It makes sense. I hardly posted anything until now. Neat magic trick! Thanks for the insight!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
It makes sense. I hardly posted anything until now. Neat magic trick! Thanks for the insight!
I appreciate the polling effort. However, I did not understand the context of the question or what my answer might mean, so I did not answer the poll.
Naturally, I am very concerned about all of the seats, their comfort, and their functionality. However important they are, seats are only one of a number of factors that will determine whether the MX will meet my needs.
I am currently very confused re the options for the seats (including the standard configuration). I hope that Tesla is not going to require the purchase of a six or seven seat configuration. With all the talk about six and seven seat configurations, I am concerned that I will not have to pay for and/or lug around a sixth seat or a third row of seats.
I really want the second row of seats to fold flat.
I hope that the actual specs and options will be clarified by next week. As an MX production reservation holder (5000+), I will need to at least sit in a car (and preferably drive it) before I order.
Naturally, I am very concerned about all of the seats, their comfort, and their functionality. However important they are, seats are only one of a number of factors that will determine whether the MX will meet my needs.
I am currently very confused re the options for the seats (including the standard configuration). I hope that Tesla is not going to require the purchase of a six or seven seat configuration. With all the talk about six and seven seat configurations, I am concerned that I will not have to pay for and/or lug around a sixth seat or a third row of seats.
I really want the second row of seats to fold flat.
I hope that the actual specs and options will be clarified by next week. As an MX production reservation holder (5000+), I will need to at least sit in a car (and preferably drive it) before I order.
That's perfectly fine and you've spoken your mind very clearly.
The poll is asking how Tesla's latest design to solve the complaints of unfoldable second row seats would affect your buying decision.
You are right that it's only one among many factors that influence buying decisions.
To some, it's a huge factor, to others it's such a small one that has no influence at all.
It does not poll about how expensive the option is.
Currently, those designs are at no extra charge even though the web page says "Optional" but I wouldn't count on it in future until the website says those options are "included."
At current, Tesla has not released any information on fold-flat second row seats. Tesla reps verbally say they don't fold flat but do not say why nor do they say whether them seats could fold flat in future.
I think you'll have plenty of time to get all the info by the time Tesla call you up at P5000.
Last edited:
The answers are ambiguous. A better set of responses may have been:
- I will buy only the 7 seat configuration as it meets my needs even with non-folding seats.
- I would buy either version, but prefer the 7 seat configuration.
- I would buy either version, but prefer the 6 seat configuration.
- I would buy only the 6 seat version as the 7 seat configuration does not meet my needs.
- I will still wait for a second row with some different or additional functionality.
(And maybe an "I will not buy one under any circumstance" option, but those people can just not answer the poll...)
The first 3 answers are compatible with anyone who may have already committed. The 3rd answer would be someone who hopes they call back and offer the option to switch, though. The 4th option is the key for estimating how many new customers were enabled by the new configuration. The 5th option tells us if even the new configuration wasn't enough for some number of people.
- - - Updated - - -
If you read the question really closely and/or if you follow the thread then I think you can probably be led to that conclusion and answer this poll with the particular information you were looking for, but there are a lot of variables in that and many people may be answering without understanding exactly what you think their "Yes" vote really means. In particular, depending on how quickly people skim the question and how many assumptions they make based on their own decision process, "Yes" could mean "I would have bought either" to "I will only buy it because of the new option" to "I would have bought the 7, but I'm happier buying the 6 now".
In particular, there is nothing on the survey page that indicates that any of those 3 interpretations are the intended interpretation. As a test, I read it with an expectation of wanting to know various pieces of information and found that the question was compatible with how someone might word a question if they were looking for exactly the same information as I was (times 3 different approaches of "information" I was looking for). As such, your results could have reflected how many new sales opportunities just opened up, or they could have reflected the total number of both new and old happy/enabled buyers in the current state of affairs, or they could have reflected how many would switch their order if they had the choice regardless of prior buying decision. But, in reality it will reflect a randomized mix of any of those pieces of information.
This is reflective of one of my pet peeves in UI design. Too many uses of the standard "Yes, No, Cancel" dialog boxes result in unhappy customers because they weren't entirely clear on what the programmer thought the options meant. It is better to include the text of what will happen in the buttons such as "Replace file", "Save to new filename", "Cancel" for example. "Yes" may mean "Replace the file using the same name" if you read everything closely, but history shows that people don't always read that closely and analyze the question fully before clicking on a response...
- I will buy only the 7 seat configuration as it meets my needs even with non-folding seats.
- I would buy either version, but prefer the 7 seat configuration.
- I would buy either version, but prefer the 6 seat configuration.
- I would buy only the 6 seat version as the 7 seat configuration does not meet my needs.
- I will still wait for a second row with some different or additional functionality.
(And maybe an "I will not buy one under any circumstance" option, but those people can just not answer the poll...)
The first 3 answers are compatible with anyone who may have already committed. The 3rd answer would be someone who hopes they call back and offer the option to switch, though. The 4th option is the key for estimating how many new customers were enabled by the new configuration. The 5th option tells us if even the new configuration wasn't enough for some number of people.
- - - Updated - - -
If you read the question really closely and/or if you follow the thread then I think you can probably be led to that conclusion and answer this poll with the particular information you were looking for, but there are a lot of variables in that and many people may be answering without understanding exactly what you think their "Yes" vote really means. In particular, depending on how quickly people skim the question and how many assumptions they make based on their own decision process, "Yes" could mean "I would have bought either" to "I will only buy it because of the new option" to "I would have bought the 7, but I'm happier buying the 6 now".
In particular, there is nothing on the survey page that indicates that any of those 3 interpretations are the intended interpretation. As a test, I read it with an expectation of wanting to know various pieces of information and found that the question was compatible with how someone might word a question if they were looking for exactly the same information as I was (times 3 different approaches of "information" I was looking for). As such, your results could have reflected how many new sales opportunities just opened up, or they could have reflected the total number of both new and old happy/enabled buyers in the current state of affairs, or they could have reflected how many would switch their order if they had the choice regardless of prior buying decision. But, in reality it will reflect a randomized mix of any of those pieces of information.
This is reflective of one of my pet peeves in UI design. Too many uses of the standard "Yes, No, Cancel" dialog boxes result in unhappy customers because they weren't entirely clear on what the programmer thought the options meant. It is better to include the text of what will happen in the buttons such as "Replace file", "Save to new filename", "Cancel" for example. "Yes" may mean "Replace the file using the same name" if you read everything closely, but history shows that people don't always read that closely and analyze the question fully before clicking on a response...
CarlK
Active Member
Tam, I wasn't trying to criticize your effort but I got the same feeling as flar has. The way the survey was constructed and the lead questions stated seem to assume everyone taking the survey prefers bench seat that folds flat. when the person accepts the 2 seat configuration it's only because it's a good enough compromise.
I'm no poll scientist but something more objective without any presumptions of people's preferences like flar presented would be more informative.
I'm no poll scientist but something more objective without any presumptions of people's preferences like flar presented would be more informative.
Last edited:
Where's the option to use the middle space for the fish tank instead of cargo? These surveys are so biased..
I am sorry.
The poll is not comprehensive.
It narrowly focuses on sales figure.
It doesn't care why you buy the car.
It wants to know whether the last intervention would lead to better sales figure or worse.
The earliest intervention was the prototype with 7 seat configuration and all fold flat rear rows. I assume that would attract those who want 3 surf boards and other stuff straight right inside the Model X.
The second intervention was the Signature Model X with 7 seat configuration and only the 3rd row fold flat. There were threads about this but it looks like there are more people keeping their reservations than any vocal numbers of people threaten that they would cancel their reservations.
There's no need to include that in this current poll if we already know the answer.
Now, we've got a third intervention: The design from second intervention is still there but now you've got a new option of taking off the middle seat of non-foldable second row. I don't hear an overwhelming objection in this round.
Thus, the poll is to confirm that the third intervention still maintains more sales than anti-sales.
If the sales figures are not hurt, then there's no need to worry about the latest intervention.
It doesn't matter whether people buy because of the latest intervention as long as they buy, even for other reasons.
For example, if the latest intervention is putting a smiley screen saver when the car goes to sleep, then suddenly the answer is overwhelmingly to NOT purchasing the car, then that would make Tesla think twice about that last intervention.
However, with a smiley screen saver implementation, and the overwhelming answer is "I'll buy it" then smiley screen saver is not a threat even if people don't care about it or even just hate it so much or if the poll questions are misleading... you just can't argue with the increased sales figures!
Last edited:
My point was not that you weren't comprehensive. My point was that you were ambiguous. With poll answers that aren't clear sometimes people answer "Yes" or "No" for reasons other than what you intended.
I've seen plenty of people try to take real time polls of a room full of people and ask for a show of hands "Who agrees with that?" and "Who doesn't?" and invariably someone asks "Wait, do you mean we are agreeing with X, or with Y" and the person running the poll clarifies and suddenly half of the "agree" and "disagree" answers want to change their answer and they have to start over "OK, Who agrees that we should [... something very specific ...]"? "Now, who agrees that we shouldn't [... that same specific thing ...]" - and looking around the room suddenly everyone feels more confident in what they are voting for and often the numbers are quite different.
The reason I included a lot of answers in my suggestion was not because I thought you should be more comprehensive, but because I believe you want to weed out anyone who "would have bought the car anyway". From the wording of your poll, and from the available answers, it isn't clear that they shouldn't go ahead and answer "Yes", even though you are looking to find out if they specifically changed their mind due to the new option. You can either word the answer specifically, as in "Yes, I will buy it with the new config, and I would not have bought it before" so that they do not click on it, or even better, just include an option for them to tick off that indicates the situation they are in so that they don't even have to wonder. The answers then naturally let them self identify as "a person whose mind wasn't changed" and so you can be confident that they didn't contribute to the answers that demonstrate a mind that did change. It doesn't require them to read the entire thread where the poll was introduced, it doesn't require them to read every word in the question very carefully and be 100% on board with what your vague "Yes" and "No" meant, they simply see that option and think "That's me!" and you've categorized them out of the part of your poll that is more related to your real question.
It makes the poll more reliable for finding a true bead on who was swayed by the new config...
In fiinal, I've got to agree with you. I am quite amateur when it comes to poll creation. I found your notes very interesting and instructive. I do appreciate that.
Your reading is the same as mine. As Mark Z pointed out in detail in communications with his Delivery Specialist, your above statement is correct.
The current design is: Either you have original middle seat or you permanently lose it forever.
The seat arrangement have to be done in the factory, NOT after delivery.
After delivery, unlike other SUVs, it's not user removable (or if you missed it it's not user assemble-capable.)
Subzero Weather Package do have built-in heater for all seats which might dissuade a user removable design.
Mark Z
Active Member
Tam is right, no option has been hinted for a user removable center seat. One challenge in the decision for the Six Seat Interior or the Seven Seat Interior is the exact description of how the three seat 2nd row moves forward and backward. One advisor this weekend could not explain "Independently operable" as shown in the text of the Design Studio. We must wait until the Launch Event for exact answers that can be provided after that time.
They must have looked at an old picture of prototype where all 2nd row seats were arranged randomly: one's forward, one's in reverse, one's neutral:
That was quick!
I didn't know that there's a limit of 100 responses for the free version.
The poll is now closed.
I know that many say the question and answers are biased, ambiguous and the result is meaningless, how about others:
The poll asked:
Model X prototype was shown with second row seats folded flat for cargo storage.
If they can no longer be folded flat but you can have an option of losing the middle seat for some of that purpose instead,
what would your buying decision be:
The answers:
I will buy it. 43.00% 43
–
No, I will not buy it. 27.00% 27
–
I am undecided 30.00% 30
![Z0kDx3r[1].jpg](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/attachments/z0kdx3r-1-jpg.95648/ "Z0kDx3r[1].jpg")
My interpretation is:
The cargo storage issue does raise a concern for some potential buyers.
The latest remedy offered by Tesla still may not pacify that group.
However, that group is not a majority according to the poll.
There are still more willing potential buyers than anti-sales group. Roughly 2:1 (43/27=1.59; rounded up to 2)
If it's the other way around (more anti-sales than buyers,) then I would be worried.
Thus, Tesla is on the right track for prosperity.
I didn't know that there's a limit of 100 responses for the free version.
The poll is now closed.
I know that many say the question and answers are biased, ambiguous and the result is meaningless, how about others:
The poll asked:
Model X prototype was shown with second row seats folded flat for cargo storage.
If they can no longer be folded flat but you can have an option of losing the middle seat for some of that purpose instead,
what would your buying decision be:
The answers:
I will buy it. 43.00% 43
–
No, I will not buy it. 27.00% 27
–
I am undecided 30.00% 30
My interpretation is:
The cargo storage issue does raise a concern for some potential buyers.
The latest remedy offered by Tesla still may not pacify that group.
However, that group is not a majority according to the poll.
There are still more willing potential buyers than anti-sales group. Roughly 2:1 (43/27=1.59; rounded up to 2)
If it's the other way around (more anti-sales than buyers,) then I would be worried.
Thus, Tesla is on the right track for prosperity.
Last edited:
