-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
But think of it this way: If I buy a model 3 on the low end, with the software lock on the battery, and Tesla is able to break even on that sale from a battery margin standpoint... Ok. But as Tesla's are supposed to be very reliable, and last many years that new model 3 will someday be sold used at whatever the typical depreciation is for the 3. When I sell my car, Tesla gets nothing, but the new owner gets a deal on a used Tesla, and decides to use the savings they got vs buying new to upgrade the car's battery and suddenly Tesla not only makes the upgrade fee, but makes a little extra because it costs more after the fact vs at time of order when new.
So it's a little boost to revenue long after the car is sold. They could do this with several options on the car (autopilot, etc). The car doesn't have all the newest features of a current build, but still has a lot more value inherently built in because you can upgrade it over the phone.
I agree. It'll be interesting to see how this pans out. But i wouldn't be that surprised if it turns out that a lot of people will realise that they actually don't need that much range. Especially in more densely populated areas with a dense Supercharger network.
And the Model S 60 to 75 kWh upgrade costs $11 000 here in Sweden, that's a lot of money for an upgrade which under normal circumstances will be 60 kWh to 67.5 kWh (100% vs 90% charge). I don't think that something similar will work for the Model 3 unless they cut the price in half, or more.
I think the it will be the battery and more that will arrive with software locked options.
The manufacturing cost savings of reducing build permutations shouldn't be underestimated.
Could explain why SC access isn't free as well.
Think of the difference to the whole M3 experience if whole chunks of features are enabled by software instead go build process.
Then think off the marketing options of "try it free for 30 days" afterwards or used car purchases that can still upgraded later?
The manufacturing cost savings of reducing build permutations shouldn't be underestimated.
Could explain why SC access isn't free as well.
Think of the difference to the whole M3 experience if whole chunks of features are enabled by software instead go build process.
Then think off the marketing options of "try it free for 30 days" afterwards or used car purchases that can still upgraded later?
JeffK
Well-Known Member
That'd be kind of a cool marketing thing for the holidays... Give extra capacity for Thanksgiving and take it away before Christmas travel. The following year with their tax return they might wish to upgrade.
timk225
Active Member
No matter how you slice it or price it, putting an unlockable battery in Model 3's means LOST MONEY for Tesla.
If they price the upgrade so they make back the money, assuming that 1 in 3 buyers or whatever percentage of them gets the upgrade, they could have made MORE PROFIT, if 2 in 3 Model 3's weren't running around with dead weight expensive unused batteries!
And if they did price the unlockable upgrade so they'd break even on the cost of the extra batteries, assuming 1 in 3 buyers gets it, then that means those 1 in 3 buyers will pay THREE TIMES the cost of the extra cells to get theirs turned on.
A Model 3 owner should be able to drive into a service center and pay much less than (extra battery cell cost X 3) to upgrade to the larger pack.
I don't think I am wording this exactly right, but it makes sense in my head.
2 battery packs is the only logical answer. A small one and a big one.
The only way I can seeing this being a good sales idea to have an unlockable pack upgrade is if Tesla gave every new Model 3 owner something like a 90 day free trial, to be used when the owners wanted to use it. Someone could own their Model 3 for weeks or months, get used to it, then activate their 90 day free trial, then decide if they want to pay to keep it afterwards.
And even then, people should be able to order with an unlockable pack or a fixed size pack if they are sure they will never upgrade. Once again, no sense putting extra batteries in if they won't be used.
If they price the upgrade so they make back the money, assuming that 1 in 3 buyers or whatever percentage of them gets the upgrade, they could have made MORE PROFIT, if 2 in 3 Model 3's weren't running around with dead weight expensive unused batteries!
And if they did price the unlockable upgrade so they'd break even on the cost of the extra batteries, assuming 1 in 3 buyers gets it, then that means those 1 in 3 buyers will pay THREE TIMES the cost of the extra cells to get theirs turned on.
A Model 3 owner should be able to drive into a service center and pay much less than (extra battery cell cost X 3) to upgrade to the larger pack.
I don't think I am wording this exactly right, but it makes sense in my head.
2 battery packs is the only logical answer. A small one and a big one.
The only way I can seeing this being a good sales idea to have an unlockable pack upgrade is if Tesla gave every new Model 3 owner something like a 90 day free trial, to be used when the owners wanted to use it. Someone could own their Model 3 for weeks or months, get used to it, then activate their 90 day free trial, then decide if they want to pay to keep it afterwards.
And even then, people should be able to order with an unlockable pack or a fixed size pack if they are sure they will never upgrade. Once again, no sense putting extra batteries in if they won't be used.
Last edited:
Very likely. It will lower mfg. cost. We see this a lot with outboard motors where the same motor is sold over a range of horsepowers and priced by horsepower even though it is the same engine with different controller programming.
I hope you're right but just be sure to factor in that most days you will charge to 90% and then in the winter you will likely lose 20-25% due to the cold, so effectively you're effective range in January is a lot closer to 150 miles than 215.
alseTrick
Active Member
Just because it works with the S does not mean it works with the 3. There's almost certainly going to be more orders placed for base batteries in the 3 than in the S and X. It's a different market and the SES of the consumers is going to be different/lower.
For proof of my point? Look at how supercharging is included in the price of the S and X but not the 3.
With all that said, I think I'm hoping Tesla does do the upgradeable base battery option (with an entirely different option for the performance/ludicrous models). I'd like to buy the base battery and then in 5+ years upgrade to the larger battery to mitigate battery loss. I don't "need" the larger battery at present and I probably can't afford the larger battery either. Not with the other options I want.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
That was before the titanium shield upgrade that is now standard on all Tesla's. They can do it in under 4 minutes but can't do under 2 mins like they used to be able to do.
But even at 4 minutes its leaps and bounds faster than the most of a day effort on a Nissan Leaf.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
If Tesla has to give away thousands of dollars in extra battery to save some bucks in manufacturing efficiency - they are screwed. They can't become a mass car producer.
modamoda
Member
Let's think about another country. It's also helping Tesla to help customer to buy it lower price. I once lived in South Korea, where government does NOT offer EV incentive(up to 20k USD equivalent) on 70+kWh cars. There could be another countries which have similar regulation.
(Don't ask me why, I neither know how this creepy regulation comes from)
It's tricky strategy to sell Tesla with EV incentive
60D - gov incentive + 75 kWh battery upgrade(*) = (approx) 60k USD
75D (gov incentive not eligible) = 80k USD
* I predict battery upgrade might be available when government regulation changes
I suspect the actual number of people getting the smallest battery will be very low.
Even then, if the initial purchaser only gets the small battery, the next owner could still pay Tesla to unlock the extra capacity.
Same applies to CPO. Tesla buy a 55KW and sell it as a 70KW making more money in the process.
cpa
Active Member
I believe the opposite. I believe that the number of people buying the smallest battery will be over 20%, perhaps as much as one-third.
[Ducking for cover!]
There are so many different lifestyles and budgets out there! Some people just do not need or want the range, yet want to drive electric. They may have free or reduced-fee charging at work. My feeling that there will be those who buy this car as their second car to drive around town on errands or to their job that is only a 25-mile round trip. The car might be a graduation present for a child or grandchild who is going to college in town or just a short distance away where there is charging on campus. Others could opt to spend their money on Supercharger access (let's say that the cost is $1,000-$1,500) rather than dropping many thousands more for a ~260-mile battery with Supercharging included.
What I believe makes better economics for Tesla at the outset of the Model III would be to have fixed battery sizes until they can develop a sense as to the demand for sizing. Moreover, they might be supply constrained from the Gigafactory the first year or two. They will be able to produce more vehicles more cheaply as there are no idle cells sitting in the battery packs for those who opted for the smallest size. It might be cheaper for Tesla to be able to swap out the small fixed battery for a larger pack upon trade in several years later too as cell prices drop.
Once the Gigafactory is cranking out plenty of product, and once Tesla has good sales data, then it just might make sense to offer battery unlocking upgrades.
It's been said many time before, some folks seem to mistakenly think the target market is Accord or Camry.
Tesla have consistently used BMW & Audi for comparison, so are obviously aiming there.
Using the ICE analogy, while you can see a 320i on the roads, it isn't the most common.
The same is likely to happen with the Model ☰, but it depends on the price delta.
That is correct. But please remember that it will be a lot of people that will stretch a bit more to get this car then the average BMW/Audi. I would never ever even think about buying a BMW or Audi - or any brand new car at all, but I do plan on buying this car (new), and that is not because it is in the "premium" marked segment. So yes, this is in the BMW/Audi marked segment, but it will be a lot of "Accord/Camry marked segment customer" getting it.
... but back on topic. I will not try to guess what will be the biggest seller here as it can go both ways.
Similar threads
