Do you contend that Tesla's announcement of a SC that only mentions driving from Los Angeles, California to Tucson, Arizona for free, for life is "not the same message" as one that says you can drive "long-distance, for free for life"? Guess I have to disagree with you there.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Do you contend that Tesla's announcement of a SC that only mentions driving from Los Angeles, California to Tucson, Arizona for free, for life is "not the same message" as one that says you can drive "long-distance, for free for life"? Guess I have to disagree with you there.
I contend Tesla added the "long-distance travel" qualification to their free, for life parlance. It is funny how Elon, at the general meeting, sort of awkwardly fits it into the sentence. It hadn't been there before, between free and for life.
See the bolded standard Tesla wording that has now been reworked into including the word long-distance:
2014:
"The Buckeye Supercharger adds an additional charging option for our owners who travel between Southern California and the Phoenix area. It is part of a series of Superchargers that will more densely cover travel on Interstate 10 from Santa Monica through Tucson for free, for life."
2015:
"We are excited to announce that the San Diego Supercharger Station is now open. New Supercharger Stations open every week, enabling more options for free long-distance travel, for life."
Now, obviously the placement of Superchargers has always been areas where Tesla finds barriers for sales. In the 2014 case, they were on an Interstate, sure but use was not really specified beyond that. You could hope one exit to your place of work. The 2015 specifies long-distance specifically.
Important: These kinds of messages are not the only place where I feel Tesla used to promote a free, unlimited message that now has been changed. Their sales person network is at least used to be such place, see experiences on TMC.
I get it. No one reading the 2014 announcement would construe it as describing long distance travel (even though it only mentions a 500 mile trip) because the words "long-distance" aren't present.
And now saying "long-distance" is a new qualification on the message. Like I said, it's ok that we disagree. :biggrin:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I've been reading his articles criticizing Tesla since before he was an owner, so maybe my perspective is a bit different. I do know sometimes he does write some good article, but more times than not, many of his articles read like he's criticizing just to criticize, not like he's trying to be constructive.
SW2Fiddler
We Are Cognitive Dissidents
Once more for accuracy's sake. Everyone feel free to click the link to the Initial Press Release. I won't tell you what's there, just see for yourself.
"But London! But Schipol!" (might as well say "But Chicago!" too.)
Here's a different interpretation on Elon's comment. I had not thought or read of this before, and it is not my idea. It came from a comment on my blog.
Tesla is not sending notes out because of etiquette gaffs. They realize that the battery is better served by slower charging over the long term. So if you can charge at home or with an L1, L2 charger conveniently, the car's battery will last longer.
Tesla is not sending notes out because of etiquette gaffs. They realize that the battery is better served by slower charging over the long term. So if you can charge at home or with an L1, L2 charger conveniently, the car's battery will last longer.
It's possible to say Superchargers were installed for enable long distance travel and then say free for life at the same time. At the launch they said it was intended to make travel easier. Just because they pushed the free for life without qualification doesn't mean the first part of the message was voided. Something that some seem to miss.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. Tesla is noticing a small trend and decided to say something. That doesn't mean people need to freak out if they are abusing the system. If you can charge at home but don't then I guess it's up to you to determine if you think that is what most would consider reasonable and a good use of the resource. Others paid the same amount you did.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. Tesla is noticing a small trend and decided to say something. That doesn't mean people need to freak out if they are abusing the system. If you can charge at home but don't then I guess it's up to you to determine if you think that is what most would consider reasonable and a good use of the resource. Others paid the same amount you did.
I know what it says in the original press release. To me, Elon referencing to that now is part of the changed message - because the message in-between, after that press-release, certainly was very simple: free, for life (of Model S). The long-distance was the initial problem to be solved with the network, sure, but Supercharging itself was marketed as use as much as you like. Had Tesla and their sales people actually marketed limitations, I'd have no problem accepting that. They didn't, quite the contrary - and my opinion they are now changing that message, which - if enforced - could be tantamount to bait and switch on the proposition they had sold "for life of car".
Luckily I don't expect Tesla to enforce any such thing for current Model S owners, so all good - they are sticking by their commitment and that's all I'd ask. They can change the rules for future buyers as long as they're clear on those changes.
The totality of the message is what matters, including what their sales representatives said - many on TMC certainly "heard" a different message from Tesla. Our subjective views probably won't come to any mutually satisfactory conclusions. And that's where there is a debate, one I guess we are all tired of trying to have.
Indeed, others paid the same as I did and get to use Supercharger much more, since I use hardly any. Tesla is benefiting from me and likes of me in this sense. I'd have to see some numbers to believe abuse on the other end isn't - fairly - offset by users like me.
- - - Updated - - -
I did offer a summary back then trying to see where we agree and disagree. I think it was pretty fair, but not many took it. People wanted a debate, sure - let's debate.
- - - Updated - - -
I get it. No one reading the 2014 announcement would construe it as describing long distance travel (even though it only mentions a 500 mile trip) because the words "long-distance" aren't present.
It does mention a 500 mile distance, nobody is disputing where the Superchargers were primarily built - alongside long-distance routes.
What has changed is, Tesla has moved from an explicit free, use as much as you like message to an explicit free, use as much as you like for long-distance driving message.
There is a difference to that, compounded by their sales force which took the message and ran with it, as far as I can tell.
Not really. As you've pointed out they installed one in London and other big cities. All they've done is politely asked people who can charge at home to consider doing that to leave the network open for those that need it.
Indeed, but I wager they are consciously adding "long-distance travel" to the basic message now ("free, for life" transitioned to "free long-distance travel, for life") - London and the like will be vague exceptions they won't market quite as much anymore.
This, of course, is how it looks at the moment their messaging is evolving. They might change their minds, of course, or employ different tactics in different markets.
No. You guys are missing my point.
But it's okay. Maybe over those beers one day.
I'm fine disagreeing, what kind of sucks is that I don't think we all have quite the correct perceptions of each other's opinions so I'm not sure we quite know what and how we disagree on, but it is what it is.
Maybe a visual aid will help:
I think you're saying "originally they said X, and so now saying X again is a changed message". Ok, I think you've passed my limits of comprehension.
deonb
Active Member
I think I figured it out... AnxietyRanger's surprisingly strong (yet completely non-invested?) opinion isn't informed based on any given message from Tesla:
Thus his opinion stems from an impression of the opinion of people who went before him (who may or may not still be holding the same opinion).
Hence, no amount of actual proof that you can provide from Tesla would be sufficient proof to counter his opinion, since it's not originally based on anything that Tesla said. You would have to counter the message oozing from dark corners of TMC and other national Tesla forums instead.
This is why it passed the limits of our comprehension
.
callmesam
Member
In parsing the language and intent, Tesla used the word "enabling" which is not exclusive as some have been trying to assert.
The Supercharger network was initially built to answer the question of how to make the Model S long distance.
That they emphasize the enabling nature says nothing about limiting the use of the network.
Tesla was also emphasizes the "charge at home" aspect and convenience.
In 2013, they launched swap to enable owners and fleets to go "faster or free". They also began selling to taxi fleets in Amsterdam and Vegas.
In 2014, Supercharging explicitly included cities where fixed parking is an issue. Which is basically everywhere.
In 2015, they announced 10X HPWC giveaway program. The business must offer charging "free" to customers, in an ironic twist.
So, do I agree that Tesla in any way limited use of the Supercharger Network?
Nope. If they had wanted to make it fit a limited explanation, then all they had to do was add the words "only for" or "exclusively for".
They've chosen a different tact:
"Free forever".
SW2Fiddler
We Are Cognitive Dissidents
Supercharging - Elon's statement that Daily Supercharging Users are Receiving...
See, I wasn't really even aware of Tesla until I started shopping for (the rest of my family's) cars in December 2013 and the next couple of months. I don't have memories of how I perceived TM's message, they really weren't on my radar at all as I was still driving beaters, hand-me-downs, junkers and clunkers to be frugal. Then by May I had the real wheel in my hands.
I just have to accept the word of those - I guess Noland is one - if they say they really, sincerely got that 'feel' from the public face that TM put out. It just doesn't seem borne out by the evidence at hand. -shrug-
OK, I don't have a fear that the SC network will come crashing down. I don't even think TM will change the policy on the Model S one bit. But what runaway "abuse" could bring about would affect the X and the 3, worst case decreasing the "one million" number of free-Supercharged Tesla cars that JB said they plan to sell before considering a fee plan.
I have my S and it's more good than the frustration of debating facts vs. feels is bad.
And beer is good too. Here's a virtual mug raised to the spirit of the exchange. Here's to Light Without Heat. (I think a guitarist came up with that one...)
I can't speak to anyone else's perceptions, and have tried to stick to citations.No. You guys are missing my point.
But it's okay. Maybe over those beers one day.
I'm fine disagreeing, what kind of sucks is that I don't think we all have quite the correct perceptions of each other's opinions so I'm not sure we quite know what and how we disagree on, but it is what it is.
See, I wasn't really even aware of Tesla until I started shopping for (the rest of my family's) cars in December 2013 and the next couple of months. I don't have memories of how I perceived TM's message, they really weren't on my radar at all as I was still driving beaters, hand-me-downs, junkers and clunkers to be frugal. Then by May I had the real wheel in my hands.
I just have to accept the word of those - I guess Noland is one - if they say they really, sincerely got that 'feel' from the public face that TM put out. It just doesn't seem borne out by the evidence at hand. -shrug-
OK, I don't have a fear that the SC network will come crashing down. I don't even think TM will change the policy on the Model S one bit. But what runaway "abuse" could bring about would affect the X and the 3, worst case decreasing the "one million" number of free-Supercharged Tesla cars that JB said they plan to sell before considering a fee plan.
I have my S and it's more good than the frustration of debating facts vs. feels is bad.
And beer is good too. Here's a virtual mug raised to the spirit of the exchange. Here's to Light Without Heat. (I think a guitarist came up with that one...)
Last edited:
Great point. You know what wouldn't violate any promises but would solve this? Stop building SC's, and the chargers would kick you off if someone pulled into the SC who had used it less. If you aren't near your car, when you return, you may still be parked there, but your charge will be terminated early with a note saying "leave now... someone waiting who used it less".
Commercial chargers charging $.55 per kilowatt hour won't solve this; perhaps if commercial chargers charge something closer to reasonable then that would be a solution. Do gas stations do a 1,000% markup like Chargepoint does?
roblab
Active Member
What I looked for when I glanced back on this thread was the fact that electricity is quite cheap when compared to gasoline. It is difficult to justify driving to a supercharger and sitting around for a half hour to an hour when you can just drive home and park it, and pay 5 to 10 bucks overnight and not wait at all.
Now, if you don't have a home, or an outlet, I don't see any problem. You don't have much of a choice. And the guy or gal who thinks that they are saving a bundle using "free power" aren't taking into account their time, and they will figure it out somewhere down the road.
Since the superchargers are going to be powered by solar, I don't think Elon and Company really care, either. If a supercharger gets clogged, they will either build another nearby or add spaces. The settling will occur, and everyone will be fine.
The real benefit is that you can charge at home. If you can. And it's cheap.
That makes driving a Tesla valuable.
Now, if you don't have a home, or an outlet, I don't see any problem. You don't have much of a choice. And the guy or gal who thinks that they are saving a bundle using "free power" aren't taking into account their time, and they will figure it out somewhere down the road.
Since the superchargers are going to be powered by solar, I don't think Elon and Company really care, either. If a supercharger gets clogged, they will either build another nearby or add spaces. The settling will occur, and everyone will be fine.
The real benefit is that you can charge at home. If you can. And it's cheap.
That makes driving a Tesla valuable.
