When did Tesla ever promise anyone that they would be "kept in" with future supercharger or other upgrades? I still don't understand the logic... Why would anyone who purchased their Model S prior to May 30th have any expectation of receiving this new feature which didn't exist at the time they bought their car? Please explain that much to me.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
When did Tesla ever promise anyone that they would be "kept in" with future supercharger or other upgrades? I still don't understand the logic... Why would anyone who purchased their Model S prior to May 30th have any expectation of receiving this new feature which didn't exist at the time they bought their car? Please explain that much to me.
Tesla has not, technically, made any promise to any buyer of 120kw supercharging, even ones receiving cars today. Heck, they didn't really promise even 90kw, only that the Supercharger could do it, not the car. The wording in the "order a car" website still only talks about the Supercharger's capability, not the car. You have to infer the car's capabilities.
Odenator
Member
This could be considered deceptive and misleading advertising and open Tesla up to lawsuit. I remember a woman named Heather Peters suing Honda because she didn't achieve the advertised 50 mpg in her hydrid.
Why do you feel that Elon's use of the word "now" means retroactively to all previous owners? Now means "starting today". His statement is true. Previously, owners would spend upwards of 40-45 minutes. Now, a stop will take you half as much time. How is that clearly not speaking to those who buy cars from that moment forward?
Yes, previously (people who bought Model S until now) people were spending 40-45 minutes charging. Now (people who buy starting today) will only take 20-22 minutes. If you bought after May 30th and don't get 120 kW, then yes, I think you should be upset. But not for anyone who bought prior, no.
So now, if Tesla doesn't explicitly qualify a statement, it applies to everyone and all past customers gain an immediate entitlement based upon parsing the words of a press release? Your above comment would be correct if there was a general presumption that current customers are owed future functionality, but that is clearly not the case anywhere in consumer electronics or in the automotive industry.
- - - Updated - - -
It would only be deceptive and misleading if Tesla offered the functionality at the time your purchased and then did not deliver or took it away. It is not false or deceptive to offer a new feature after the purchase. Even if Tesla said specifically "this feature will be made available to all prior owners" and then changed their mind, that is still not deceptive or misleading because you did not base the purchase of your vehicle on this new information. Because this was not available at the time your bought your car, it was not a material consideration for your purchase.
If Tesla issued a press release today saying they will be sending "customers" a pot of gold, but only new customers received that pot of gold, previous customers would have no legal standing because they were in no way damaged by the removal of a feature they were never promised in the first place.
I respectfully disagree with you.
If current and future customers are the only ones that receive this feature, there would be nothing to roll out. You choose to interpret these statement(s) and Elon Musk's words with the information we know now (i.e., some "early" cars can not charge at 120kw). Your logic is also faulty because some "previous" customers from the May 30, 2013 announcement can charge at 120kw. Not all can. So, Elon Musk was referring to some previous customers, not all customers. Again, using information we have now, you are still wrong with your "clear and obvious" argument because these statements include some previous customers (not only current and future).
I understand what you are doing here. I do. But, the problem is Tesla has a long history of poor communication. And the communication has not improved. Some people, like yourself, are okay with this form of communication and others are not.
Last edited:
Actually, many of us put down confirmed non-refundable money or full purchases before Tesla had confirmed anything about various features, including Supercharging capacity. We based our purchasing decisions on Tesla's implication of capability.
Many still have, on the promise of things like a full sleep mode (only recently delivered), 3-phase charging, German high speed tuning, and such.
Tesla has put themselves repeatedly in situations of "trust us to do this right for you". For many of us, the super charging capacity is one of those.
I'm not sure that anyone brought this up because I have not read all of the posts prior to this, but Tesla announced early on that they would not be producing model years. Other car manufacturers lump all of their model changes into a model year. Tesla makes continuous upgrades, and said upfront that they would be doing so. So when you buy a Chevy, you are getting this model year with these specifications. That's the way it will be sold until the next model year comes out. Tesla preferred to have continuous upgrades. This allows Tesla to improve their product as the improvements become available. It is yet to be seen if Tesla will upgrade those early production numbers. They are not IMO obligated to do so. I believe that it is this policy that has at least partially gotten in the way of proper communication regarding these issues to the owners. Let Tesla run through it's process and see what items they are going to upgrade over time. Until they decide to let us know, all we can do is request.
Last edited:
digitaltim
Sig737 VIN628
I have generally stayed quiet on this except to chime in that my Sig was not limited to 90kW, but generally agreed to be so due to the 3/2013 battery replacement.
I assume all manufactures have a strategy for planned (or unplanned) obsolescence - that is how industry works. Free forever, does not compute...especially with respect to product improvements...there are no absolutes.
Still seems simple to me...
I assume all manufactures have a strategy for planned (or unplanned) obsolescence - that is how industry works. Free forever, does not compute...especially with respect to product improvements...there are no absolutes.
Still seems simple to me...
I agree with you. However, it appears Tesla does not, which is why Elon Musk speaks in a certain manner and Tesla phrases press releases in the same manner.
My objection is Tesla's communication. If Elon Musk states something in absolute terms (Super Charging free for life...), customers (old, new, and future) should believe that. But, other absolute statements (roll out to customers this summer) should only apply to certain customers at an arbitrary date to an arbitrary number of cars, etc.
To me it's an issue of communication, which leads to the larger issue of credibility. Like most of us here, I have a deep appreciate for this company, which is why I view this as a larger problem than technology obsolescence.
digitaltim
Sig737 VIN628
Agreed - one of my proverbial rules of life - communication (or lack there of) is the root of all evil.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
All that said ... I'm still keeping my Model X Signature reservation. Some of you clearly believe it's foolish to take an early model, believing that later models get better technology. My personal experience has been different. Tesla has made things right, maybe not as quickly as I'd like 
, but they've made things right. And every day I'd put off driving my Roadster, waiting for the next best thing, would be a day I'd not be driving my Roadster.
So again, everyone here has a right to their personal feelings regarding the current difference between cars. Maybe some of you would have waited. I'm one of those who wouldn't have waited. And obviously won't be waiting on the X. If they came to me tomorrow and offered me a Founder's spot, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. Because it's that many more days I'd have to be driving an X.
, but they've made things right. And every day I'd put off driving my Roadster, waiting for the next best thing, would be a day I'd not be driving my Roadster.So again, everyone here has a right to their personal feelings regarding the current difference between cars. Maybe some of you would have waited. I'm one of those who wouldn't have waited. And obviously won't be waiting on the X. If they came to me tomorrow and offered me a Founder's spot, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. Because it's that many more days I'd have to be driving an X.
All that said ... I'm still keeping my Model X Signature reservation. Some of you clearly believe it's foolish to take an early model, believing that later models get better technology. My personal experience has been different. Tesla has made things right, maybe not as quickly as I'd like
So again, everyone here has a right to their personal feelings regarding the current difference between cars. Maybe some of you would have waited. I'm one of those who wouldn't have waited. And obviously won't be waiting on the X. If they came to me tomorrow and offered me a Founder's spot, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. Because it's that many more days I'd have to be driving an X.
On my head stone, "I want it, and I WANT IT NOW!":biggrin:
Didn't Tesla (or Elon) state that US Signature owners would get some free "upgrades" down the road? I've read references to something like that in different threads, but I don't have an actual quote. I'm certainly not arguing for how Tesla should handle this. I hope Tesla does upgrade affected Sig owners if this turns out to be a real issue. I'm just advocating that it shouldn't be an expectation by owners. If Elon announces next week that the superchargers are going to 150 kW, then what... are we all going to expect a free upgrade?
This was the point I was trying to make about 20 pages ago. Supercharging was billed as a single thing, not a thing with gradations and levels. Folks who bought the car early thought they were getting Supercharging not Supercharging-lite. Superchargers weren't available for many months after my car was delivered but I was confident that, when they were I would be able to fully utilize them. Thankfully, I am, but I agree with those whose cars are hampered; they paid what I paid and have 2012 MY cars as well and should have the same "Supercharging" my car does.
Look, Signature/early VIN owners are some of Tesla's most important customers. This is something that Tesla SHOULD rectify and, I think, they will.
Pretty sure the newer VINs won't have a problem handling the increased charge rate. This is because it now appears that around VIN 2500 TM decided to equip cars with the high amp charge rate Panasonic cells released in early 2012. Meanwhile, those of us currently limited will continue to be stuck at 90. Unless of course Tesla takes the high road and supports the owners that helped make the Model S a reality by putting down a 40 grand deposit for their cars.
... don't forget that 500gb Hard Disk for music storage that was specified in the tech package. I presume it's sitting in our cars, unused as they've never enabled it and stopped talking about it or listing it.
I don't buy this argument and actually think it is strained like many of the other arguments for why Tesla should fix the early owners (I am one of them). I don't think we can create a meaningful argument for why they have to do so. And I find it unlikely that they will. It will cost them about $180M (2,000 cars times an average of $90,000 in revenue for an 85kWh car) in deferred, delayed or lost revenue since they are mostly battery limited in production. And I don't see any way to use the old batteries that creates immediate value unless they are about to deploy lots of swapping stations.
That said, I am disappointed like many in the way it was communicated. I did not subscribe to many of the assumptions that were made along the way by many on the boards based on interpretations of announcements (e.g. many assuming supercharging would be free for 60kWh owners). But this one pretty much "fooled" everyone to the point that we figured it out one year after we started supercharging by experimentation (thanks to ckessel). Still no major communication on something that many of us consider significant.
I personally will take what I get. I have zero regrets and have already stated that I would never go back and undo that amazing time I've had with my P85 since early Aug 2012. Even if I had been told that day that waiting a bit longer would allow me to get 120kW charging I probably would not have waited.
But I still want to know what my options are, if any. I will then accept the chips where they fall. I will also not do an early Model X but that is in large part because my P85 delivers so much fun that I don't feel rushed like I did with my MS. I want a MX for my wife but would never dream of using her as a guinea pig like I do with myself.
Kraken
Member
I disagree with the sentiment that a lack of a qualifying statement from tesla that certain cars won't be able to do 120 means that they implied all cars will be able to support it. This isn't a direct quote, but... "In the future, customers will be able to use 120" to me doesn't mean the same thing as "in the future, all customers will be able to use 120". Perhaps, this vagueness was on purpose as they were evaluating their options. I'd say the same thing for "a software update enables 120" . It technically did, if the car could. Again, to me a. Lack of specification means it can't be defined whether they meant all or not... And again, perhaps that vagueness was on purpose. I do agree that I believed, with the rest of you at it will be all...
We don't know that. For all we know, vins 2500 -10,000 are limited to 120kw, vins 10,000 - 20,000 are limited to 135kw, and new cars off the line now are capable of 200kw charging all due to battery upgrades.
anyway, as I've said before, there is more to this I'm sure. Perhaps tesla didnt realize there was such a capability difference in certain battery cells Panasonic was giving them to fill gaps in supply chains. Perhaps they did, but they hadn't figured out the plan to alleviate the issue so they left the wording vague. Perhaps there is a plan already, but it can't be announced until the proper time and place (battery swapping).
i agree tesla should try to make it right, but I don't believe they're obligated to. All of our cars charge pretty dang fast, regardless of a few minutes. I definitely agree with requesting what you think tesla can do to make it right, but I am saying you shouldn't get your hopes to high. Ask for the moon, but be expecting and content when they only offer a meteorite.
We don't know that. For all we know, vins 2500 -10,000 are limited to 120kw, vins 10,000 - 20,000 are limited to 135kw, and new cars off the line now are capable of 200kw charging all due to battery upgrades.
anyway, as I've said before, there is more to this I'm sure. Perhaps tesla didnt realize there was such a capability difference in certain battery cells Panasonic was giving them to fill gaps in supply chains. Perhaps they did, but they hadn't figured out the plan to alleviate the issue so they left the wording vague. Perhaps there is a plan already, but it can't be announced until the proper time and place (battery swapping).
i agree tesla should try to make it right, but I don't believe they're obligated to. All of our cars charge pretty dang fast, regardless of a few minutes. I definitely agree with requesting what you think tesla can do to make it right, but I am saying you shouldn't get your hopes to high. Ask for the moon, but be expecting and content when they only offer a meteorite.
Similar threads
