-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
So…how did they let you get there when the vehicle was not sellable? They just let you waste your time showing up only to be told nope? WTF?
Propofoln
Member
Good luck. I specifically asked my SA about paused deliveries on 2/11 and received the following response: we currently do not have any insight other than the model S is more than likely in production at the factory.
Seems like lots of S/X queued up. Hopefully when we finally do get VINs assigned they aren't from finished vehicles that sat outside for weeks:
So I sent that EPA article to a Tesla rep to which is response was "We have no news on any delay."
Did the same with my typically very knowledgeable and helpful SA.. silence so far. But we've discussed at length the frustration people inside Tesla are feeling so I'm not surprised.A very Tesla response
Just got called and had to reschedule my delivery to Tuesday after being assured the car was on site and ready for delivery tomorrow (it wasn't)
SucreTease
Teslarian
How do you do this the easy way? Every time I have had to do it, I have obviously done it he hard way.
Leeclanual
Member
zoomer0056
Active Member
Highlight a passage, select quote. Do this in multiple posts. Then use the reply to start and select insert quotes.
Pray tell what my "lot of assumptions" are. Tesla does its own testing. You can clearly see this within the documents they submit to the EPA.
I don't know which "last delay" you're referring to. But the current one appears to be because the Model S LR has not yet been issued a certificate of conformity (and same for the Model Y Performance). As I noted in the post you quoted, I suspect it's because there is a discrepancy somewhere that the EPA isn't letting Tesla get away with. Perhaps that is one of the assumptions you are referring to - but note that I never claimed definitively that is what happened. I postulated what I suspect the reason to be.
You perhaps have a much more charitable view of the company than I do. But I think history has shown this company and its leadership have no qualms about being dishonest if it helps their bottom line. In this case it seems to have bitten them in the ass for once.
If the other "assumption" is that Tesla didn't do their due diligence and try to take care of this early... I mean that's simply fact. You can verify with the EPA itself when the documents were submitted. Most were in December. Some not until after the New Year. Had they planned earlier, they could have avoided this situation where they don't have a valid certificate of conformity for cars they are trying to sell. They could have submitted the testing as early as Summer 2022 (when the changes were announced) for MY2022 or 1/1/2023 for either MY2023 or 2024.
We can speculate as to why they decided to wait. My assumption would be that Tesla wanted to delay the reduced ranges becoming public knowledge for as long as possible.
No worries, we can always trust you to take the least charitable view, predictable as the sunset. Everything you "suspect" and "postulate" assumes the worst possible reading of Tesla.
My view, there is always a tension between ratings agencies and manufacturers since the dawn of time. I think there is a lot of back and forth here, especially on the MSLR, and I'm sure Tesla is working to maximize the range number as they should be.
Yes, just like we can count on you only looking at the events with rose tinted goggles. It's as predictable as a certain idiot being transphobic and promoting white supremacists.
See, I would think Tesla should be working to report the most accurate range number that they can, not maximizing the number. But hey, I guess we do agree that they're trying not to be honest about the numbers.
The issue there was a different one, of course, about emissions.
Nuance missing in your question, as usual. Every company tries to maximize or minimize, as the rules allow. I think we can agree on that. VW was clearly emitting above the allowable thresholds. So that's an illegal action, no matter what motivated them.
Tesla has, to our knowledge, worked within what the rules allow. That is not illegal action.
I dont know if you were joking but it probably isnt anywhere close to "almost all". I know that tesla-info only shows us the inventory cars but of the 85 Plaids that show up in their system only 34 had the yoke. So, if Tesla had to make an educated guess of what their customer base is buying and they chose to create 40% of the inventory Plaids with a yoke then that is probably alot closer to the take rate for the yoke.
Similar threads
- Locked
