I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla essentially never gets around to delivering actual base configuration cars. Remember how they essentially canned the S40 before it became available.
Also look at iTunes. ITune wants $9.99 a month in the US for unlimited music. It's only $1.50 a month in China. They charge want the people are willing to pay. People are going to buy the $1,500 wheels and pay the $9k for bigger battery. People will vote with their money. Don't like then cancle your pre-order. Same with people here paying $9/month to stream music on iTunes. The price would drop to $2 if no one subs.
I would not be surprised if there are more 18" and 19" wheel options later in the year and aftermarket wheels are not too expensive if you really don't like the look.
I'm sure it's also related to income levels and licensing costs for the US vs. China. I last went to China in 08 and it was 2 RMB to take the subway in Beijing. At the time, that was about $0.33 USD. In Shanghai, I recall it was 3 to 9 RMB, but usually on the lower side. 3 RMB is about $0.50 USD. Buses in Beijing were 1 RMB for one w/no AC and 2 RMB for one with. Good luck getting on any US public transportation at that kind of price for a regular adult fare.
Model S owners complaining the Long range Model 3 might be too cheap compared to the 100D. I am trying to argue with them but they might have a point. AWD is only a 5k option.
Back in Feb. Electrek article "Tesla is now claiming 35% battery cost reduction at ‘Gigafactory 1’ – hinting at breakthrough cost below $125/kWh" . Assuming this is accurate and the "Long Range Model" has 20kW more than base, that's $2500 more manufacturing cost for the batteries, plus some increase in battery case/battery mgmt. system. So is an estimated 300% mark-up excessive for a mass market car option?
If you're only looking at the material & labor costs, probably. But if you're looking at the cost of developing that product, nope.
I think it's the other way around. The upgrade on the S from the 75D to 100D is $23,000. Yet the Model 3 is $9K for the larger battery. There might be more KW in the 75->100 jump than the standard to the long range, but it's not $14,000 worth.
Little bit off topic, but yeah they're lower because of cost of living and no one pays for music or movies so that's why iTunes are cheap. The point is iTunes could have charged more if people was welling to pay. Income is actually pretty high for working classes (and farmers that had their land taken away by the gov). Many are instant millionaires but they still wouldn't pay $2 for iTunes -)
We are all 'paying it forward' to a certain extent to make sure Tesla completes Master Plan #1/The Mission Statement. There would be no model 3 to debate over option pricing if not for people willing to accept this premise.
The Wall street thesis is Tesla is going to shut its doors because it doesn't make money with S, doesn't make money with the X, and will lose money on every 3 it sells. With that kind of headwind, Tesla has every right and obligation to charge what the market can bear can until they turn profitable. Tesla has a negative EPS of 1.33. They have a long way to go before they are gouging anyone.
2011: 14 amp charging rate, 24 kWh battery, 80 mile range Nissan Leaf for $38 K (before tax credits) 2017: 40 amp, ~ 75 kWh, 310 mile range Tesla model 3 for ~ $55 K We have come quite a ways.
Yah.... My point wasn't that the 40 was a bad car; but that they never really released it and instead claimed (based on the demand for the bigger models, which were actually being delivered) that the 40 wasn't actually necessary. By doing this, Tesla avoided selling more than a tiny number of cars at the long-advertised "base" price (which clearly had a bad negative margin profitwise).
I see you are spending as much time on forums / model 3 on day after the event as I am. It was fun seeing you last night!
I can't believe the Tesla got the prices Down to this level and you guys are still complaining about price of the batteries for a range increase.