Performance Upgrade Price Change!

[caskater47]

Hate to disappoint buddy u are not an early adopter ..try owning one since 2012 ..u spent more time b*tchjng on this thread than enjoying what u have ..

You've had a Model 3 Performance since 2012? Are you Elon Musk's brother?

 

[P85_DA]

You've had a Model 3 Performance since 2012? Are you Elon Musk's brother?

No owned Tesla since than ..u signed your contract ..why are u acting like Tesla owes you more ?

 

[caskater47]

No owned Tesla since than ..u signed your contract ..why are u acting like Tesla owes you more ?

If you've actually followeed this thread then you already know the answer. If you didn't, search is your friend.

 

[whatthe2]

P3D stealth. Minus is BS

Ah yes, forgot that one. Probably the best name as I have no interest in the bigger wheels and red brakes.

 

[MXWing]

You're right. There's also a pretty easy way to fix this imo.

If this were my bussiness I would:

1. Give P3D+ buyers $5k refund. No strings attached.
2. Give P3D- buyers one of the following :
A. $5k refund. No strings attached.
B. Buyback the car for total price paid (including tax/title)
C. Free retrofit or replacement P3D+

Why would I do this?

It was less than two months since cars started being delivered. Most companies warrant initial quality for 60-90 days on products. That's standard market expectation.

A refund is an obvious low impact method to combat bad customer satisfaction.

Buyback/Retrofit/Replacement removes all deprecated vehicles from the road. It stabilizes the value and market by eliminating confusion and uncertainty amongst buyers. It provides additionally needed goodwill.

Further, if the worst case was that I had to produce two cars for every one I sold then that is cheaper than the hit I'll receive from the bad publicity, potential lawsuits, government oversight and liklihood of killing future sales as a result of my bad decision.

Could I get by without doing those things? Sure. Would I still become profitable if refused to be the good guy? Probably. Would I succeed in my goal to convert the world to electric and win the hearts and minds of consumers across the globe after having given my earliest adopters a severe beating to their wallet and goodwill? Not a chance...

I like your solutions. Make every P variant buyer happy. I would feel very whole under option 1 as would @brianman.

I also am a huge fan of standardizing all the P's. I'm a fan of standardization in general.

The only caveat with your solution is you expect Tesla to take 100% of the responsibility for everything. Should they depends on your POV.
Could they, we have no idea.

My solutions were my estimations of what I think Tesla will do. Not what I prefer obviously. I hope Tesla just comes across some huge money somehow and just writes the whole thing off like you are proposing.

A serious question I think we both should ask is why doesn't Tesla just do as you suggest? They have had sufficient time to digest feedback from many people.

I would like to rule out malice as a motivation. With that out, what's the reason?

Occams razor would say "Debilitating financial, legal, or x" reason for doing so.

 

[Roys3]

It’s useless to me as well due to me having it placing an order June 26th.

Considering you paid 5000 less, what do you expect over someone who paid 5000 more?

Everyone wants what is best for THEM.

Best for me is is 5000 goodwill credit while letting me keep FUSC being that early first adopter. Not expecting that. Will have to likely settle for the arbitrage difference between 5000 - SC used for life of car.

Not sure what you mean. I don't want anything "over someone who paid 5000 more". And I don't want only what's best for me.
- Sure you paid $5K for PUP - and got PUP - and got ripped when PUP became free - and will be compensated with a $5K refund - and I'm glad for you.

- Sure I went PUP-less - and got ripped when PUP became free - and ??? I paid more for a PUP-less car than the current buyers (and you after the rebate) pay for a full-featured car with track mode and everything.

I want what's best for everyone of us in the same situation. This should all be obvious this late in the thread...

 

[MXWing]

I want what's best for everyone of us in the same situation. This should all be obvious this late in the thread...

All of us except for Tesla's financials, liabilities or some other reason they can't pull an Oprah out of their ass and give free cars to everyone?

I'm going to have to start asking peoples occupation and business ownership experience to validate their knowledge of running companies.

 

[caskater47]

I would like to rule out malice as a motivation. With that out, what's the reason?

Occams razor would say "Debilitating financial, legal, or x" reason for doing so.

Unfortunately this is where my past experience and pessimism comes into play. I have yet to encounter any company that wasn't at least partially malicious. I can't think of a single company that was capable of doing the morally right thing. Even those with the best intentions tend to act selfishly at the end of the day. I have sat in many meetings iny career where an executive chooses to make a decision to screw over customers because doing otherwise would require effort on their part. Most company leaders always choose the path of least resistance. Sometimes that means purposeful malfeasance but more often its just gross negligence.

I would like to think you're right that Tesla's inaction is because of something financially crushing for them to implement my action plan but I have a hard time believing they sold that many P3Ds. However let's assume they did for a momenta. In that case I think that makes their mistakes all the more dangerous and in need of correction and likely in need of serious oversight.

 

[Roys3]

All of us except for Tesla's financials, liabilities or some other reason they can't pull an Oprah out of their ass and give free cars to everyone?

I'm going to have to start asking peoples occupation and business ownership experience to validate their knowledge of running companies.

"Pull an Oprah out of their ass"? Yeah, I'd hire you... And your outdated graph was VERY impressive!
- And yes, all of us - including we shareholders, and believers in Tesla's larger mission...
You seem to flop back and forth on what best you want, and for whom.

 

[MXWing]

Unfortunately this is where my past experience and pessimism comes into play. I have yet to encounter any company that wasn't at least partially malicious. I can't think of a single company that was capable of doing the morally right thing. Even those with the best intentions tend to act selfishly at the end of the day. I have sat in many meetings iny career where an executive chooses to make a decision to screw over customers because doing otherwise would require effort on their part. Most company leaders always choose the path of least resistance. Sometimes that means purposeful malfeasance but more often its just gross negligence.

I would like to think you're right that Tesla's inaction is because of something financially crushing for them to implement my action plan but I have a hard time believing they sold that many P3Ds. However let's assume they did for a momenta. In that case I think that makes their mistakes all the more dangerous and in need of correction and likely in need of serious oversight.

I agree with you that pessimism is often the default and accurate belief on why something so wrong happened. Since it is the default of experienced peoples, I made sure to say I don't believe this is the case here.

This is the reason why:

Elon could have said nothing and Tesla support could just stonewall indefinitely lowering rebellion and anger over time.

People who have the willingness and means to sue Tesla over $5,000 is pretty low. Best scenario is you have a case, AND YOU WIN - Tesla would have an NDA as part of it. Standard practice for all companies.

Tesla is still engaging, when contractually I don't think they have to. I think it is a positive sign.

Being in game theory, I have to struggle with asymmetric information situations all the time. They know more than me. You are way behind in a negotiation position. We don't know anything about what is going on in meetings.

My belief is Elon just said "We can't deal with this *sugar* right now. We'll get to it eventually but lets focus on the ramp."

FWIW, I have always favored the customer at personal costs, even if they were wrong just for goodwill. I'd love for Tesla to have a 500 mil Q4, and just throw a one time 50 Mil writedown just to thrill all of us. (Your proposed solutions)

"Pull an Oprah out of their ass"? Yeah, I'd hire you... And you're outdated graph was VERY impressive!
- And yes, everyone - including shareholders, and Tesla's mission in general...
You seem to flop back and forth on what best you want, and for whom.

Yes - it easy to tell Tesla to write checks. There is no free lunch anywhere. That's the "unofficial" fundamental theorem of Economics.

Tesla owes on all that debt + interest. To add on to that chart.

Q1 was BAD.
Q2 had record cash burn.
Tesla burns $739.5 million in cash on way to record 2nd-quarter loss
Q3 was great.. but questions linger. Can Q4 repeat or improve on Q3? What happens to gross margins with MR in the mix, etc.

My position is consistent - consider the big picture. Push too hard against Tesla, I'll tell you why Tesla can't just accommodate your interests.

Push too hard against the consumer, I'll tell you why and how Tesla could have handled things better.

It's not a simple situation. Tesla is damned if they do, damned if they don't.

 

[NathanielHrnblwr]

Tesla is damned if they do, damned if they don't. Refunding also sets precedence and poses challenges for future price changes. It's a shame Elon said they'd refund the difference, IMHO. What he likely thought was a goodwill gesture started a storm of unhappiness across various trims. He should have told Fred to suck it up, buttercup and enjoy his free roadster in 2020.

 

[Roys3]

Unfortunately this is where my past experience and pessimism comes into play. I have yet to encounter any company that wasn't at least partially malicious. I can't think of a single company that was capable of doing the morally right thing. Even those with the best intentions tend to act selfishly at the end of the day. I have sat in many meetings iny career where an executive chooses to make a decision to screw over customers because doing otherwise would require effort on their part. Most company leaders always choose the path of least resistance. Sometimes that means purposeful malfeasance but more often its just gross negligence.

I would like to think you're right that Tesla's inaction is because of something financially crushing for them to implement my action plan but I have a hard time believing they sold that many P3Ds. However let's assume they did for a momenta. In that case I think that makes their mistakes all the more dangerous and in need of correction and likely in need of serious oversight.

I think it's not too late for them to backpedal and bring the prices back to pre-gift levels. Embarrassing? Yes (and the track mode issue still needs to get sorted), but probably for the best.

Before this crazy price drop all was going pretty well in the Tesla community. Just admit the mistake and learn from it.

 

[caskater47]

I think it's not too late for them to backpedal and bring the prices back to pre-gift levels. Embarrassing? Yes (and the track mode issue still needs to get sorted), but probably for the best.

Before this crazy price drop all was going pretty well in the Tesla community. Just admit the mistake and learn from it.

Even if they go back on the pricing change I don't think it'll help them. The cat is already out of the bag.that they have no real intention in supporting P3D non-PUP in the future. If the original trim was to drive higher profit margin sales, the secret is out and nobody will buy it. There won't be many suckers out there to sell to.

Given what's happened I think they're going to have a difficult time recreating their Q3 success. The longer they wait to handle this situation amicably the less likely it is too.

 

[Roys3]

I agree with you that pessimism is often the default and accurate belief on why something so wrong happened. Since it is the default of experienced peoples, I made sure to say I don't believe this is the case here.

This is the reason why:

Elon could have said nothing and Tesla support could just stonewall indefinitely lowering rebellion and anger over time.

People who have the willingness and means to sue Tesla over $5,000 is pretty low. Best scenario is you have a case, AND YOU WIN - Tesla would have an NDA as part of it. Standard practice for all companies.

Tesla is still engaging, when contractually I don't think they have to. I think it is a positive sign.

Being in game theory, I have to struggle with asymmetric information situations all the time. They know more than me. You are way behind in a negotiation position. We don't know anything about what is going on in meetings.

My belief is Elon just said "We can't deal with this *sugar* right now. We'll get to it eventually but lets focus on the ramp."

FWIW, I have always favored the customer at personal costs, even if they were wrong just for goodwill. I'd love for Tesla to have a 500 mil Q4, and just throw a one time 50 Mil writedown just to thrill all of us. (Your proposed solutions)



Yes - it easy to tell Tesla to write checks. There is no free lunch anywhere. That's the "unofficial" fundamental theorem of Economics.

Tesla owes on all that debt + interest. To add on to that chart.

Q1 was BAD.
Q2 had record cash burn.
Tesla burns $739.5 million in cash on way to record 2nd-quarter loss
Q3 was great.. but questions linger. Can Q4 repeat or improve on Q3? What happens to gross margins with MR in the mix, etc.

My position is consistent - consider the big picture. Push too hard against Tesla, I'll tell you why Tesla can't just accommodate your interests.

Push too hard against the consumer, I'll tell you why and how Tesla could have handled things better.

It's not a simple situation. Tesla is damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Who's telling Tesla to write checks? I would never have decreased the price in the first place.

First a high-profile owner, Lambert?, felt abused. Then Elon offered to write checks.
Then P+ owners wanted to make sure they got those checks and the free charging became an issue.
Then P- owners said "Hey, wait a minute!" Then all hell broke loose...

Personally, my preferences are 1) Don't write any checks - get the price back to where it was before this mess.
Or, failing that: 2) I'll be happy with a fairly inexpensive-to-Tesla futuristic FSD option.
But that's just me... Others will want other things. Tesla needs to address this problem.

 

[happyzod]

So why can’t AWD owners ask to pay 4000 more for 3.5 second to make 3P- spec? Why can’t they have track mode?

Any pricing pressure on a higher level trim depresses prices for lower trims.

RWD owners have a legitimate beef as well.

Where does it end?

Tesla’s best possible action at this point is to say nothing and do nothing.

What’s you signed is what you signed.

Be thankful they are still entertaining something.

You keep ignoring the fact that AWD owners could not have cancelled their delivery AFTER free PUP was announced, re-ordered their car for the same exact price, and gotten the free upgrade. People avoided doing this because of the bait and switch tweet by Elon Musk. If P3D- owners cancelled, then those cars would not have been sold as Performance cars and probably would have been forced into a software downgrade and sold as AWD cars. That would cost Tesla $9000 per undelivered P3D-.

The P3D- right now is basically a software upgraded AWD. I believe this is already confirmed with this fiasco. I wouldn't be surprised if in a year or two the sport mode was offered as an upgrade for $4000. If any insane/ludicrous mode is offered it will probably be to P3D+ owners exclusively.

 

[Roys3]

Even if they go back on the pricing change I don't think it'll help them. The cat is already out of the bag.that they have no real intention in supporting P3D non-PUP in the future. If the original trim was to drive higher profit margin sales, the secret is out and nobody will buy it. There won't be many suckers out there to sell to.

Given what's happened I think they're going to have a difficult time recreating their Q3 success. The longer they wait to handle this situation amicably the less likely it is too.

You could well be right, but new top-of the-line Model 3 buyers might willing be suckers, if they know their long-waiting/long-suffering predecesors (us!) were suckered too.

Elon just has to convince them that excessive margins will be used for a good cause - like the low-end Model 3 ramp-up. He also has to state that the price at the top end will remain high until competition comes along. (Could be a long time!)

 

[P85_DA]

Refunding also sets precedence and poses challenges for future price changes.

This ^^ ..turns into this November 10 Price Changes Get Refund?

 

[Roys3]

This ^^ ..turns into this November 10 Price Changes Get Refund?

Wow! They really are throwing darts at the price board - lots of them!

They're hitting the $1000 up, and $1000 down, rings on the S and X boards now. Maybe they'll "improve" and get into the $5000 rings over there too?

Someone needs to take the darts away - or fire the dart throwers... The ever-changing price board should be viewed with time-smoothing and trend-recognizing glasses by top management, and good explainers need to explain the trends before taking numbers off the board and hitting customers with them...

 

[goodlucktj]

This ^^ ..turns into this November 10 Price Changes Get Refund?

Lol and that thread is quickly devolving into this one...only over $2k instead of $5k. My favorite quote so far:

It is a three step process if you've already taken delivery:
1. Get Fred Lambert to write a blog post
2. Rally the twitter mob
3. Browbeat Elon until he gives in (Fred is integral to this step)

 

[juanmedina]

Lol is Elon Musk fault in the end even if you want to point fingers at someone else