Thanks Danal. I will break my silence to support his statement. I heard something similar at My SC. "Use it as much as you like. It is one of the perks of owning a Model S. Free for life of the car, though it would be more convenient for you to install and charge at home." To me it is clear they are assuming it will be more convenient for me to charge at home compared to at a supercharging station all the time. However what they do not know is it's also convenient for me to charge at SC only.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Reporters, whose job is to report accurately on the content of an interview, can frequently get something wrong when they paraphrase as opposed to getting a direct quote. And that's when they are working from a recording or notes too, not just memory. I don't see it as uncommon to interpret and remember a statement in different ways (I believe most people store their interpretation of a statement in their memory, not the direct quote). We can't even get agreement on how to interpret written statements on the website that we can see in black and white, and Elon's meaning in his direct quote!
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
To be clear I'm not saying I'm immune to this, but this happens a lot more in spoken conversation and remembering such conversations. That's why phone interactions with customer reps are frequently recorded (when worse comes to worse sometimes they play back that conversation to you).
And it's true no one really brought this point up before you did. We were arguing over the written website content and people asked multiple times if there was any evidence of sales reps encouraging people to charge at superchargers in lieu of available home charging and there were crickets. You were the first person to chime in about it.
Last edited:
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
deonb
Active Member
Not really about nitpicking. A lot of us were begging for weeks on end for someone to come forward with first-hand experience saying "Tesla said x to me".
It was really frustrating - every data point we had before yours was either people looking at the same material and interpreting it differently, or casual second-hand, unsourced, information.
However, in the light of the new evidence, I'm now supportive of AnxietyRanger's point and I agree that if Tesla disallows, limits or even discourages local Supercharging in any way, it would constitute bait-and-switch.
It's hard to know (probably impossible), if this was Tesla's official policy all along, but either way Tesla has to take responsibility for the actions of their sales staff.
Whether or not I can charge at home is nobody's business but mine. If I want to charge at the local Supercharger exclusively, then that's what I'll do. It's there to be used, especially when all the stalls are empty. Elon made one very small, very vague statement and now people are trying to turn that vague statement into a policy of some sort. I used my local Supercharger three times last week because I had appointments all over the valley, and did not have the luxury of waiting hours for my car to charge at home. Some days my appointments can involve almost 200 miles of local driving. 200 miles is still "long distance", isn't it? And the Superchargers are for long distance travel, are they not? I do not see anywhere that Tesla specifies where or how those long distance miles need to be driven in order to qualify.
This entire debate is silly. It is nothing more than one group of people trying to impose their views on another group of people. Some people need to get over themselves.
This entire debate is silly. It is nothing more than one group of people trying to impose their views on another group of people. Some people need to get over themselves.
And no one is saying that someone who drives that much in a day should be forced to go home and charge for 9 hours. Please point out that post. Tesla hasn't specified what is considered long distance.
deonb
Active Member
“I’m going to go over there and charge today just because I think I should be able to!!”
Looks like he's one of those people whose only incentive for not purposefully breaking his own arm every day, was the cost of healthcare.
Having said that, I'm not fond of a business model where the success depends on the service being so inconvenient that people don't want to regularly use it.
Tedkidd
Member
Wait, what?
The thread was discussing the idea some may be "abusing" Supercharging, and what that might possibly mean. It could mean using regularly and not charging at home, at night. It could mean using it for opportunity charging at crowded locations, causing the experience of others to be harmed. Or it could mean parking in a stall for hours without or after charging.
It's all speculation. What is told to someone verbally by a salesperson somehow materially changes this?
When you buy a Tesla, does the transaction occur via verbal contract? Or is it written? What does the contract say about Supercharging? Last I knew verbal statements don't alter written contracts.
Since using the Superchargers is a right, the conversation becomes one of etiquette rather than entitlement. Can you be a glutton at the buffet? Sure!
I don't think it's been put better than scaesare, use Superchargers however you want. Just be cognizant and thoughtful. And maybe try to act like you DON'T want to be the straw that breaks the camels back.
The thread was discussing the idea some may be "abusing" Supercharging, and what that might possibly mean. It could mean using regularly and not charging at home, at night. It could mean using it for opportunity charging at crowded locations, causing the experience of others to be harmed. Or it could mean parking in a stall for hours without or after charging.
It's all speculation. What is told to someone verbally by a salesperson somehow materially changes this?
When you buy a Tesla, does the transaction occur via verbal contract? Or is it written? What does the contract say about Supercharging? Last I knew verbal statements don't alter written contracts.
Since using the Superchargers is a right, the conversation becomes one of etiquette rather than entitlement. Can you be a glutton at the buffet? Sure!
I don't think it's been put better than scaesare, use Superchargers however you want. Just be cognizant and thoughtful. And maybe try to act like you DON'T want to be the straw that breaks the camels back.
Last edited:
FWIW, I had seen several Danal and No2DinosaurFuel type of statements on TMC prior to this. There was another thread about it, even. I looked for it some time ago, but felt the discussion so futile I let it go as it didn't immediately appear.
I also think my point to TexasEV in #890 wasn't about local charging abuse, but about the way Tesla's customer service had been reporting local charging as OK in general - not in exceptional circumstances. Reading carefully the story of sperrysburg reflects how the sales person's and customer service's messages were different than Elon's.
If Lump's quote in #908 is accurate, that Tesla sales people are now giving a new message, then indeed Tesla seems to be changing the previous policy. Their change of wording certainly suggests some level of activity on this. I think Tesla's management softly changing the message remains a likely scenario, but I acknowledge it is my opinion and there are other opinions.
Special thank you to deonb for his acknowledgement. I appreciate it.
p.s. For those discussing charging etiquette, I have no complaints about many of their suggestions. I just always felt the etiquette (how it should be, what should we do) was separate of ascertaining what Tesla's policy was and had it changed.
I also think my point to TexasEV in #890 wasn't about local charging abuse, but about the way Tesla's customer service had been reporting local charging as OK in general - not in exceptional circumstances. Reading carefully the story of sperrysburg reflects how the sales person's and customer service's messages were different than Elon's.
If Lump's quote in #908 is accurate, that Tesla sales people are now giving a new message, then indeed Tesla seems to be changing the previous policy. Their change of wording certainly suggests some level of activity on this. I think Tesla's management softly changing the message remains a likely scenario, but I acknowledge it is my opinion and there are other opinions.
Special thank you to deonb for his acknowledgement. I appreciate it.
p.s. For those discussing charging etiquette, I have no complaints about many of their suggestions. I just always felt the etiquette (how it should be, what should we do) was separate of ascertaining what Tesla's policy was and had it changed.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Very interesting quote. It directly conflicts with with what Chipper heard up thread. Whether this is a "policy change" or "bait and switch" is up for interpretation, but Tesla is doing something on this front and pushing all the way to low level reps if that quote was true.
Sperrysburg's situation is no different from Elon's statements. His situation is that he has no home charging. Elon has been saying in previous shareholder meetings that superchargers were fair game in this regard and that they are building superchargers specifically for such a market (AKA "city superchargers" that we have talked about in this thread).
Danal and Chipper are saying something different: that sales reps have said it was okay to not install a home charger and just use a supercharger instead for all your charging.
Last edited:
Exactly. Anyone arguing that locals shouldn't use their local Supercharger is wrong, and Tesla would have no way to police such usage because there are a number of scenarios where local charging is perfectly acceptable. That was my point. Local charging being a nuisance is a complete non-issue in 99% of locations. This "issue" certainly shouldn't have risen to the level of Elon commenting on it at a shareholder meeting.
- - - Updated - - -
There is no written contract for Supercharging. Tesla's public statements regarding Supercharging, however, constitute an advertisement for the vehicle and an inducement to purchase that vehicle. As such, Tesla's verbal representations are binding.
mgdurand
Member
So I get the consensus is that there are two issues, 1. What Tesla's policy is, if any and 2. People should be courteous?
Tesla will have to figure out if they have a policy, especially as they ramp up for X production and beyond. As for courtesy, are Tesla owners any more courteous than non-Tesla owners? I occasionally charge locally, but that's when I have to, I don't care about sitting there to save $2.58 or whatever. If someone were traveling and asked me to let them play though, that would be fine though I'm in a sparse state so it doesn't happen. I get the impression from traveling through SoCal which I do often, that ideas of courtesy might differ based on population density. Some of those drivers look like they'll punch me out for smiling at them, let alone give up a spot to a traveller. Freaky.
Maybe Tesla will have a Supercharger crisis or two, and some bad press, before they tune it in again; the price of success. I don;t see how making occupied stalls "live" on your nav will prevent overcrowding and that's the only idea they've advanced so far AFAIK, apart from building more. More is definitely better though, as long as the economy of it stays ahead.
Tesla will have to figure out if they have a policy, especially as they ramp up for X production and beyond. As for courtesy, are Tesla owners any more courteous than non-Tesla owners? I occasionally charge locally, but that's when I have to, I don't care about sitting there to save $2.58 or whatever. If someone were traveling and asked me to let them play though, that would be fine though I'm in a sparse state so it doesn't happen. I get the impression from traveling through SoCal which I do often, that ideas of courtesy might differ based on population density. Some of those drivers look like they'll punch me out for smiling at them, let alone give up a spot to a traveller. Freaky.
Maybe Tesla will have a Supercharger crisis or two, and some bad press, before they tune it in again; the price of success. I don;t see how making occupied stalls "live" on your nav will prevent overcrowding and that's the only idea they've advanced so far AFAIK, apart from building more. More is definitely better though, as long as the economy of it stays ahead.
Just to make it even more complicated I have another scenario. What about people that drive long distances on a daily bases always around the same area. Like taxis, contractors, service people, realtors, any many other jobs that require a lot of miles on a daily basis. If they have a Supercharger near by, should they be able to use it or not? They are local, they have their home chargers, but they still need to charge quick to make their daily miles. It really shouldn't matter if your Supercharger is close to your home. If you need to drive more than your battery can handle in a day, the Supercharger is the only way to make it possible.
This is an opportunity rather than a problem. One) The number of Supercharger stations needs to ramp up along with car production; Two) customers want easier access to superchargers.
Push and Pull are acting together.
Tesla have access to Supercharger use data and, when connected, car data as well. Rather than acting as a spur for a letter to particular customers why not just use their address information to locate and build new destination supercharger stations? Once constructed, then letters can be sent out to "frequent superchargers" making them aware of the new facility - or a new marker can just appear on the in-car map. If a taxi company or hire company buys a number of cars, then part of that deal could include a supercharger station at a convenient base point.
Tesla's car sales department needs to communicate with Supercharger planning and the Gigafactory needs a whole wing devoted to building and shipping out superchargers.
Push and Pull are acting together.
Tesla have access to Supercharger use data and, when connected, car data as well. Rather than acting as a spur for a letter to particular customers why not just use their address information to locate and build new destination supercharger stations? Once constructed, then letters can be sent out to "frequent superchargers" making them aware of the new facility - or a new marker can just appear on the in-car map. If a taxi company or hire company buys a number of cars, then part of that deal could include a supercharger station at a convenient base point.
Tesla's car sales department needs to communicate with Supercharger planning and the Gigafactory needs a whole wing devoted to building and shipping out superchargers.
Last edited:
Taxis and such are best served by battery swapping. Now it will be awhile before there is anything resembling a battery swap network, but basically commercial use is the major use case for battery swapping because downtime costs money.
Why do you think they're not already doing that? Clearly the location of sales is driving supercharger planning, that's why California has more superchargers giving owners more routing options, while other parts of the country are still waiting to be connected. The rate limiting step in supercharger expansion is not production, it's site acquisition and local planning issues.
