Ignore works.
Geez this thread came to life with a bang today after a few days dormant!@
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Performance Upgrade Price Change!
- Thread starter spesler
- Start date
Geez this thread came to life with a bang today after a few days dormant!@
If you are going to chew gum in class, please give everyone a stick!
Perry
Active Member
Yes I mean I would have ordered a year later like 3rd or 4th quarter 2019 and maybe even benefited from air suspension which has been reported to come in 2019.
Perry
Active Member
Really tired of this argument. It made no sense the 12th time you made it and it doesn't the 13th.
Perry
Active Member
Yes of course. Knightshade, take notes, you are in the minority and you don't get it.
Last edited:
Perry
Active Member
Yes he said "too much too soon" then in that same thread, I think it was the very next tweet after this one said "will take corrective action".
He took corrective action for P3D+. Where is the corrective action for P3D-? The only way you can construe that he meant only corrective action for P3D+ was due is to believe that the "to much too soon" only applies to P3D+. But that price change equally affected the P3D- because all of a sudden paying the price we paid, new buyers got 5K more of parts at retail value. Case closed.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I don't. I think ONLY considering one specific circumstance either way is crazy as a way to judge any cost or loss here.
That's my point.
The folks saying "Every P owner lost exactly 5k in value and and deserves a check, but only P owners!" are factually wrong.
The folks who most obviously lost value, who have the best argument, are P+ owners. They literally paid 5k for something that's now free. So them wanting the 5k back makes at least some sense... (ignoring that depreciation means the + package isn't worth 5k anymore the moment it drives off the lot, tax, etc)
Tesla chose to point out those folks still got FUSC that new owners don't- and when the owners were unhappy with that they offered to let you get a 5k refund of the + package if you gave up FUSC.
That still left P+ owners in a slightly better position than new owners- they both paid roughly the same, for roughly the same car, but older owners still got free lifetime (transferable) data too, that new owners don't. So they're basically settled.
P- owners then got mad, because the option they not only did not pay 5k for, but that they actively chose at order time to not get was now "free"
This makes less sense... it's a package you already didn't want, and didn't pay for- but you think you're now owed a "refund" on a thing you didn't even buy. As I pointed out- AWD and RWD owners didn't pay for it either- where's their refund?
"But our cars lost value, because the next step up car is cheaper!"
This is called assuming facts not in evidence.
And with that same logic AWD cars lost value, since the "next step up" car lost value to them too... ditto RWD owners...which then trickles down to MR owners, and so on...
But if someone has actual #s to support the claim I'd like to see em (it'd likely be years before we have that though, you'd need a decent # of sold-as-used Ps of both types to judge).
As pointed out- the 20s are a downgrade in the eyes of many... so are the brakes for those who don't track the car (or intend to use better aftermarket ones)... the only objectively better thing right now is track mode.
And Elon claimed the P- would get that eventually- so if it does that goes away too... (if it doesn't then I agree there's a MUCH better argument P- owners are owed "something" and we can debate what).
Plus- of course- P- owners still get FUSC, which refund-owners don't, and new P owners don't.... so claiming they should get 5k AND keep FUSC (which I've seen suggested from both + and - owners is even more nonsensical.
Why would it need to be in the first few months? Regardless of GAP, the "replacement cost" on the + car dropped by 5k.
Unless you have evidence the - dropped by that much in the used market the "same thing" argument fails....(and as I say I doubt it did- because assuming TM comes to the - it's going to be a very desirable car to many in the used market... moreso than the + to some folks.
Nor did anybody do so. So again you're not making much sense.
P- owners paid the same as new + owners. To get a car without the boat anchors or expensive-but-not-awesome brakes....Plus get FUSC and free lifetime data that the new owners don't.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry it still makes no sense to you that people who didn't pay for something don't have much an argument asking for the money they didn't pay to be refunded.
I'm not sure how much simpler I can explain that though.
I didn't realize it was an election?
Tesla appears to "get it" the same way I do though- hence the policy of only refunding 5k to people who paid them 5k
Given that the action only happened for the P3D+ it seems exceedingly clear that's what he meant.
Or do you think Elon couldn't have done it for other owners if he "meant" to? Can you explain why that would make any sense?
Clearly not.
Because those parts aren't "worth" 5k.
One way you can tell is Tesla not only changed the price on them from 5k to $0, they offered to give back 5k to anybody who HAD paid 5k for them.
(But not to people who hadn't)
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Good to see this thread active again. Need to get to 200 pages.
I am looking forward to hearing about the people who got the P- with FUSC but didn't get lifetime data. We really can't forget about the downtrodden.
It depends on whether you're using autopilot or not.
I am looking forward to hearing about the people who got the P- with FUSC but didn't get lifetime data. We really can't forget about the downtrodden.
It depends on whether you're using autopilot or not.
Perry
Active Member
This is semantics. Calling something with a different name just to make it sound like you got some valid argument. You have none. You sound like a pro abortionist calling them selves "pro choice" because its more palatable. In the end its still killing a life just like this is killing the value of a P3D- by 5K or at the very least the perceived value of the + parts.
And this is not even taking into account the unfairness of it all by giving only some the promised "corrective action" as Elon put it and not others. I would have been OK with no one getting the "corrective action" and learned the lesson to never be a Tesla early adopter but to play favorites like this is disgusting and makes me thing a lot less of Tesla as a company. I will not be buying another Tesla unless they make this right. By the time I'll need a new car there will be other players to consider so I won't need to consider Tesla again.
Knightshade, you're ignoring several things, e.g.:
1. The hardware components of the PUP almost certainly cost more than $5,000 since the wheels alone cost $4,000 and the brakes and shocks etc will add substantially to that. It is obvious that if Tesla is now saving production costs, they are saving them on everything that's in the P3D-, not on the PUP (which is made in smaller batches than any of the components on the P3D-/AWD).
2. The P3D- has been substantially devalued by the fact alone that it is discontinued only two months after it came out, and when you try to sell it in the future it will be harder because a tiny fraction of P3Ds will not have the bigger wheels, brakes, spoiler, etc on them and won't be what buyers are looking for
3. The P3D- has been further devalued by the recent revelation that the whole lot sorting thing was dishonest advertising by Tesla and that it is in fact identical hardware-wise (same parts including inverters and motors) to the regular AWD. This is further corroborated by AWD buyers receiving their cars as fully unlocked P3D- due to Tesla error, and P3D- buyers getting theirs as AWD, just to seem them upgraded via software push.
4. The P3D- has been further devalued (e.g., in eyes of potential future buyers) by Tesla indicating on multiple occasions that PUP is necessary to use Track Mode safely and sustainably, e.g., by saying in Aug that it wouldn't even come to the cars, phasing the version of the car out completely, and still not having pushed Track Mode to any of them. This is despite Tesla making no disclaimer whatsoever that the car would not be fully and immediately Track Mode eligible when they widely advertised it as a "performance feature" early this summer.
So I completely disagree with you on the argument for refund being clearer for the P3D+. In fact one might argue that it is clearer for P3D-. But the only thing we know for sure is that we now know that Tesla's pricing structure for the P3D-/+ never made any sense, was potentially fraudulent toward us customers (in that Elon advertised substantially better hardware, when the parts catalogues show motors and inverters are identical) and they should correct it now. Btw AWD will almost certainly get performance unlock for $5k in the future, so that giving P3D- owners $5k refund now (or installing PUP for free or price of the Aeros) would be the most equitable thing they could do for everyone.
Again posting the link to the petition for P3D- owners to sign, with 100+ signatures already in it.
1. The hardware components of the PUP almost certainly cost more than $5,000 since the wheels alone cost $4,000 and the brakes and shocks etc will add substantially to that. It is obvious that if Tesla is now saving production costs, they are saving them on everything that's in the P3D-, not on the PUP (which is made in smaller batches than any of the components on the P3D-/AWD).
2. The P3D- has been substantially devalued by the fact alone that it is discontinued only two months after it came out, and when you try to sell it in the future it will be harder because a tiny fraction of P3Ds will not have the bigger wheels, brakes, spoiler, etc on them and won't be what buyers are looking for
3. The P3D- has been further devalued by the recent revelation that the whole lot sorting thing was dishonest advertising by Tesla and that it is in fact identical hardware-wise (same parts including inverters and motors) to the regular AWD. This is further corroborated by AWD buyers receiving their cars as fully unlocked P3D- due to Tesla error, and P3D- buyers getting theirs as AWD, just to seem them upgraded via software push.
4. The P3D- has been further devalued (e.g., in eyes of potential future buyers) by Tesla indicating on multiple occasions that PUP is necessary to use Track Mode safely and sustainably, e.g., by saying in Aug that it wouldn't even come to the cars, phasing the version of the car out completely, and still not having pushed Track Mode to any of them. This is despite Tesla making no disclaimer whatsoever that the car would not be fully and immediately Track Mode eligible when they widely advertised it as a "performance feature" early this summer.
So I completely disagree with you on the argument for refund being clearer for the P3D+. In fact one might argue that it is clearer for P3D-. But the only thing we know for sure is that we now know that Tesla's pricing structure for the P3D-/+ never made any sense, was potentially fraudulent toward us customers (in that Elon advertised substantially better hardware, when the parts catalogues show motors and inverters are identical) and they should correct it now. Btw AWD will almost certainly get performance unlock for $5k in the future, so that giving P3D- owners $5k refund now (or installing PUP for free or price of the Aeros) would be the most equitable thing they could do for everyone.
Again posting the link to the petition for P3D- owners to sign, with 100+ signatures already in it.
Last edited:
Perry
Active Member
Knightshade has a way of doing that with his disempathetic argumentative style. He won't admit even in the smallest possible way that the other side might have the slightest of points.
ken830
Model S 85, Model 3 Performance, Model X LongRange
Knightshade.. you have read more carefully.... I could point out several examples, but here's just one:
JeffK said this:
He's saying there is a measurable depreciation for cars with PUP and no measurable depreciation for car without PUP. He gives the example of the gap insurance total case.
My response was this:
I give just one example where it is measurable. How can someone claim that it's not measurable when it's clearly measurable. Logically, it's immeasurable if it can't be measured in any circumstance. If you can measure it in some situations, then it is measurable. If you lose money/value in some situation, but not all, then you've lost something.
And then you come along and say this:
Your problem with my argument is that I'm only considering resale value (which I'm not). But then you're completely okay with JeffK only considering gap insurance total case?
And when I call you out on this, you respond with
What is your point? Do you think I'm crazy for only considering the resale value? Do you think JeffK is crazy for only considering the Gap Insurance total case? Because that's all he's using to argue that it's immeasurable and you're not calling him out! Effff....!!!!!! I think I broke my keyboard typing this.
JeffK said this:
He's saying there is a measurable depreciation for cars with PUP and no measurable depreciation for car without PUP. He gives the example of the gap insurance total case.
My response was this:
I give just one example where it is measurable. How can someone claim that it's not measurable when it's clearly measurable. Logically, it's immeasurable if it can't be measured in any circumstance. If you can measure it in some situations, then it is measurable. If you lose money/value in some situation, but not all, then you've lost something.
And then you come along and say this:
Your problem with my argument is that I'm only considering resale value (which I'm not). But then you're completely okay with JeffK only considering gap insurance total case?
And when I call you out on this, you respond with
What is your point? Do you think I'm crazy for only considering the resale value? Do you think JeffK is crazy for only considering the Gap Insurance total case? Because that's all he's using to argue that it's immeasurable and you're not calling him out! Effff....!!!!!! I think I broke my keyboard typing this.
Perry
Active Member
Nope, the 14th time didn't do it either.
How about not making it the 15th time.
Perry
Active Member
Definitely two camps here.
1. Those that bought the P3D Stealth and feel cheated that they aren’t getting compensation since P3D+ got a $5k refund (trade for giving up FUSC if you prefer) and P3D Stealth doesn’t get the same benefit of the lower price or a trade for giving up FUSC.
2. Those that don’t have the P3D Stealth and can’t see that those that did pay the extra $11k for the software unlock for an extra 1 sec 0-60 feel cheated and want some compensation.
I’m in camp 1. Love my car and didn’t want the PUP, but definitely feel cheated that Tesla is giving $5k back to PUP’s and offering us nothing.
Yes, @Knightshade, I get it, we didn’t want PUP and didn’t pay for it, but still doesn’t sting that we get nothing.
1. Those that bought the P3D Stealth and feel cheated that they aren’t getting compensation since P3D+ got a $5k refund (trade for giving up FUSC if you prefer) and P3D Stealth doesn’t get the same benefit of the lower price or a trade for giving up FUSC.
2. Those that don’t have the P3D Stealth and can’t see that those that did pay the extra $11k for the software unlock for an extra 1 sec 0-60 feel cheated and want some compensation.
I’m in camp 1. Love my car and didn’t want the PUP, but definitely feel cheated that Tesla is giving $5k back to PUP’s and offering us nothing.
Yes, @Knightshade, I get it, we didn’t want PUP and didn’t pay for it, but still doesn’t sting that we get nothing.
I think Knightshade's right that P3D- owners' asking for a "refund" is nonsensical to a degree - because there's no payment to be refunded.
On the other hand, I think P3D- owners are entitled to want some kind of compensation.
After all, a P3D- owner has paid the exact same amount as a P3D+ owner who received the refund, but the P3D+ owner has received more "stuff." (wheels, brakes, track mode)
The symmetrical offer for P3D- offer should be: give up FUSC in exchange for the P3D+ upgrades - wheels, brakes, track mode, spoiler.
Money in lieu of this would be nice, but not necessary.
IMO it's the total lack of acknowledgment of P3D- buyers that is disappointing - we made a bigger leap of faith than the P3D+ buyers - we paid $11,000 for a software switch. It feels like this is not being recognized.
BTW: If offered the wheels & brakes, I would still choose not to upgrade, but I'd at least feel that I was given a reasonable alternative. I'd opt for track mode if it's possible to separate that from the hardware, but wouldn't be too put out if they say it can't.
2nd BTW: I think another option which would have been less offensive to me would have been to just screw everybody: no refunds for anyone - you have to buy at the price offered at the time. But for whatever reason, they chose to open that can of worms...
On the other hand, I think P3D- owners are entitled to want some kind of compensation.
After all, a P3D- owner has paid the exact same amount as a P3D+ owner who received the refund, but the P3D+ owner has received more "stuff." (wheels, brakes, track mode)
The symmetrical offer for P3D- offer should be: give up FUSC in exchange for the P3D+ upgrades - wheels, brakes, track mode, spoiler.
Money in lieu of this would be nice, but not necessary.
IMO it's the total lack of acknowledgment of P3D- buyers that is disappointing - we made a bigger leap of faith than the P3D+ buyers - we paid $11,000 for a software switch. It feels like this is not being recognized.
BTW: If offered the wheels & brakes, I would still choose not to upgrade, but I'd at least feel that I was given a reasonable alternative. I'd opt for track mode if it's possible to separate that from the hardware, but wouldn't be too put out if they say it can't.
2nd BTW: I think another option which would have been less offensive to me would have been to just screw everybody: no refunds for anyone - you have to buy at the price offered at the time. But for whatever reason, they chose to open that can of worms...
