Model X Price higher than announced?

[AnxietyRanger]

Is it really completely unreasonable, though, to consider the possibility Tesla's PR might be a bit too optimistic intentionally/knowingly - or at least should know better, but still continue being too optimistic? Being too optimistic might seem like a good idea at a time for them to keep people interested. But perhaps it would be a good time to start being a bit too pessimistic instead, judging by the number of "over promise and under deliver" type of sentiment bandied around - the saying does sound awfully better the other way around.

Anyhoo, I think there are three different things at play here. Not all people seem to agree or disagree on the same things. Perhaps it would help to spell them out:

1: First of all, the 10% being thrown around. Elon indeed talked about a small single-digit increase. One might read that even as something much smaller than 9%, I wonder if it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume even less than 5% because the word "small", but in any case an expectation of less than 10% wouldn't be unreasonable at all. 10%+ seems moving goal posts. At the very least, Model X 85 should cost "small single-digits" more than Model S 85D at the time, for the estimate to make any sense. 10% more would be missing the mark. Now, that was of course just an estimate or a goal from Tesla at the time, but as far as them meeting that goal, 10%+ would be missing it.

2: The second thing is, should the pricing be compared to a dual-motor Model S or single-motor Model S. At the time of Model X launch, there was only a single-motor Model S and a suggestion that Model S would perhaps only get dual-motor after Model X, so it wouldn't be completely unreasonable to assume the price-increase was related to the additional motor and thus both Model S D and Model X would be "small single-digit" increases compared to Model S, not necessarily compared to each other. Then again, there was also talk of single-motor Model X I believe, so this isn't as clear-cut. Realistically, there is more to Model X than just an additional motor, the larger chassis and those falcon wings are probably price factors, so in any case I expect Model X to cost more than Model S D. But how much would be a reasonable expectation and still be within what Tesla said?

3: Thirdly, there is the question should the pricing be compared to a Model S price at the time of original Model X prototype unveiling or at the time of eventual Model X production start. I think only a minority expected the low single-digits increase to refer to 2012 pricing. I guess one could read it like that, but that's not really realistic I think. Though, one might have some case of comparing to Model S pricing during the originally estimated release time, if one reserved early - say, if Tesla gave you info to expect you could order in early 2014 then you might reasonably hope to do so at early 2014 Model S pricing levels plus the percentages, but that's about it. In my opinion people would have a far "better case" (not legally, but morally) with the first two points than to expect years-past Model S pricing to be the comparison point.

+10% compared to a 2015 Model S D model may be a fairly risk-free personal estimate, even realistic considering how much Tesla has missed some marks, but that doesn't really mean it would be the right thing to get in the end. I would recommend using that estimate too to leave you some risk buffer, but I'm not as sure letting Tesla completely off the hook - if that's the reality - is the right thing either. If people feel Tesla should stop making too optimistic-sounding estimations (be it price or schedule) in public, then it would be better to let them and the public know than to accept it silently. The worst thing is the nagging feeling they might be too optimistic in public knowingly, to keep people interested longer. If nothing else, changing things to get rid of that feel would be nice.

Finally, not really a Tesla pricing issue directly, the long delays for Model X has caused some to miss or risk missing goverment subsidies. Although that's not relevant directly to Tesla's comments on Model X pricing, it is a factor that affects real price, but for Tesla's part (and moral responsibility) is in my opinion more related to the delays aspect and the PR therein. For someone with a reservation and money lined up, that matters too of course.

I don't mean to sound too critical on Tesla. Model X is still firmly on my list and Model S is great. Clearly the PR department as well as scheduling, change and risk management and pricing are areas where Tesla has got their work cut out for them - and it is an interesting discussion in its own right (and hopefully helpful too for all sides).

 

[AnOutsider]

In any case, until we see the actual pricing and can compare, this is all just noise.

True enough, though while I'm expecting it to be quite high, I think there will still be sticker shock for many. I'm sticking in the race tho.

*edit* very well put AR.

 

[bonnie]

1: First of all, the 10% being thrown around. Elon indeed talked about a small single-digit increase. One might read that even as something much smaller than 9%, I wonder if it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume even less than 5% because the word "small", but in any case an expectation of less than 10% wouldn't be unreasonable at all. 10%+ seems moving goal posts. At the very least, Model X 85 should cost "small single-digits" more than Model S 85D at the time, for the estimate to make any sense. 10% more would be missing the mark. Now, that was of course just an estimate or a goal from Tesla at the time, but as far as them meeting that goal, 10%+ would be missing it.

2: The second thing is, should the pricing be compared to a dual-motor Model S or single-motor Model S. At the time of Model X launch, there was only a single-motor Model S and a suggestion that Model S would perhaps only get dual-motor after Model X, so it wouldn't be completely unreasonable to assume the price-increase was related to the additional motor and thus both Model S D and Model X would be "small single-digit" increases compared to Model S, not necessarily compared to each other. Then again, there was also talk of single-motor Model X I believe, so this isn't as clear-cut. Realistically, there is more to Model X than just an additional motor, the larger chassis and those falcon wings are probably price factors, so in any case I expect Model X to cost more than Model S D. But how much would be a reasonable expectation and still be within what Tesla said?

At the Model X launch, Elon said around 10%. He did not say single digit, low single digit, etc. At the actual launch he set the expectation of 'around 10%'. I heard it in person. And that was the first time we saw the X.

Regarding dual-motor vs single-motor ... at the time the statement was made, no, there was no AWD Model S. But the single-motor Model X WAS still on the table. So the assumption made by most was that the single-motor Model X would be comparable to a single-motor Model S. When it was announced the Model X would only be offered as AWD, there was a lot of discussion here on the forum that 'now this would mean the base price is higher'. So clearly people who were following the evolution of the Model X against the evolution of the Model S expected AWD would cost more than single-motor.

- - - Updated - - -

... there will still be sticker shock for many. I'm sticking in the race tho.

Agree on both points. Hopefully I'll be so busy enjoying it that I'll miss most of the *discussion*.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

At the Model X launch, Elon said around 10%. He did not say single digit, low single digit, etc. At the actual launch he set the expectation of 'around 10%'. I heard it in person. And that was the first time we saw the X.

I was of course referring to Elon Musk's quote from 2013, when it was already clear there would only be AWD Model X, so the present-day scenario. He spesifically mentioned low single-digit percentage increase and indeed made the price difference sound very slight overall. Here is video of it around 24:30 mark: Elon Musk: Tesla Model X Will Be AWD Only (w/video) | Inside EVs Granted, that was made to an European audience, so if the European price difference is low single-digits and the U.S. difference is around 10%, perhaps that could still count as a win.

Regarding dual-motor vs single-motor ... at the time the statement was made, no, there was no AWD Model S. But the single-motor Model X WAS still on the table. So the assumption made by most was that the single-motor Model X would be comparable to a single-motor Model S. When it was announced the Model X would only be offered as AWD, there was a lot of discussion here on the forum that 'now this would mean the base price is higher'. So clearly people who were following the evolution of the Model X against the evolution of the Model S expected AWD would cost more than single-motor.

Here is the Elon Musk quote: "The Model X price will be very similar to the Model S. It's probably going to be slightly higher starting price, because the Model X will only be offered as all wheel drive... so, low single-digit percentage more expensive..." He even goes to say the pricing is "very similar".

I don't think it is an unreasonable interpretation of Elon Musk's words to interpret that as: +"low single-digits"% more expensive than Model S non-AWD price. Frankly, that's the only way to interpret that quote.

Hence it really isn't quite as clear-cut, what they have been saying to the public. At the very least, I don't think it is just the public not listening or understanding. Even you seem to contradict this Elon Musk quote there.

I still expect the price to be significantly higher than Model S D, but that doesn't meant it would be within these PR statements. (Hopefully I'm wrong on the former.)

 

[robby]

Is it really completely unreasonable, though, to consider the possibility Tesla's PR might be a bit too optimistic intentionally/knowingly - or at least should know better, but still continue being too optimistic? Being too optimistic might seem like a good idea at a time for them to keep people interested. But perhaps it would be a good time to start being a bit too pessimistic instead, judging by the number of "over promise and under deliver" type of sentiment bandied around - the saying does sound awfully better the other way around.

Anyhoo, I think there are three different things at play here. Not all people seem to agree or disagree on the same things. Perhaps it would help to spell them out:

1: First of all, the 10% being thrown around. Elon indeed talked about a small single-digit increase. One might read that even as something much smaller than 9%, I wonder if it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume even less than 5% because the word "small", but in any case an expectation of less than 10% wouldn't be unreasonable at all. 10%+ seems moving goal posts. At the very least, Model X 85 should cost "small single-digits" more than Model S 85D at the time, for the estimate to make any sense. 10% more would be missing the mark. Now, that was of course just an estimate or a goal from Tesla at the time, but as far as them meeting that goal, 10%+ would be missing it.

2: The second thing is, should the pricing be compared to a dual-motor Model S or single-motor Model S. At the time of Model X launch, there was only a single-motor Model S and a suggestion that Model S would perhaps only get dual-motor after Model X, so it wouldn't be completely unreasonable to assume the price-increase was related to the additional motor and thus both Model S D and Model X would be "small single-digit" increases compared to Model S, not necessarily compared to each other. Then again, there was also talk of single-motor Model X I believe, so this isn't as clear-cut. Realistically, there is more to Model X than just an additional motor, the larger chassis and those falcon wings are probably price factors, so in any case I expect Model X to cost more than Model S D. But how much would be a reasonable expectation and still be within what Tesla said?

3: Thirdly, there is the question should the pricing be compared to a Model S price at the time of original Model X prototype unveiling or at the time of eventual Model X production start. I think only a minority expected the low single-digits increase to refer to 2012 pricing. I guess one could read it like that, but that's not really realistic I think. Though, one might have some case of comparing to Model S pricing during the originally estimated release time, if one reserved early - say, if Tesla gave you info to expect you could order in early 2014 then you might reasonably hope to do so at early 2014 Model S pricing levels plus the percentages, but that's about it. In my opinion people would have a far "better case" (not legally, but morally) with the first two points than to expect years-past Model S pricing to be the comparison point.

+10% compared to a 2015 Model S D model may be a fairly risk-free personal estimate, even realistic considering how much Tesla has missed some marks, but that doesn't really mean it would be the right thing to get in the end. I would recommend using that estimate too to leave you some risk buffer, but I'm not as sure letting Tesla completely off the hook - if that's the reality - is the right thing either. If people feel Tesla should stop making too optimistic-sounding estimations (be it price or schedule) in public, then it would be better to let them and the public know than to accept it silently. The worst thing is the nagging feeling they might be too optimistic in public knowingly, to keep people interested longer. If nothing else, changing things to get rid of that feel would be nice.

Finally, not really a Tesla pricing issue directly, the long delays for Model X has caused some to miss or risk missing goverment subsidies. Although that's not relevant directly to Tesla's comments on Model X pricing, it is a factor that affects real price, but for Tesla's part (and moral responsibility) is in my opinion more related to the delays aspect and the PR therein. For someone with a reservation and money lined up, that matters too of course.

I don't mean to sound too critical on Tesla. Model X is still firmly on my list and Model S is great. Clearly the PR department as well as scheduling, change and risk management and pricing are areas where Tesla has got their work cut out for them - and it is an interesting discussion in its own right (and hopefully helpful too for all sides).

Great post, very well stated. Re: #2, Elon specifically cited the dual motor aspect of the X as the rationale for the higher price, so he was clearly comparing against the single motor S.

edit: AnxietyRanger nailed it.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Just to play with the numbers a little.

What if Tesla does stick to those words and indeed was comparing pricing to non-AWD Model S, what could the price look like?

Base Model S 85 is $81,070 in the U.S. AWD adds $5000, which is, what, 6%? Sorry for very quick number crunching, feel free to correct any mistakes. That, I guess, would still fall at least near of low single percentages, if we push it a little. I think the "D" unveiling is pretty much in line - price-wise - what the Elon Musk comment on Model X pricing sounded to me originally. Small price increase, but not a lot. If the pricing of Model X is very similar to Model S D, let's allow, say, an additional $1000-2000 for the falcon wings, that would still fall below the original 10% threshold. So, Model X start pricing non-AWD Model S + $7000ish.

It wouldn't actually be low single-percentages, but I think probably close enough still. How would that sound to you guys, concerned about Model X pricing? Assuming the end-result will be anything like this. I mean, it still could be - if the base spec is bare enough and in the end the chassis differences and falcon wings are more cost-effective than we fear (or they are willing to take a hit on margins)?

Low single-percentages compared to non-AWD Model S taken literally would sound like less than 5%, so if would be true, then Model X base spec would actually have to be priced lower than all the above, lower than Model S D. Only way I could see that happening is if they make some things optional on the entry level and the manufacturing cost of the Model X actually isn't much more than Model S D. That isn't completely impossible, of course, considering there is no 60 kW model of the Model X, so a little more bare 85 could take its place.

What could a base-Model X 85 look like?

$81,070 Model S Price
+$5,000 All Wheel Drive Standard
-$2,000 Supercharger Optional
+$1,000 More Expensive Doors
$0 Basic second row, no third row

That would land at less than 5% price difference to non-AWD Model S.

Yours truly, Ever the optimist.

 

[Zythryn]

...
Yours truly, Ever the optimist.

I am an optimist myself.
However, don't be surprised when you base your expectations on PR statements and extrapolations you create from a foundation of PR statements, and then are disappointed by reality.

Targets are wonderful and I appreciate businesses sharing theirs.
You are a great example of why companies don't tend to do this more often :tongue:

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I am an optimist myself.
However, don't be surprised when you base your expectations on PR statements and extrapolations you create from a foundation of PR statements, and then are disappointed by reality.

Targets are wonderful and I appreciate businesses sharing theirs.
You are a great example of why companies don't tend to do this more often :tongue:

Yeah, it sucks when people hold each other (and companies) to their word, right?

It is one thing to take a piece of PR fluff from a press release or generic company Twitter bot and make extrapolations from that. Any well-versed corporate spectator knows, that goes astray fast. Many times the left hand truly doesn't know what the right hand is doing and so forth. Watching companies and trying to make sense of them certainly is a difficult art.

It is quite another thing to hope that the company CEO, when caught on video, in public, making a candid-sounding commentary, might actually base their comment on something of worth. Also, we are not talking about any targets, we are talking about targets for a product where monetary reservations have been and are being accepted.

Are you suggesting the video quote from Elon Musk is "PR statements and extrapolations I create from a foundation of PR statements"? Because, in simple reality, the quote from Elon Musk is actually very self-explanatory. He said what he said and it isn't very complicated. (Rest of my commentary was mostly trying to dissect the discussion and argumentation here, not really comment on Tesla. I was trying to give multiple arguments a fair hearing.)

p.s. I don't expect Tesla to stick to their public target on this. But of course I hope they do.

 

[de704]

I was thinking about potential Model X price, they said 5-10%,...

The prices hasn't been announced... Not by Tesla..

What was said is the price will be comparable to a similarly equipped Model S. Then Later (Before the D was announced) Elon said there will be a premium over the S because of the dual motors. That is all I've heard out of Tesla but nothing concrete so that they still have room to change it to what ever they want.

If some random news outlet or stock analyst quoted a price it means absolutely nothing.

 

[aronth5]

Bonnie is right in how Tesla made their claims, but I agree that it is all a bit misleading. With each delay, time passes and the cost of the S goes up in general and because of the options being added. So while in the end it may indeed be 10-15% above a Model S at the time of the release, the price of the Model S at the time of release is significantly higher than it was at the time of the reveal and last year (when the X was originally supposed to launch)

If there is one consistent theme over the past couple of years it is the increasingly higher cost of the Model S so there really shouldn't be a surprise over the high cost. After all the original list price of the S with the smallest battery pack was $57,499 and now it is over $70k. If you believe cost creep is an issue for the Model X just wait until the Model 3. That will be real sticker shock for many potential buyers.

 

[Zythryn]

Yeah, it sucks when people hold each other (and companies) to their word, right?
...
p.s. I don't expect Tesla to stick to their public target on this. But of course I hope they do.

I hold companies responsible for their business plans, official documents, etc.
I also tend to believe that they want to deliver are targets they share in PR statements.
And yes, I consider statements made by Musk on Twitter, or PR events as PR statements.

If the statement is about product/options/items currently available I expect them to be completely accurate.
The further away in time, or the larger or more complicated the goal, the more room for change in the expected target.

Why wind yourself up even more by using the target price in a PR statement as a foundation for filling in unsupported details?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The prices hasn't been announced... Not by Tesla..

What was said is the price will be comparable to a similarly equipped Model S. Then Later (Before the D was announced) Elon said there will be a premium over the S because of the dual motors. That is all I've heard out of Tesla but nothing concrete so that they still have room to change it to what ever they want.

If some random news outlet or stock analyst quoted a price it means absolutely nothing.

Actually, the later 2013 comment from Tesla CEO was that Model X starting price would be low single-digit percentage more than Model S, because it will be all-wheel drive. So it was a reference to the base price, the starting price, not a similarly equipped model.

Elon Musk in 2013, at a public Tesla event: "The Model X price will be very similar to the Model S. It's probably going to be slightly higher starting price, because the Model X will only be offered as all wheel drive... so, low single-digit percentage more expensive... very smiliar..."

That is pretty specific. Of course they can still back out on it without legal ramifications, because it was not a promise. But if the end-result is something other than low single-digits higher starting price for Model X than for Model S, then Telsa did either really believed but fail to get there or were misleadingly optimistic - hard to say which, of course. It is still possible they can reach that price, though, as we hope.

Why Tesla CEO's public estimate from 2012 of "around 10%" changed to "low single-digit percentages" in 2013, and talk of starting price instead of similarly specced model, we don't know, but as the later quote the latter seems to stand as the latest and best we've heard from the horse's mouth on Model X pricing. It may not materialize, of course, but that's a different question.

It is not about "some random news outlet or stock analyst quote", when we are in fact talking numbers from the Tesla CEO himself! I believe all the percentages talked refer to these few Elon Musk quotes. 10% refers to the 2012 launch, 5% or low single-digits refer to the revised info from Elon Musk later. Anything else is just muddying the issue, hopefully not intentionally. These numbers are based on source Elon Musk.

Like it or not, Elon Musk has put his and his company's reputation out there by handing the trading and reserving public a few monetary anchors for the Model X pricing. People have made decisions based on that information. Now we shall see where the chips fall, hopefully not far from the target.

Now, this is a small thing, of course as I said in a past post. We are discussing it, as we discuss many minor things. This is not a big issue in terms Tesla or Elon Musk, no matter how it goes.

- - - Updated - - -

If there is one consistent theme over the past couple of years it is the increasingly higher cost of the Model S so there really shouldn't be a surprise over the high cost. After all the original list price of the S with the smallest battery pack was $57,499 and now it is over $70k. If you believe cost creep is an issue for the Model X just wait until the Model 3. That will be real sticker shock for many potential buyers.

Indeed.

Cost-creep is separate from Tesla meeting the "around 10%" over similarly specced or "low-single digit percentage" increase in starting price over Model S claims.

Cost-creep, reasonably, was always going to be there when discussing something that happens over years of wait - of course Tesla failing to meet their scheduled deadlines is another matter to discuss, but still.

Cost-creep will be there. But will Tesla meet the goal of "low-single digit percentage" price increase over non-AWD Model S price (as it stands when Model X is released) as Elon Musk suggested in 2013? That is more interesting talk, I think.

- - - Updated - - -

I hold companies responsible for their business plans, official documents, etc.
I also tend to believe that they want to deliver are targets they share in PR statements.
And yes, I consider statements made by Musk on Twitter, or PR events as PR statements.

If the statement is about product/options/items currently available I expect them to be completely accurate.
The further away in time, or the larger or more complicated the goal, the more room for change in the expected target.

Why wind yourself up even more by using the target price in a PR statement as a foundation for filling in unsupported details?

I think the wounding up is mostly in your head in this case. I offered a playful suggestion on how Tesla might meet the low single-digits price increase over Model S 85 non-AWD starting price. I doubt it differs from much of the speculation and discussion on this site. Why have a Model X forum at all, yet, if speculation isn't part of the game. I offered the speculation that instead of talking "similarly specced", what if Tesla goes for a lower base-spec for Model X 85, than they have for Model S 85D, and make the price happen that way - as Elon Musk in 2013 quote talks of "starting price" instead of "similarly specced".

The suggestion was that the price in question could happen by having a comparable price to Model S 85D, which already is pretty close to that percentage target, while perhaps removing some base features to make even a lower price happen (perhaps leaving supercharging plus some other things optional and having minimal Model X frills like just falcon wings but no special rear seating at base price).

It doesn't sound completely impossible Tesla might have a starting price comparable to Model S 85D for Model X, if one formulates it the way I did. Of course it was a huge simplification.

And all this is speculation based on very limited information.

As for PR statements, especially ones related to products where reservations with money are accepted, they too are something to hold companies to. Especially public companies. My point was just that if the PR comes from some low-level stooge, we may reasonable give them a little more leeway (they may not know), than we should when the company CEO makes a public statement. The latter, obviously, will hold larger sway over the trading and buying public, and they will know and can affect more, so holding them to their word is more reasonable than, say, if some Tesla showroom temp says something.

I'm not talking of legal responsibility now either, just reputation and moral responsibility. This is not a huge, big thing, just an interesting side-track.

 

[bonnie]

This whole thread seems like an awful lot of *something* for a company that hasn't even announced pricing yet. We're talking about deceit, moral responsibility, etc. & it is all speculation, no fact. Interesting exercise perhaps, but (to me) it seems somewhat harmful - to those who don't recognize it as speculation and to Tesla (because an awful lot of judgment is being passed without any actual facts). I'm going to wait for pricing.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

This whole thread seems like an awful lot of *something* for a company that hasn't even announced pricing yet. We're talking about deceit, moral responsibility, etc. & it is all speculation, no fact. Interesting exercise perhaps, but (to me) it seems somewhat harmful - to those who don't recognize it as speculation and to Tesla (because an awful lot of judgment is being passed without any actual facts). I'm going to wait for pricing.

I guess people are a bit pessimistic about trusting Tesla's estimates, because they have failed to meet them so many times (related to schedules). I'd say that is useful PR feedback for Tesla, even if it hurts a little. It would be good hurt.

I'm actually still optimistic Tesla might meet Elon Musk's publicly announced estimates on the Model X pricing, at least close enough. Cost-creep will be there, but if the starting price is similar to Model S 85D for Model X 85, then I have no complaints over Musk's estimates.

 

[bonnie]

I guess people are a bit pessimistic about trusting Tesla's estimates, because they have failed to meet them so many times (related to schedules). I'd say that is useful PR feedback for Tesla, even if it hurts a little. It would be good hurt.

I'm actually still optimistic Tesla might meet Elon Musk's publicly announced estimates on the Model X pricing, at least close enough. Cost-creep will be there, but if the starting price is similar to Model S 85D for Model X 85, then I have no complaints over Musk's estimates.

I never implied even once that feedback wasn't useful. I think you missed my point.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I never implied even once that feedback wasn't useful. I think you missed my point.

I probably just look at it from a little different point of view, I think discussing things through can move them on from that harmful-feeling area. I think I got your point there about the innuendo and all, I just feel talking helps more than not talking.

Solid discussion of what was actually said and what we should make of it, and what can we speculate based on it, may sometimes alleviate those feelings - more than not talking. Also, it can add to the collective information and thus, in this case, help people prepare to what the pricing may eventually be like. That, I think, could also be a useful outcome from all the hashing.

For example, I think a lot of people seem to have ignored Elon Musk's comments in London in 2013, so that was new stuff for the discussion here. That wouldn't have come out without this discussion going somewhere.

 

[bonnie]

I'm going to drop out. When you reply to my comments in such a way as to imply that I was trying to stop feedback, it comes across that you're implying I said that. Same with this second reply. I never said people shouldn't discuss, but since you're replying to my quote and saying exactly that, it looks as if I did.

 

[MartinAustin]

I think it's safe to say that if the base price of the Model S is $69,900, the Model X will be $79,900.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I'm going to drop out. When you reply to my comments in such a way as to imply that I was trying to stop feedback, it comes across that you're implying I said that. Same with this second reply. I never said people shouldn't discuss, but since you're replying to my quote and saying exactly that, it looks as if I did.

I don't think you are trying to stop feedback at all, I never said you were. I was merely commenting on why personally I prefer further discussion as a way of cooling down hot topics.

I certainly hope the discussion on the specifics on what the Model X may cost and why, will continue by some knowledgeable and perhaps even imaginative people. Perhaps there are more tips we can gather and turn to working theories. For example, one angle for someone interested: Is there more than the 2012 unveiling and the 2013 London opening where Elon Musk (or someone from Tesla) has given pricing estimates for Model X? It might be interesting to compare that timeline.

Waiting without speculating is a perfectly valid option, too. Not all are interested in speculating about the same things.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it's safe to say that if the base price of the Model S is $69,900, the Model X will be $79,900.

I think it is fair to compare 85 kWh starting prices only, so I expect it to be more expensive than Model S 85.

But interesting thought that they may be targeting some specific starting price number for Model X, something that "sounds good".

If not $79,900 (sounds low-balling it), could it be, say $84,900? That would be close to "low single-digit percentages" over Model S 85.

 

[Krugerrand]

And I just think it's better to wait and see what happens then to speculate until the horse is dead. Then one can discuss based on what really happened instead of what was thought to be. Saves the wasting of a lot of perfectly good hot air that way. :tongue: