-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Owner
Active Member
I was more discussing in this case that most of us are early adopters. We bought our cars before supercharging was available or as ubiquitous as now, and have likely a huge percentage of us are charging at home at home with HPWCs etc...
So in many ways we are not the "typical Model S owners".
So in many ways we are not the "typical Model S owners".
In the many car shows I've been to, the one thing that people who say they won't purchase an electric car come up with is that you can't travel in it. Even if they don't travel, they want the option to be able to if they have to (family emergency, etc.). If it won't be useful for trips, then it won't provide a better experience than an ICE car and will be just a "second" car.
I have heard the hypotheses about "people don't ever drive more than X on average so they don't need more than Y range", but using that to justify a short range electric car basically tells potential purchasers "our EV is inferior but purchase it because of environmental concerns--even though it's sub-optimal compared to an ICE car". In spite of all the complaining we do on this forum about how Tesla could do it better, Elon got the main thing right: People will purchase electric cars only if the total experience is better.
But there have been less than 200K Leafs sold total. If Tesla really is going to meet it's sales targets it's got to be a lot better than a Leaf or a compliance cars.
NigelM
Recovering Member
Your second statement proves some relevance. Read this thread and you imagine a huge, scandalous mess; see that a relatively small number of folks perhaps inadvertently received the mail, hmmm a mistake but hardly worthy of the outcry we've collectively devoted to it.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Tesla likely assumed 5% (as it is roughly right now for Model S fleet) and $0.10/kWh electricity. That would work out exactly to $500. The 10% I have refers to a Census survey that shows ~10% of miles travelled are trips of 100 miles or longer (I will have to dig up the exact percentage, it was mentioned in other threads).
Tesla may have assumed it'll be for trips longer than that (maybe 200 miles for example) and that might move the percentage to closer to the 5% it is today.
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
The bottom line for me is that Tesla has to set a clear policy on Supercharger use, and do it soon. With every day, new Model S are driving out onto the roads, and Model X will bring even more people onto the network.
Sending out vague letters (we don't even know what constitutes a "local" Supercharger, or what is frequent use) is completely unacceptable. The company needs to be held to account for this, and at the very least they owe some people here an apology.
I very much doubt that the Superchargers will be "free" in the next generation of Tesla vehicles. I predicted more than a year ago that free Supercharging would eventually become a problem for Tesla (http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/31598-Sociology-and-the-Supercharger-Nomad) with roving bands of vagrant Tuscan Raiders in used Model S and Model X subsisting off the free electricity.
This is going to result in unpleasantness at the Supercharger stations.
Are you really going to want to have to face this when using a Supercharger station:
Some kind of fee per hourly use will eventually become necessary IMO.
Sending out vague letters (we don't even know what constitutes a "local" Supercharger, or what is frequent use) is completely unacceptable. The company needs to be held to account for this, and at the very least they owe some people here an apology.
I very much doubt that the Superchargers will be "free" in the next generation of Tesla vehicles. I predicted more than a year ago that free Supercharging would eventually become a problem for Tesla (http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/31598-Sociology-and-the-Supercharger-Nomad) with roving bands of vagrant Tuscan Raiders in used Model S and Model X subsisting off the free electricity.
This is going to result in unpleasantness at the Supercharger stations.
Are you really going to want to have to face this when using a Supercharger station:
Some kind of fee per hourly use will eventually become necessary IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
As the one who was quoted in Ms Hull's article, I can tell you I didn't mention any of the so-called issues others have with the intent of the letter as I don't share those views. I happen to support discouraging local use of the Superchargers, where residential alternatives are available. She called me, and I responded with the only issue that I have, and that is with the selection criteria of the letter. To me the letter cheapens the intent of the letter, which is too bad. And I don't think anyone would defend the selection criteria used, or Tesla's lack of getting in front of their screw-up.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Read the article. These are HPWCs and the electricity is not free (the garage sets the price of electricity). I suggested something similar before using supercharger hardware (call it "urban chargers" or something and charge a fee for it). Any sustainable charging solution for city daily charging will not be free.
- - - Updated - - -
I think the issue has been overblown. As of the last time it was tracked, supercharging made up only slightly more than 5% of travel by the Model S fleet. There are a handful of locations that have experienced congestion, but it is not that severe even in those cases (and Tesla has been adding more stations in areas to address this). I think letters like this one is sufficient at this stage of the game (as well as their marketing highlighting superchargers being for long distance use). It is rather unfortunate that they botched it up though.
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
It may be overblown today... but what happens 10, 15... 20 years down the line. A high % of today's Model S and future Model X may still be on the road, and their price on the used car market may make them affordable to nomads.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Except that it creates unnecessary FUD for many customers of a company already not strong in the communications department.
Moreover, it directly impacts one of the core features and benefits of Model S ownership.
A few hundreds posts of feedback and analysis is nothing compared to the damage already done externally. To minimize or to make light of it is to do the company a further disservice - perhaps more so than to overstate the case. And in this case, any lost sale or negative impact is one sale and one impact too many.
But go ahead and minimize it if it makes ya feel better - there will be no shortage of fanbois/gurls to support your position. Meanwhile, the underlying issues will remain and will eventually be addressed either *by* or *for* the company. As an investor, I would much prefer the proactive *by* rather than *for*, since *for* is usually effected by clueless analysts.
I explained to my sales person that I drive 40K miles / year and that at least half of that would be on the supercharger network. About half my driving is a once a week 260 mile round trip commute and the rest is long distance trips. I really don't have a choice. I always charge up at home before leaving but the rest, especially the long trips, has to come from the superchargers. My entire purchase was based around this. If they want to take that away, they'll need to repurchase my MS from me first.
I just crossed 200K miles on my Prius after 6 years. I figured I'd drive the MS a little less than the Prius. I now drive the MS most of the time instead of the Prius but only about 80% as much as on the Prius previously.
- - - Updated - - -
That's an important distinction because I fully expect it to be for the life of the car and not the purchaser. If they change the policy going forward and try to make it for the original purchaser only, it would lower the resale value.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Purposely not responding to the rest of the post, but this one point is really becoming a problem on this forum. I've noticed a disturbing tendency to just label people as fanboys when someone doesn't like the point being made. It's such a copout. Either your argument can stand without insulting or it cannot.
I don't notice the word 'troll' being thrown about when a long valued forum member has something to say that is in disagreement with someone supportive of Tesla. That would be no different, imo.
How about we all show a little more respect for each other? Make your points. Your argument should be able to stand on its own merit without taking potshots.
I received the email, and will admit I'm fired up about it. (I started reading this thread, but decided to respond before I get even more irritated). It might be Elon Musk's contention and desire for SC's to only be used for distance traveling, but that wasn't in my literature, documents or contracts when I ordered, purchased, paid for and took delivery of my MS 10 months, and 36,500 miles ago. Fast, free and forever was what was stated. Sure, the impediment to mass acceptance of EV's in general is where can I charge when I am not within range of my home (or office). However, I bought my MS because of the promise of SC's. The closest SC was Vacaville, which is about 45 miles away. Manteca opened within the last few months, and it's about 55 miles away. I use the Fremont SC quite a bit, and it's about 100 miles away.
After receiving that Tesla letter yesterday, I left the area this morning, heading to Monterey today. I topped up at the Gilroy SC (~140 miles away), then heading to Monterey, and returning, with another stop in Gilroy. BTW, the crappy Nav system said to drive slowly from Monterey to Manteca (It predicted 6% remaining). That's the stupidest suggestion. I SC'd in Gilroy to 225 miles, and then hit Manteca to get 220 miles range.
I can and do charge at home. Tesla sold me the dual charger and HPWC, but the SC network is a convenience, and I have paid for the promise of that convenience. My MS is sitting out in my driveway right now, getting ready to charge from about 175 miles to about 235.
Tesla, STOP trying to change your story after the fact. I use the SC when I feel it is important to quickly recharge my car. I'm not going to drive it home with little charge remaining, relinquishing it to spend the night being charged at home, and it not being available before the morning, for an unanticipated trip.
Do you really want to alienate your customer base? I haven't seen a manual on how to piss your valued customers off, and alienate them, but you certainly have started with the first couple of chapters. Nowhere was using a SC labeled as an abuse, until Elon's hint at the letter alleging abuse. I like Elon, and think he's visionary, but ELON, YOU"RE LISTENING TO THE WRONG PEOPLE ABOUT THIS, OR YOU'RE NOT THINKING THROUGH IT. While I love my Tesla, limiting me to using SC's where you deem as acceptable is one way to ensure my leaving the flock, and TO DISCONTINUE BEING A GOODWILL AMBASSADOR OF tESLA.
Finally, just because you're trying to change your policy of SC use, that policy was NEVER a policy that was between Tesla and I. My MVPA doesn't state any limitation. Should you try to enforce SC use to what YOU deem as acceptable will surely negatively affect Tesla in the long run. Don't be Penny Wise And Pound Foolish!
Scotty
(An irritated Tesla owner who was the recipient of the Tesla 'SC abuse letter, includint the stupid assumption that I'm hogging the SC
After receiving that Tesla letter yesterday, I left the area this morning, heading to Monterey today. I topped up at the Gilroy SC (~140 miles away), then heading to Monterey, and returning, with another stop in Gilroy. BTW, the crappy Nav system said to drive slowly from Monterey to Manteca (It predicted 6% remaining). That's the stupidest suggestion. I SC'd in Gilroy to 225 miles, and then hit Manteca to get 220 miles range.
I can and do charge at home. Tesla sold me the dual charger and HPWC, but the SC network is a convenience, and I have paid for the promise of that convenience. My MS is sitting out in my driveway right now, getting ready to charge from about 175 miles to about 235.
Tesla, STOP trying to change your story after the fact. I use the SC when I feel it is important to quickly recharge my car. I'm not going to drive it home with little charge remaining, relinquishing it to spend the night being charged at home, and it not being available before the morning, for an unanticipated trip.
Do you really want to alienate your customer base? I haven't seen a manual on how to piss your valued customers off, and alienate them, but you certainly have started with the first couple of chapters. Nowhere was using a SC labeled as an abuse, until Elon's hint at the letter alleging abuse. I like Elon, and think he's visionary, but ELON, YOU"RE LISTENING TO THE WRONG PEOPLE ABOUT THIS, OR YOU'RE NOT THINKING THROUGH IT. While I love my Tesla, limiting me to using SC's where you deem as acceptable is one way to ensure my leaving the flock, and TO DISCONTINUE BEING A GOODWILL AMBASSADOR OF tESLA.
Finally, just because you're trying to change your policy of SC use, that policy was NEVER a policy that was between Tesla and I. My MVPA doesn't state any limitation. Should you try to enforce SC use to what YOU deem as acceptable will surely negatively affect Tesla in the long run. Don't be Penny Wise And Pound Foolish!
Scotty
(An irritated Tesla owner who was the recipient of the Tesla 'SC abuse letter, includint the stupid assumption that I'm hogging the SC
NigelM
Recovering Member
Dude, blowing up something out of proportion spreads fear, uncertainty and doubt. What I've been suggesting is to calmly look at the real size of the issue of mis-communication.
Sorry, but that's FUD right there. Moves by Tesla to remind folks that Superchargers are intended for long distance travel benefit the vast majority of owners.
A few hundred posts of feedback and speculation about (sometimes nefarious) motives attracted external attention (media attention, if that's what you're referring to). There's no need to hide anything on TMC but we're also pretty good at getting worked up over things on here.
As I said above, blowing things out of proportion does the company a disservice; there's been no attempt to minimize anything on my part, just trying to see things in proper context.
Sorry, that's not worthy of a response.
- - - Updated - - -
P.S. I'll maintain again that if folks have been unfairly targeted, and I'm happy to take their word for it, then they should get an apology. But nobody died and the world isn't ending.
Sorry Nigel but your tone strikes me as condescending and dismissive.
I realize that it is often difficult to interpret "tone" from written words but your posts in this thread as well as your related thread/poll title "Letter-gate..." leave me with the impression you think this whole discussion is ridiculous - the fact that anyone would even give it a second thought much less be annoyed by receiving said email from Tesla is annoying to you.
Again, I could well be way off the mark but that's what it looks like to me.
Mike
Similar threads
- Question
- Question
