Performance Upgrade Price Change!

[Msjulie]

This is exactly the point that many of us have been trying to make. The price new customers pay has nothing to do with you.

Uh duh...

That does not dismiss the unhappiness of the Stealth Performance buyers response to the Elon-tweeted refund for Performance buyers, a subset who were offered a price adjustment and the others - pound sand

Again, not related...

 

[JeffK]

That doesn't help anyone who already bought one, math or otherwise

It's about feelings... see the post you originally responded to

 

[Knightshade]

Uh duh...

That does not dismiss the unhappiness of the Stealth Performance buyers response to the Elon-tweeted refund for Performance buyers, a subset who were offered a price adjustment and the others - pound sand

Again, not related...

The P3+ buyers were offered a conditional (give up FUSC being the condition) refund of the $5000 They paid for the + package

P3- buyers are not of course, since they didn't spend that 5k in the first place to be refunded to them.


As someone else brilliantly pointed out- Completely unrelated group of people and math

 

[Msjulie]

The P3+ buyers were offered a conditional (give up FUSC being the condition) refund of the $5000 They paid for the + package

P3- buyers are not of course, since they didn't spend that 5k in the first place to be refunded to them.

As someone else brilliantly pointed out- Completely unrelated group of people and math

Ok once again: Elon said folks paid too much, $5k to be exact and offered a refund to those folks. Unless someone can prove that those optional different parts were literally a zero cost difference against the stealth Performance car's configuration, stealth buyers did pay (whatever true cost for different hardware) more than the plus folks did and were not offered anything.

And yes it is about fairness; Tesla would likely still have gotten grief from stealth owners but they could have acknowledged the above truth (we paid the same as those that got other parts but no special parts) and tossed us a bone. How about those < $40 retail (what mine cost from Amazon) worth of $150 priced aluminum pedal covers? Something..

Folks should stop saying the stealth folks didn't pay.. clearly they did because when you apply the refund, the price is the same but equipment is not for the same timeframe of buyers... that is a fact.

Also you may recall I thought the refund was a bad idea in the beginning, everything has price changes if generally with a more sane process. I couldn't give 2 sheets what a new buyer has to pay for any Tesla, the less they cost the less ICE cars (hopefully) on the road.

 

[Knightshade]

Ok once again: Elon said folks paid too much, $5k to be exact and offered a refund to those folks.

Well, no, he didn't say any of that.... (the nearest he came was suggesting the price reduction was "too much too soon" with no refund mentioned at all in that discussion).

The refunds came up a bit later as follows-

Initially he defended the difference by pointing out "old" owners got free supercharging and the 5k-cheaper folks don't (and indeed that he'd extend the FUSC to anyone who paid the 5k but didn't have FUSC).

When Fred pointed out FUSC wasn't worth 5k (indeed, Tesla themselves only charged 2k when they sold it alone) Elon replied to say FUSC was underprced at the time, but if + buyers want that 5k refunded by giving up FUSC, he would do that.

Which has literally nothing at all to do with people who never paid that 5k in the first place.

The folks who never paid 5k in the first place are, as you pointed out a- Completely unrelated group of people and math

Unless someone can prove that those optional different parts were literally a zero cost difference against the stealth Performance car's configuration, stealth buyers did pay (whatever true cost for different hardware) more than the plus folks did and were not offered anything.

No, they didn't. Because they're a Completely unrelated group of people and math.

Unless you think AWD buyers now deserve $5000 back too. I mean they ALSO chose NOT to buy the $5000 package- so they're just as entitled to a refund of something they chose not to buy, but it now free, right?

And yes it is about fairness;

Agreed.

Refunding ONLY the - owners for parts they didn't pay for in the first place would, indeed, be unfair.

Much more fair to only offer a refund to people who actually spent that money.

Folks should stop saying the stealth folks didn't pay.. clearly they did because when you apply the refund, the price is the same but equipment is not for the same timeframe of buyers... that is a fact.

Well, not really, no it's not.

You still get FUSC and the refunders don't... (and new buyers get neither FUSC nor free lifetime data for that matter).

But the easiest way to tell you didn't pay the $5000 being refunded is you literally didn't pay the $5000 extra to be refunded.

Neither did AWD or RWD owners- who aren't screaming for refunds.

I couldn't give 2 sheets what a new buyer has to pay for any Tesla, the less they cost the less ICE cars (hopefully) on the road.

So you only care what old buyers had to pay?

 

[juanmedina]

Well, no, he didn't say any of that.... (the nearest he came was suggesting the price reduction was "too much too soon" with no refund mentioned at all in that discussion).

The refunds came up a bit later as follows-

Initially he defended the difference by pointing out "old" owners got free supercharging and the 5k-cheaper folks don't (and indeed that he'd extend the FUSC to anyone who paid the 5k but didn't have FUSC).

When Fred pointed out FUSC wasn't worth 5k (indeed, Tesla themselves only charged 2k when they sold it alone) Elon replied to say FUSC was underprced at the time, but if + buyers want that 5k refunded by giving up FUSC, he would do that.

Which has literally nothing at all to do with people who never paid that 5k in the first place.

The folks who never paid 5k in the first place are, as you pointed out a- Completely unrelated group of people and math





No, they didn't. Because they're a Completely unrelated group of people and math.

Unless you think AWD buyers now deserve $5000 back too. I mean they ALSO chose NOT to buy the $5000 package- so they're just as entitled to a refund of something they chose not to buy, but it now free, right?




Agreed.

Refunding ONLY the - owners for parts they didn't pay for in the first place would, indeed, be unfair.

Much more fair to only offer a refund to people who actually spent that money.





Well, not really, no it's not.

You still get FUSC and the refunders don't... (and new buyers get neither FUSC nor free lifetime data for that matter).

But the easiest way to tell you didn't pay the $5000 being refunded is you literally didn't pay the $5000 extra to be refunded.

Neither did AWD or RWD owners- who aren't screaming for refunds.





So you only care what old buyers had to pay?

Because they didn't suffer a $5000 price adjustment and they don't have FUSC to bargain with.

 

[Msjulie]

Neither did AWD or RWD owners- who aren't screaming for refunds.

AWD < Performance, AWD was $4k, or $5k or $6k I think over time and people were understandable less than pleased when they paid the larger #

Performance was $11k MORE on top AWD cost so again, AWD completely unrelated..

 

[Msjulie]

Well, no, he didn't say any of that.... (the nearest he came was suggesting the price reduction was "too much too soon" with no refund mentioned at all in that discussion).

I did not specify the when or the how - doesn't matter. Pointless arguing going on here. Folks who disagree tend to be the folks that paid $5k and then got the option to get it back and oddly seem to have a screw-it attitude towards the other folks ...

I'm done with all this, thanks for playing. You won't convince me Tesla (Elon, whomever) didn't make a big blunder in all of this nor will you convince me that getting an adjustment offered to a subset of folks but not others isn't a sh*t decision as well.

NOTICE I am not saying how much of an adjustment or the exact calendar date or any other irrelevant specifics about the fact an adjustment was offered.

 

[Knightshade]

AWD < Performance, AWD was $4k, or $5k or $6k I think over time and people were understandable less than pleased when they paid the larger #

Performance was $11k MORE on top AWD cost so again, AWD completely unrelated..

And Performance + was $5,000 MORE on top of P. P3- completely unrelated.

Because they didn't suffer a $5000 price adjustment.

Neither did P3- buyers. Their car was discontinued, not price adjusted.

 

[juanmedina]

And Performance + was $5,000 MORE on top of P. P3- completely unrelated.




Neither did P3- buyers. Their car was discontinued, not price adjusted.

I wish I could ban you .... haha

Even worse.

 

[ken830]

Tesla shouldn't have lowered the price so drastically so soon. But since they did, they shouldn't have refunded anyone. But since they did, they should offer the refund to everyone affected.

Elon's logic was that the $5k price difference is justified because Free Unlimited Supercharging is worth $5k. All Model 3 Performance cars before the price drop got the Free Unlimited Supercharging. So, why only a subset of them gets to trade that in for $5k? If Free Unlimited Supercharging is truly worth the $5k that Elon claims, then it should be offered to everyone.

Cars without PUP should be offered the same deal, or at least a significantly equivalent deal like at-cost upgrade to PUP, or partial refund and partial PUP hardware, or transferable Free Unlimited Supercharging, or pretty much anything would be better than nothing.

Elon said he will make things right in his Tweet. Giving only a subset of owners the option not only didn't make things right, it made things worse. Doing nothing would've sucked, but also would've been more fair to everyone -- price changes, suck it up. Going back in time to adjust some people's pricing/config but not others is just weird and unfair.

 

[JeffK]

Tesla shouldn't have lowered the price so drastically so soon. But since they did, they shouldn't have refunded anyone. But since they did, they should offer the refund to everyone affected.

Elon's logic was that the $5k price difference is justified because Free Unlimited Supercharging is worth $5k. All Model 3 Performance cars before the price drop got the Free Unlimited Supercharging. So, why only a subset of them gets to trade that in for $5k? If Free Unlimited Supercharging is truly worth the $5k that Elon claims, then it should be offered to everyone.

Cars without PUP should be offered the same deal, or at least a significantly equivalent deal like at-cost upgrade to PUP, or partial refund and partial PUP hardware, or transferable Free Unlimited Supercharging, or pretty much anything would be better than nothing.

Elon said he will make things right in his Tweet. Giving only a subset of owners the option not only didn't make things right, it made things worse. Doing nothing would've sucked, but also would've been more fair to everyone -- price changes, suck it up. Going back in time to adjust some people's pricing/config but not others is just weird and unfair.

The thing is there's measurable depreciation for the people who paid the $5000 extra. Whereas there's not for those who didn't.

For example, if you don't have gap insurance and your car was totalled. You'd lose the normal depreciation plus the $5000 since you can buy a brand new car for $5000 less. This is not the case for non-pup because the price of a new Model 3 Performance is the same (it just comes with more stuff).

 

[ken830]

The thing is there's measurable depreciation for the people who paid the $5000 extra. Whereas there's not for those who didn't.

For example, if you don't have gap insurance and your car was totalled. You'd lose the normal depreciation plus the $5000 since you can buy a brand new car for $5000 less. This is not the case for non-pup because the price of a new Model 3 Performance is the same (it just comes with more stuff).

I'm not too concerned with deprecation as a measure of fairness... but I still can't understand this "no measurable depreciation" claim? For example, if I were to sell my vehicle, would a buyer value my vehicle the same as an identical vehicle with PUP? Because we now paid the same amount ($64K) for a vehicle with less OEM equipment. Of course not. Would my vehicle be valued higher if new cars with PUP costs $69K instead of $64k? Of course. That's measurable.

 

[caskater47]

I'm not too concerned with deprecation as a measure of fairness... but I still can't understand this "no measurable depreciation" claim? For example, if I were to sell my vehicle, would a buyer value my vehicle the same as an identical vehicle with PUP? Because we now paid the same amount ($64K) for a vehicle with less OEM equipment. Of course not. Would my vehicle be valued higher if new cars with PUP costs $69K instead of $64k? Of course. That's measurable.

Your logic doesn't work. If a product comes with parts at $64k now that only a week prior had those aspects missing at the same price that is a task measurable difference in value and cost. Tesla by discontinuing that configuration has made non PUP models nearly indistinguishable from an AWD. That's a 11k value loss. Once the aftermarket cracks the software to unlock speed limiting on AWD so that everyone can do 0-60 in 3.3s it will be even more apparent how these buyers were ripped off in order to give Tesla their biggest profit margin.

Simply put. The price drop affected every Performance model car, regardless of whether PUP hardware is installed or not. Period. When you remove a product from the market and replace it with a higher end product at the same price you instantly devalue all previously sold products at that price and above. That's basic economics people.

 

[ken830]

Your logic doesn't work. If a product comes with parts at $64k now that only a week prior had those aspects missing at the same price that is a task measurable difference in value and cost. Tesla by discontinuing that configuration has made non PUP models nearly indistinguishable from an AWD. That's a 11k value loss. Once the aftermarket cracks the software to unlock speed limiting on AWD so that everyone can do 0-60 in 3.3s it will be even more apparent how these buyers were ripped off in order to give Tesla their biggest profit margin.

Simply put. The price drop affected every Performance model car, regardless of whether PUP hardware is installed or not. Period. When you remove a product from the market and replace it with a higher end product at the same price you instantly devalue all previously sold products at that price and above. That's basic economics people.

So, did you quote the wrong person? Because it sounds like you're agreeing with me? Because I certainly agree with you (although I don't think AWD will get any kind of "uncorking").

 

[Knightshade]

I'm not too concerned with deprecation as a measure of fairness... but I still can't understand this "no measurable depreciation" claim?

He explained it- with a specific example regarding what insurance would give you if your car was totaled.

Which part of it was unclear to you, specifically?

For example, if I were to sell my vehicle, would a buyer value my vehicle the same as an identical vehicle with PUP? Because we now paid the same amount ($64K) for a vehicle with less OEM equipment. Of course not. Would my vehicle be valued higher if new cars with PUP costs $69K instead of $64k? Of course. That's measurable.

So- 2 problems with this-

1) It's ONLY considering resale value. During ownership however, you have FUSC, and he doesn't. Unless FUSC is worth $0 during ownership giving you a 5k refund makes no sense at all. (especially since, again, you didn't SPEND 5k in the first place that he did)

2) For some buyers your car WOULD be valued higher, because they don't WANT that "extra" OEM stuff. Unless you're suggesting the only reason anyone bought a P- was they were too poor to get the +, which is obviously nonsense. Some folks don't want 20" boat anchors and "upgraded" brakes that cost more to replace but don't add any value in street use for example.

Your logic doesn't work. If a product comes with parts at $64k now that only a week prior had those aspects missing at the same price that is a task measurable difference in value and cost.

See above

Tesla by discontinuing that configuration has made non PUP models nearly indistinguishable from an AWD.

...what?

They were already that way from the factory. Nothing about the physical config of the P- changed at all.

So that makes 0 sense.

That's a 11k value loss.

Again- 0 sense.

Once the aftermarket cracks the software to unlock speed limiting on AWD so that everyone can do 0-60 in 3.3s it will be even more apparent how these buyers were ripped off in order to give Tesla their biggest profit margin.

How long did it take the "aftermarket" to sell cracks for ludicrious mode on the S/X? Or Autopilot?

(hint: the answer is: never)

Not sure why you think the 3 will be different.

 

[pdxev]

These arguments are all really strange as they all involve assumption and perspectives. As it currently stands, these are the effective prices paid for the vehicles:

Performance Model 3 with upgraded tires, suspension, brakes, spoiler, pedals, and software upgraded Track Mode: $64K
Performance Model 3 Base: $64K

Now, typically I understand that prices can change, sometimes dramatically so. However, typically, one set of buyers are not offered a complete refund on their option purchase. This is a strange scenario that I do not think we have seen in automotive sales history. Can you imagine a similar BMW situation with the M3 and M3 Competition? 4 months after release BMW announces that it will discontinue the regular M3 and offer cash back to anybody that opted for the Competition. This move would likely just piss off a bunch of M3 buyers.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue for a refund. I'm not going to influence their crappy off the cuff decision making. I do want to offer up the opinion that this has been shitty customer relations and terrible communication across the board. I'll take my consolation prize of being one of the small group of Model 3s with unlimited supercharging and go home.

 

[Daniel in SD]

These arguments are all really strange as they all involve assumption and perspectives. As it currently stands, these are the effective prices paid for the vehicles:

Performance Model 3 with upgraded tires, suspension, brakes, spoiler, pedals, and software upgraded Track Mode: $64K
Performance Model 3 Base: $64K

You left out the part where the Base comes with FUSC. The suspension isn't "upgraded" it's just lower (shocks are the same part). The tires are also not really "upgraded", they're just different (MXM4s $277.70 each, PS4S $339.99 each). To people who want to track the car the brakes are an upgrade but to those who don't they're not. I haven't seen any information on how much downforce the spoiler adds and how much range it costs so hard to say if it's an upgrade or not. Are the pedals an upgrade or do they just look different? Track mode is coming to all Performance models.
Can you still order the P3D- off menu? I bet the price hasn't changed because it probably costs almost as much to build as the P3D+.

 

[tomas]

Uh duh...

That does not dismiss the unhappiness of the Stealth Performance buyers response to the Elon-tweeted refund for Performance buyers, a subset who were offered a price adjustment and the others - pound sand

Again, not related...

I get a kick when people disagree when someone says they are unhappy. How the heck can they know that someone is faking unhappiness???

 

[ken830]

He explained it- with a specific example regarding what insurance would give you if your car was totaled.

Which part of it was unclear to you, specifically?



So- 2 problems with this-

1) It's ONLY considering resale value. During ownership however, you have FUSC, and he doesn't. Unless FUSC is worth $0 during ownership giving you a 5k refund makes no sense at all. (especially since, again, you didn't SPEND 5k in the first place that he did)

2) For some buyers your car WOULD be valued higher, because they don't WANT that "extra" OEM stuff. Unless you're suggesting the only reason anyone bought a P- was they were too poor to get the +, which is obviously nonsense. Some folks don't want 20" boat anchors and "upgraded" brakes that cost more to replace but don't add any value in street use for example.

I feel like I'm living in a crazy world.

Why do you think it is so crazy to consider ONLY resale (I'm not doing that, btw) and it's not crazy for him to consider ONLY the gap insurance totaled claim situation? Even if both are valid, what is the more likely scenario... That I total the car within the first few months of ownership or resell the car sometime in the future?

And no one is claiming FUSC is worth $0. In fact, quite the opposite. We're claiming it's worth $5k, as Elon values it, so would like to get that back in exchange. Because when I total or resell the car, that non-transferable FUSC is literally worth nothing.

Your second point is so outrageous, I can't decide if you're serious or not. Of course some people would prefer the car without PUP, but no one would pay more for it in any normal circumstance. That's like saying some people prefer a Honda Civic over a Honda Civic SI because the don't need the performance of the SI and prefer the gas efficiency of the regular Civic. Well sure, but they sure as heck aren't going to pay more for it. And if you reply claiming people would, then I'm pretty sure I've argued with you before about the Earth being flat or round and if they faked the moon landing or not.