I pointed out that I posted facts in response to your imagining stuff. You of course are entitled to your opinion and entitled to post it. I am entitled to point out facts that do not support your opinion. I tend to be one of those reality based guys.
I'm not replying or directing this to anyone in particular. If you care to read it - feel free. Even in the Commission File Number: 001-34756 and subsequent ones I don't see SuperChargers being funded by marketing expenses. Unless I'm reading wrong..... SuperChargers are being funded directly by sales I don't see anything listing "marketing expense". This SEC filing is in direct agreement with Elons statements. I'm not shouting people down. I hope this isn't offensive to long term TMC members. _____ UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-Q (Mark One) x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016 OR ¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Commission File Number: 001-34756 Tesla Motors, Inc. _____________________ Our plan to expand our network of Tesla stores and galleries, service centers and Superchargers will require significant cash investments and management resources and may not meet expectations with respect to additional sales of our electric vehicles or availability of Superchargers. . Furthermore, the increasing number of Model S and Model X vehicles, as well as the significant increase in our vehicle fleet size that we expect from Model 3, will require us to continue to increase the number our Supercharger stations significantly. Our capital expenditure needs include expenditures for the tooling, production equipment and construction of the Model 3 production lines, equipment to support cell production at the Gigafactory, more than 70 new retail locations and service centers, and approximately 250 new Supercharger locations.
@ohmman wrote a great response already, but I thought you already read my previous post below which makes it clear the way Tesla actually pays for SC costs. Model 3 Supercharging Capable Discussion I'm not asking you to trust "a person in a forum," but rather Tesla's SEC filing in 2015 detailing how they pay for the SCs. I don't believe Elon had ever explained this in detail publicly, but if you have a quote, feel free to post the source. Here's how they paid for ongoing costs via deferred revenue: "Our best estimate of the value of this deliverable is based on a cost-plus model that includes the estimated cost of energy that will be consumed plus a per-car estimate of forecasted Supercharger network depreciation, lease and maintenance costs expected to be incurred over the estimated eight-year life of the car plus a reasonable margin. We have also considered how we price certain options that include and exclude supercharging capability. Because we offer unlimited connectivity to our Supercharger network, we defer and amortize its related revenue ratably over the estimated life of the car." @smac calculated from SEC filings where Tesla reported deferred revenue separately for superchargers that it worked out to $500 set aside per car (not the oft repeated $2000 or $2500). He also noted that even cars that did not have supercharger enabled had this money set aside also: My car won't charge faster than 60kW Here's how they pay for the network (as of end of 2013 40% to COGS and 60% as a marketing expense under SG&A): "Generally speaking, Superchargers located on more frequently traveled routes with eight or more charging stations were those that we estimated would have a higher utilization rate and are recorded to cost of automotive sales. Supercharger stations expected to have low utilization rates serve more as a marketing function for Tesla and we recorded these costs to selling, general and administrative. As of December 31, 2013, we allocated 40% of our Supercharger network costs to cost of automotive sales and the remaining 60% to selling, general and administrative." You can read in full here: Letter to the SEC They no longer report any of these separately in recent filings however, because spending on other areas are much larger than on SCs. See above, the figure is actually $500 not $2500. Also, Tesla set this number aside regardless of if supercharging was enabled on the car. The network installation costs are also shared by all vehicles (via COGS and SG&A expenses) regardless of if you opted for it. My other point is that nothing stops Tesla from for example allocating $250 into each vehicle and make the rest from pay-per-use. The pay-per-use part will lower risk from rising ongoing costs, and the $250 will give them some upfront cash they can use. It does not have to be "all or nothing" approach as you are suggesting.
Why would this make people drop? If someone didn't drop when they said no SC included, why would they drop now when they offer the solution to that? If he is going to be using it as much as he thinks then he sounds like the perfect person that should spend for the SC option so that it is included. In fact, if SC is included with a larger battery option (like a lot of people suspect/hope) then that sounds like an even better plan for him. I don't own one so I don't know for sure but I thought it was for the life of the car. If it's part of the car then it has resale value and would be taken into account when it is traded in. So, when Tesla sells it, they'll keep it on there so they can add that to the sale price.
I will respect your wishes to not continue a dialogue (I was going to also reply about the other rumor link you posted, which I don't see how it contradicts my argument), but I hope it did not turn into something personal. I also wanted to clarify I see you as an equal and am not appealing to seniority, nor do I think length of membership plays a factor in the validity of any argument. I'm only debating from a position of sourced facts.
Indeed, I see no reason to drop reservation (excluding possible financial reasons etc. [people do unfortunately get laid off]) before some real facts are provided, be it about interior, SC payment scheme or battery/range sizes.