MASTER THREAD: FSD Subscription Available 16 Jul 2021

[CapeOne]

here's my random idea out of the blue, on how to soften that $1k hit.

offer EAP that you get to keep, for that $1k. you can continue to 'rent' FSD or cancel at any time, but you are now at latest hw level and even if you cancel FSD, you get to enjoy (is that the right word?) EAP.

I'd almost go for it, if it was setup that way. (I already am at hw3, anyway).

give people something to keep for their $1k and maybe the adoption rate will increase.

EAP for "free" with $1k hardware upgrade? I think that may be too generous. I get that it essentially costs Tesla $0 to add EAP but the retail market value would be thousands and Tesla could be sacrificing a lot of potential EAP/FSD revenue by giving EAP away for free. I think Tesla would be better off eating the $1k (retail cost) for the HW upgrade than selling EAP/upgrade for just $1k. Many would be quite content to have just EAP and wouldn't bother to upgrade to FSD at this point.

Unfortunately for Tesla, however, it looks like their statement that cars "have the hardware needed for full self driving capability" will continue to haunt them unless/until they are able to roll the HW upgrade costs into the price of all FSD purchase options (full price upfront, subscription, etc.). Even if Tesla gives in and provides "free" HW3 upgrades for subscribers, what happens when HW4 is needed? HW5? HW6?

 

[CapeOne]

And if you purchase FSD, they will

As always.

If you get FSD via subscription, they won't despite the fact that owners were told their cars have the hardware needed for full self driving capability.

 

[linux-works]

eap is really a tiny step. it should not exist and its features should be in regular AP.

the squeeze is coming; other vendors are not all that far behind with product offerings and soon there will be actual competition. at that point, we'll see more firesales.

this is tech. tech is going to change and be outdated. its why I wonder what the thinking is, with people who plan to own for more than 4 years. even 4 is a very long time when it comes to cpu and tech upgrades, not to mention sensor upgrades.

the battery tech in tesla is far more long-lasting than its tech, and its not tesla's fault that tech continues to move onward as time marches on.

EAP installs to customers costs tesla nothing and is goodwill for that $1k 'trial-maybe-keep' fee. I think its more than reasonable. past customer prices just are not relevant; the market changes so fast, it is what it is (did I just use that phrase? doh!)

 

[Knightshade]

If you get FSD via subscription, they won't despite the fact that owners were told their cars have the hardware needed for full self driving capability.

They were not promised access to the subscription, because it did not exist then

Again the only thing the HW2.x buyers were promised is their cars would have the HW to do the FSD product that was being sold at the time.

And if they BUY that FSD product, they GET ANY NEEDED HW FOR FREE.

Still.

This is a new product that those folks received no promise about ever

 

[Knightshade]

eap is really a tiny step. it should not exist and its features should be in regular AP.

Currently EAP is literally every feature in FSD except the stoplight/stop sign stuff.

So no, it's not a "tiny step" at all.

the squeeze is coming; other vendors are not all that far behind with product offerings and soon there will be actual competition. at that point, we'll see more firesales.

This continues to be unsupported by facts.

As cited a few pages ago, the "competition" is inferior offerings like Supercruise, which cost more than FSD

 

[gearchruncher]

Based on what we've seen here this suggests buying, rather than subscribing, continues to have more value for many since the HW upgrades come with it.

So interesting- you're convinced that buying FSD, for sure, comes with HW upgrades forever?
We're big on "in writing" and "contracts" here. Can you show me where the purchase of FSD guarantees this, no matter what HW is needed in the future?
I can buy FSD in the app with two clicks. It warns me about regulatory approval being needed. It never tells me that HW is guaranteed.

I mean, Tesla could easily call the next version "Actual FSD" and then tell everyone they don't get an upgrade for free, because that's a totally different product than what was advertised earlier, right?

 

[CapeOne]

eap is really a tiny step. it should not exist and its features should be in regular AP.


EAP installs to customers costs tesla nothing and is goodwill for that $1k 'trial-maybe-keep' fee. I think its more than reasonable. past customer prices just are not relevant; the market changes so fast, it is what it is (did I just use that phrase? doh!)

Why do you say "EAP is a tiny step?" EAP is a bigger step over AP (or nothing) than FSD is over EAP.

Offering "free" EAP is goodwill but expensive (potential lost revenue) goodwill. As I said, many would be quite content with EAP and not care about what FSD curerntly offers over EAP.

 

[FloridaJohn]

Even if Tesla gives in and provides "free" HW3 upgrades for subscribers, what happens when HW4 is needed? HW5? HW6?

Oh, I have a suspicion that we will all be screwed when HW4+ is required.

Wait until those complaints start. You ain't seen nothing yet.

 

[CapeOne]

They were not promised access to the subscription, because it did not exist then

Again the only thing the HW2.x buyers were promised is their cars would have the HW to do the FSD product that was being sold at the time.

And if they BUY that FSD product, they GET ANY NEEDED HW FOR FREE.

Still.

This is a new product that those folks received no promise about ever

Buyers were told that their cars were equipped with the hardware for FSD. The statement stands on its own. If that statement is true, there should be no reason for them to have to upgrade to get FSD whether it be the full price upfront option or subscription option. The hardware statement is related to FSD, not how they may choose to get FSD.

If that statement is untrue, Tesla should be obligated to make it true at no additional cost to the customer OR refund the customer some amount equal to the value of making the statement true.

 

[qdeathstar]

Honestly, I find it a little bizarre that someone without a Tesla like yourself spends time on this forum fantasizing about lawsuits you wouldn't be a part of.

Mic drop @Bladerskb

 

[EVDRVN]

If you get FSD via subscription, they won't despite the fact that owners were told their cars have the hardware needed for full self driving capability.

Some people just don't get this. The pretzel logic in Tesla forums is surreal.

 

[EVDRVN]

They were not promised access to the subscription, because it did not exist then

Again the only thing the HW2.x buyers were promised is their cars would have the HW to do the FSD product that was being sold at the time.

And if they BUY that FSD product, they GET ANY NEEDED HW FOR FREE.

Still.

This is a new product that those folks received no promise about ever

LOL- Wrong, I had every feature offered at the time and a promise of future compatibility with the hardware purchased at that time. Show me where this was stated. Tesla is going to loose on this one one way or another regardless how people interpret the meaning. Promising any future compatibility with any hardware that is not explicitly stated is nonsense. When you buy a PC it does not say the hardware will be compatible with future software but since the definition of FSD changes by the hour I guess that works. LOL What next, you pay $1000 for the upgrade and the subscription doubles or in 8 months or you need new hardware to stop in some cases, what a convenient moving target. So glad I never bought FSD and won't knowing this would happen.

Here is another reality check, Tesla does not honor what they put in writing. I was told by a district supervisor that something I was promised in writing was now denied for no good reason. That is the mentality of Tesla. Guess who disagreed with that nonsense? This from a company where "spec" is whatever they decide at the time. Your headliner can be loose and that's spec and unless Elon put something in writing it's invalid. Sounds just like traditional car maker tactics but worse in some cases.

 

[gearchruncher]

we all hate dealerships, BUT they do provide a service dept, and while its not a fun place usually, at least there are many around and you dont always worry about glass not being buyable for weeks or months, etc.

By having a Tesla for 4+ years, I've learned to not hate dealerships quite as much. It's a trade-off.
Dealerships lead to competition. Competition for sales, and treating the customer well. Competition on vehicle service, in both pricing and customer service. If you don't like one dealer, there's another one down the road.

But even more, the fact that dealers are a 3rd party that deals with lots of local customers means that those customers issues can be rolled up into one much larger entity, and the manufacturer needs to keep dealers happy. It also means that the manufacturer has to make service tools, instructions, and parts available to a 3rd party- because every dealer is a 3rd party. That means those tools are much more accessible to owners as well.

Imagine this FSD situation if dealers were involved. They'd have a bunch of customers coming to them for a HW upgrade, and then complaining and leaving when they learned it was $1,000 for hardware that was advertised as already in the car. That dealer is now losing money and customers over the behavior of the manufacturer, and they have much more power than an individual customer to discuss this with the manufacturer.

The general idea of no dealership sounds really great, but at least in the Tesla implementation, they are sure trying their hardest to show us why dealers are a good thing. The exact arguments that dealers have made for why they are useful are coming true in the Tesla case.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

Does anyone know what the HW 2.5 -> HW 3.0 upgrade even does exactly? From checking out a few articles, the only apparent difference I can see is rendering enhanced visualizations on the screen.

Basically I'm wondering if it's even required for FSD to operate the way it needs to in its current form or if it's being used as a gatekeeper for the system while only actually adding some better graphics.

HW 3.0 is the autopilot computer; it has nothing to do with the graphics. The reason it is needed for the visualizations is that only it is running the autopilot software that generates the data needed to make the visualizations (which are generated by the MCU). HW 3.0 is needed to run FSD, not directly for visualizations.

 

[Dan D.]

Oh, I have a suspicion that we will all be screwed when HW4+ is required.

Wait until those complaints start. You ain't seen nothing yet.

FSD will end at HW3.

HW4 will operate brand new product software "Tesla AutoDrive". No relation whatsoever to FSD, so they will have no obligation to upgrade anyone.

 

[stopcrazypp]

This fixes nothing. The issue is that Tesla said all cars have the HW required for FSD capability.

Anything Tesla does to show this is not true is a problem. Don't offer path to FSD sub only for HW2 cars? Clearly not capable, damages from not being able to subscribe. Path that requires $1000 upgrade? Clearly not capable, damages from the $1k charge. All of these additionally reduce the resale value of the car, as it is a less flexible platform.

There is only one way to make Tesla's false statement about all cars having the HW capability for FSD cause no damages to customers. HW3 upgrades at no cost when the customer wishes to utilize any FSD functionality.

The logic is if there is no paid path to sub, there is no explicit damage (unlike where you have an explicit HW upgrade price). The sub didn't exist when they made the promises, so they are not obligated to offer it. Don't know how well that will hold up in court, but it seems plenty of people feel it'll be a valid argument.

Anyways this point is moot, given they went the current route already, and if they go back and do this it'll look even worse from a PR perspective (plus the cat is out of the bag already in terms of setting a price for HW upgrade).

 

[stopcrazypp]

You would think it was in the best interest for Tesla to upgrade them too, because then they don't have to maintain 2 different sets of AP code. But maybe they calculated that it was cheaper to do it that way .

If they wanted to do that, they would have done that years ago. Given EAP is fairly well developed at this point, I don't think it really matters to Tesla that there is an older hardware base to support for users that want to stick with that or lower. The core thing is they had already moved FSD development over to HW3 (we've know this for years).

 

[JerseyShoreMY]

As a rolling driving computer, the thinking we have is like running a laptop from ten years ago.
It still works, but not like the current version sitting next to it.
As for fee vs. free, you know there is nothing free.

 

[Knightshade]

LOL- Wrong, I had every feature offered at the time

....what?

FSD was offered at the time.

If you "had" it you'd get the HW upgrade for free.

Buyers were told that their cars were equipped with the hardware for FSD. The statement stands on its own. If that statement is true, there should be no reason for them to have to upgrade to get FSD whether it be the full price upfront option or subscription option. The hardware statement is related to FSD, not how they may choose to get FSD.

The statement was about the FSD product sold as a purchase.

And it remains accurate. BUY FSD and there's no cost for any HW to that customer.

FSD subscription is a different product nobody was promised anything about previously

If it, like the purchase, had "perpetual HW upgrades" included, the price would be higher.

So interesting- you're convinced that buying FSD, for sure, comes with HW upgrades forever?
We're big on "in writing" and "contracts" here. Can you show me where the purchase of FSD guarantees this, no matter what HW is needed in the future?

I kinda can actually.

In fact this pre-dates HW3!

Tesla said it when 2.5 came out!

Tesla has a new Autopilot '2.5' hardware suite with more computing power for autonomous driving

Tesla has been equipping all its vehicles produced since October 2016 with a “supercomputer” as part of its Autopilot 2.0...

electrek.co

we still expect to achieve full self-driving capability with safety more than twice as good as the average human driver without making any hardware changes to HW 2.0. If this does not turn out to be the case, which we think is highly unlikely, we will upgrade customers to the 2.5 computer at no cost.

As it turned out, it wasn't until HW3 they actually found any features anybody "needed" new HW for.

And guess what happened? everyone who paid for FSD got the HW upgrade free

I expect that to remain true for HW4 (or whatever else is "needed") for those who bought it, just as it was true for 2.5 and 3.



Now- if you wanna paint Tesla as sinister as possible- which clearly you do- only those who bought FSD before March 2019 would be in the "free upgrades forever" group- because only those folks were explicitly promised L4 during the purchase.

Everyone since then was only promised the current features- plus driving on city streets- all at L2. So THOSE folks would only be "entitled" to future free HW upgrades beyond 3 if needed to provide city streets wide release at L2.

 

[gearchruncher]

The logic is if there is no paid path to sub, there is no explicit damage (unlike where you have an explicit HW upgrade price).

The damages exist either way. HW2 cars will be worth less on the resale market if buyers know they can't subscribe to FSD on them, only purchase it outright.

Also, HW3 cars do visualizations that HW2 cars cannot- and Elon says this will continue to improve. There is value in having HW3 even if you don't pay for FSD, and Tesla said this HW was included in your purchase.