging and says the following (translation mine):



Nowhere does it mention any more that this would be without a cost. I got a feeling that they've given up and are going to allow also local supercharging but are preparing to make Supercharging pay per use.

What makes you think that this means they are going to start charging for charging?

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I just got a mass e-mail from Tesla in Finnish language. It talks also about supercharging and says the following (translation mine):



Nowhere does it mention any more that this would be without a cost. I got a feeling that they've given up and are going to allow also local supercharging but are preparing to make Supercharging pay per use.

To me that's less about free and more about local Supercharging.

 

[redox]

Then it's a fair option for owners who don't have home charging. There is no reason to provide them free local charging.

How do they get to use the Superchargers for free? I thought it cost them around $2,500 to use them?

 

[Panu]

What makes you think that this means they are going to start charging for charging?

I just don't think that suddenly local supercharging would be OK for Tesla unless there is a fee. The fee results more empty stalls for long distance drivers and covers some of the cost of supercharging network. Of course this is speculation.

- - - Updated - - -

How do they get to use the Superchargers for free? I thought it cost them around $2,500 to use them?

Yeah and you pay about the same for a second 11kW charger in your car. Free supercharging is for long distance travel as stated from day one (although that message has not been very clear all the time).

 

[redox]

Yeah and you pay about the same for a second 11kW charger in your car. Free supercharging is for long distance travel as stated from day one (although that message has not been very clear all the time).

Not trying to be overly argumentative, but I don't think it was stated when I bought my Model S, and unless I'm misreading it it's still not stated in the product page. That product page actually says "When Supercharging is enabled, Model S drivers can charge for no additional cost at any of Tesla’s expanding network of 120 kW Superchargers." - I can't really think of any ambiguity in the definition of "any".

It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that some folks thought "well I can't charge at home" (for whatever reason - apartment, HOA rules, roommates, etc) "so I'll fork out a lot of money upfront and make it up in time (maybe never) by charging at the local SC".

Personally I would prefer if SCs offered a "pay as you go" model, and I'd be happy to switch to that model. If that were to happen I'd hope they'd refund me the $2,500 minus the kWh that I already consumed from them and maybe charge me a nominal "access fee". I do charge at home and must have gone to SCs maybe a couple of times, so the large pre-paid amount is not a good financial model for me (and I will likely never get anywhere close to making up for the initial cost).

I also find it silly to waste time at a local SC if you can charge at home (unless your time is worth close to nothing), but not everyone sees it that way ("free pizza! let's go sit through this 2h presentation so we can get our free slice!").

 

[stopcrazypp]

Personally I would prefer if SCs offered a "pay as you go" model, and I'd be happy to switch to that model. If that were to happen I'd hope they'd refund me the $2,500 minus the kWh that I already consumed from them and maybe charge me a nominal "access fee". I do charge at home and must have gone to SCs maybe a couple of times, so the large pre-paid amount is not a good financial model for me (and I will likely never get anywhere close to making up for the initial cost).

This is a common misconception. The $2500 fee is not a prepaid fee for electricity. It is not listed that way on the sales contract, but rather as an option to pay for the software and hardware. Similar to how the Nissan Leaf's DC charger option cost ~$1500 and only goes toward the hardware. From their SEC filings, Tesla is only setting aside $500 per car to pay for supercharger operation costs. So at most you would get refunded $500 if you didn't use it at all.

Also as I have suggested, Tesla can choose to rebrand the local city superchargers as "urban chargers" or something else and then charge money for them.

And reference to long distance / road trips were listed since the supercharger launch:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...Notes/page86?p=1054196&viewfull=1#post1054196

 

[redox]

This is a common misconception. The $2500 fee is not a prepaid fee for electricity. It is not listed that way on the sales contract, but rather as an option to pay for the software and hardware. Similar to how the Nissan Leaf's DC charger option cost ~$1500 and only goes toward the hardware. From their SEC filings, Tesla is only setting aside $500 per car to pay for supercharger operation costs. So at most you would get refunded $500 if you didn't use it at all.

I believe what you're saying. I think it's a bit unreasonable to expect a customer to read SEC filings to understand what they're getting though.
It's perfectly ok if the product they sell is a combination of one time fee hardware @ $2K and a pay-as-you-go-per-kWh cost. Being clear about it is what lets the customer decide whether it makes sense for them or not.

Now to play devil's advocate, the current product page does say you can charge for free at any SC, but doesn't provide any Quality Of Service expectation. Maybe you only get a tiny trickle charge! It reminds me a bit of the good old throttling happening on cable/cell plans that are "unlimited". I'm sure there's a way to game the system on both ends, but it doesn't sound like the type of relationship you'd want to build between a company and its customers.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I believe what you're saying. I think it's a bit unreasonable to expect a customer to read SEC filings to understand what they're getting though.
It's perfectly ok if the product they sell is a combination of one time fee hardware @ $2K and a pay-as-you-go-per-kWh cost. Being clear about it is what lets the customer decide whether it makes sense for them or not.

Now to play devil's advocate, the current product page does say you can charge for free at any SC, but doesn't provide any Quality Of Service expectation. Maybe you only get a tiny trickle charge! It reminds me a bit of the good old throttling happening on cable/cell plans that are "unlimited". I'm sure there's a way to game the system on both ends, but it doesn't sound like the type of relationship you'd want to build between a company and its customers.

They don't have to read SEC filings, they just have to read the purchase contract which does not guarantee SC access, but only that the software and hardware is installed (the $500 is only hypothetical, legally Tesla doesn't owe anything). Tesla could choose to close all their superchargers at any time and they are not under any legal obligation to continue servicing them. There is no "service contract" being signed between Tesla owners and Tesla for the superchargers.

Now to play devil's advocate, the current product page does say you can charge for free at any SC, but doesn't provide any Quality Of Service expectation. Maybe you only get a tiny trickle charge! It reminds me a bit of the good old throttling happening on cable/cell plans that are "unlimited". I'm sure there's a way to game the system on both ends, but it doesn't sound like the type of relationship you'd want to build between a company and its customers.

This had been discussed in other threads. The major difference is Tesla haven't been using "unlimited" to advertise superchargers, unlike cable and cell plans (which has unlimited in bold letters in practically every advertisement). Tesla can't start charging money without getting creative (like renaming stations as I suggested), but Tesla certainly can start throttling if they felt the need to.

 

[Yggdrasill]

I expect Tesla Superchargers to continue being free for long distance.

But there's nothing wrong with also putting up Supercharger-like installations in cities, where those who can't charge at home can go for the occasional quick top-off. And these wouldn't necessarily be operated by Tesla or free. Like: Private Tesla Fastcharger? [Not quite a supercharger] This guy bought 2.