Ktowntslafan
Member
I see no mention of Tesla on "sponsor/collaborator" page of Plug 'n Drive's website-seems odd given near identical mission statement to Tesla's. What am I missing?
Sponsors and Collaborators | Plug n Drive
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I see no mention of Tesla on "sponsor/collaborator" page of Plug 'n Drive's website-seems odd given near identical mission statement to Tesla's. What am I missing?
Sponsors and Collaborators | Plug n Drive
Knobby
Member
The modified incentive program is not intended to "hurt " Tesla.. it's intended to encourage the mass market cars. - to actually further Tesla's stated (but so far not observed cause), the mass market adoption of electric vehicles. Tesla should interpret this as a clue to get on with the Model 3, and hit the right price with it, and stop focusing on more and more "Ludicrous" stuff. I won't be sending any letters.
Ktowntslafan
Member
I'm sure Tesla would love to follow your advice, unfortunately there's just one GIGA problem-battery supply (and it seems to me their pretty focussed on it):
Tesla's profits today (incl. ludicrous profits) are helping to solve this little problem. So new EVIP, regardless of intention, is in fact hurting Tesla-and thus slowing the transition to sustainable transport.
Last edited:
Jaff
Active Member
These EVIP changes will not drive Tesla to "get on with it" any faster. I think you vastly underestimate the difficulties involved with a new company bringing a complicated new product to market.
I think you also underestimate the financial challenges Tesla faces, and why they have had to employ a fairly unique business model.
Whether the new EVIP was intended to hurt Tesla or not is moot...it will in fact hurt their sales.
I think you also underestimate the financial challenges Tesla faces, and why they have had to employ a fairly unique business model.
Whether the new EVIP was intended to hurt Tesla or not is moot...it will in fact hurt their sales.
Last edited:
Breezy
Member
There will be cases like yours, but that doesn't hold as a fleet average. The average 24 kWh Leaf drives about 16000 km per year. The average S85 doesn't drive 57000 km per year (85/24 x 16000), even adjusting for displacement of larger vehicles on average.
From a gasoline-displacement POV, it would make the most sense to have several brackets, with the largest rebates for the first 20 kWh or whatever, then the same amount for the next 40 kWh, etc.
Wholeheartedly agree with that.
You're giving them way too much credit. I haven't seen any evidence of clear analysis on the part of this government. There's a lot of "shoot from the hip" reactionary politically based decisions. It's why our electrical system, in a place with abundant hydro and a strong nuclear industry, is the unholy, expensive and inexcusable mess that it is right now.
Peter_M
Member
Right - a simple scheme would be $X for cars (BEV or PHEV) with batteries bigger than 15 kWh and an additional $Y for cars with batteries bigger than 60 kWh, and Y could be less than X. The idea is to motivate people to buy electric cars that can move city driving to electric with the $X, and then give an additional motivation to move long trips to electric with the $Y. There might need to be "ramp-up" incentives for the boundaries, from 10-15 kWh and from 40-60 kWh, so that there isn't a sudden jump in incentive that would generate arguments about how the kWh is measured and whether the chosen kWh numbers are the right ones.
Ktowntslafan
Member
Mass market EV? Doesn't exist. If it did, we would need hundreds of GIGAfactories to supply it. Are any other manufacturers building GIGAfactories? NO!...proof that Big Auto is not serious about EV's.
Our incentive $ should all go to Tesla, IMO. Maybe we should drop EVIP and finance the next GIGAfactory instead...or keep EVIP and do both!
Global warming isn't going away, time to get creative.
Phil Plait on Twitter:
Last edited:
mknox
Well-Known Member
Again, don't disagree, but am just trying to relay how I believe the government is thinking. Perhaps it would be better suited to structure it as a reward program rather than an incentive program.
- - - Updated - - -
Plug 'n Drive is a non-profit NGO which relies on sponsors for funding. It likely means that Tesla has not stepped up with any funding or sponsorship dollars for them.
Somehow I don't think a modified incentive program in ON will spur on the auto manufacturers to build "mass market" electric cars. Given the world market, ON is only a small market. Heck, even Tesla treats all of Canada with scarcely concealed contempt, we're just not big enough to be considered worth their while.
mknox
Well-Known Member
The program was designed to incentivize Ontarians who would otherwise not consider an EV to at least buy what is available.
- - - Updated - - -
I think this is key. The government believes that $75k + car buyers would buy the car with or without the incentive. I think they had some data to support that, but don't personally believe it was a very exhaustive study. I hope their EM&V process tracks and reports on the program's success (in all vehicle classes) and the proof, as they say, will be in the pudding. If sales numbers attributable to the EVIP are down, it will be a strong argument to modify the program.
Jaff
Active Member
The other thing no one is talking about Mike is this...I think the Guv thinks all Tesla owners bought their vehicles paying cash! 
For some, myself included, owning a Tesla meant that I could qualify for 7 years worth of financing!
I could easily have purchased a couple of Condos with the funds that I have spent on my Teslas...but like many others, my wife and I are trying to do the right thing (environmentally speaking) by getting the EV ball rolling!
For some, myself included, owning a Tesla meant that I could qualify for 7 years worth of financing!
I could easily have purchased a couple of Condos with the funds that I have spent on my Teslas...but like many others, my wife and I are trying to do the right thing (environmentally speaking) by getting the EV ball rolling!
Interesting comment in this terrible anti-Tesla newspaper article. Daphne Bramham: We shouldn't be subsidizing luxury cars, even if they're electricThe other thing no one is talking about Mike is this...I think the Guv thinks all Tesla owners bought their vehicles paying cash!
For some, myself included, owning a Tesla meant that I could qualify for 7 years worth of financing!
I could easily have purchased a couple of Condos with the funds that I have spent on my Teslas...but like many others, my wife and I are trying to do the right thing (environmentally speaking) by getting the EV ball rolling!
I wonder how big this really is. In the Tesla email to owners it seem to stress that too.Gord James said:
Jaff
Active Member
"...paid much more so we could drive emission free"...Hey, that's me and the missus! :wink:
Truer words never spoken...
Truer words never spoken...
Mones
Member
People, as futile as it seems...write to the government. Those who own an Tesla probably already got the email from them. Those who don't or are in the process or are just avid Tesla fans, take the time to write to the government. The more people who write in, the more notice it takes. I have family who work in government and they all say the same thing, squeakier wheels get the grease. The more you write in, the more people are prone to doing something.
Not everyone buying a Tesla is doing so because of an excess of income. The rebate was a large part of my decision and helped me tremendously. I also purchased a Tesla, not simply for the luxury car, but because I thought it was the best product on the market and I wanted to switch to electric and get off the gas train. I did sacrifice other parts of my lifestyle in order to be able to afford the payments, and it wasn't simply a matter of having extra money to spend on a luxury.
The favouring of rebates for lower priced cars (lets leave the model 3 out of the convo right now) heavily helps companies that are more geared towards traditional ICE cars. Someone who is on the fence about an electric car or just curious about it is more likely to walk into a Chevy dealership where they would get a bigger rebate, but at the same time the company/dealership/salesman would have the opportunity to convince them to buy an ICE car or just kill their interest in the electric car specifically.
We should be rewarding companies such as Tesla who took the initiative to focus solely on the electric market and not even offer a gas option. These companies are committing to changing the future rather than presenting electric cars as "one" option.
Not everyone buying a Tesla is doing so because of an excess of income. The rebate was a large part of my decision and helped me tremendously. I also purchased a Tesla, not simply for the luxury car, but because I thought it was the best product on the market and I wanted to switch to electric and get off the gas train. I did sacrifice other parts of my lifestyle in order to be able to afford the payments, and it wasn't simply a matter of having extra money to spend on a luxury.
The favouring of rebates for lower priced cars (lets leave the model 3 out of the convo right now) heavily helps companies that are more geared towards traditional ICE cars. Someone who is on the fence about an electric car or just curious about it is more likely to walk into a Chevy dealership where they would get a bigger rebate, but at the same time the company/dealership/salesman would have the opportunity to convince them to buy an ICE car or just kill their interest in the electric car specifically.
We should be rewarding companies such as Tesla who took the initiative to focus solely on the electric market and not even offer a gas option. These companies are committing to changing the future rather than presenting electric cars as "one" option.
Ktowntslafan
Member
mknox
Well-Known Member
The other thing no one is talking about Mike is this...I think the Guv thinks all Tesla owners bought their vehicles paying cash!
For some, myself included, owning a Tesla meant that I could qualify for 7 years worth of financing!
I could easily have purchased a couple of Condos with the funds that I have spent on my Teslas...but like many others, my wife and I are trying to do the right thing (environmentally speaking) by getting the EV ball rolling!
I'm not sure if the gov't thinks Tesla buyers are paying cash or not, but I don't think that had any bearing. I financed over 7 years myself, and it was still a whopping big loan payment compared to anything I'd done in the past. Doing the right thing is great, but would you have (honestly) done so without the incentive? If the answer is "yes" then providing an incentive would not have been a wise use of taxpayer money.
Now if this were not an incentive program, but a reward program, then I would be all over this too... complaining about discriminatory practices and such.
- - - Updated - - -
I am squarely in this camp as well. It was only with the fuel savings over my 40,000+ km annual driving plus the $8,500 incentive that made it so I could even remotely afford my Model S. And I ordered about a year prior to first deliveries so had probably the lowest MSRP that the car ever saw. The question is how many of us like this are there? The government thinks not enough for it to require an incentive to help sales. I wish they would release their EM&V homework which would support (or refute) this.
Jaff
Active Member
Mike, I respectfully disagree about them "not thinking all Tesla owners are paying cash.
Let's face it...they equate the total sale price of the vehicle being paid in full when we buy it...hence their use of the $150,000 figure being the cut off...if those clowns understood that the majority of Tesla owners are financing over seven years (or leasing), then would understand the stretch many are making to be environmentally conscious by driving the only long range capable EV.
I have no doubt in my mind that they are thinking this...after all, according to their mantra, the $150,000 figure makes one "rich".
Let's face it...they equate the total sale price of the vehicle being paid in full when we buy it...hence their use of the $150,000 figure being the cut off...if those clowns understood that the majority of Tesla owners are financing over seven years (or leasing), then would understand the stretch many are making to be environmentally conscious by driving the only long range capable EV.
I have no doubt in my mind that they are thinking this...after all, according to their mantra, the $150,000 figure makes one "rich".
mknox
Well-Known Member
Mike, I respectfully disagree about them "not thinking all Tesla owners are paying cash.
Let's face it...they equate the total sale price of the vehicle being paid in full when we buy it...hence their use of the $150,000 figure being the cut off...if those clowns understood that the majority of Tesla owners are financing over seven years (or leasing), then would understand the stretch many are making to be environmentally conscious by driving the only long range capable EV.
I have no doubt in my mind that they are thinking this...after all, according to their mantra, the $150,000 figure makes one "rich".
I know that when I was involved with the provincial energy efficiency rebate programs, a lot of time and effort was put in to EM&V work to determine the effectiveness of the incentives, determine free-ridership levels and so forth. Some efficiency upgrades were so obvious, with such short-term paybacks that incentives were reduced or eliminated, and a lot of people were unhappy. We see that with the ever reducing "premium" paid under the microFIT solar program as capital costs come down.
My big issue is trying to assume what the government is thinking. I have heard they have "some" data to support the reduced need for incentive payments, but wish they would be a bit more transparent and release their study data. It's easy for us all to make assumptions, especially if partisan views start coming in, but at the end of the day, I want to see the data.
Ktowntslafan
Member
Why reinvent the wheel? Norway is the best practice globally:
The head of the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association, says the country's system works because “it’s constructed to make the least-polluting cars the most attractive.”
THOMAS HAUGERSVEEN FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html?referer=
The head of the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association, says the country's system works because “it’s constructed to make the least-polluting cars the most attractive.”
THOMAS HAUGERSVEEN FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html?referer=
Last edited:
Similar threads
