Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Supercharging letter from Tesla 8-13-2015

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Well, I thought I'd chime in because I hadn't seen any posts for people without access to home charging who got the letter. I don't have home charging, and am a frequent user of Superchargers. I would love to get home charging as it would nearly eliminate the need to go to Superchargers, but that's not possible. When I buy my next house I will certainly install home charging, and it will be awesome! I usually visit superchargers at off-peak times -- often I am the only one charging so I don't think I am contributing to congestion. I have never left my car plugged in after I have finished charging, and usually leave when my charge is <70% so I stay in the faster portion of the charge curve.

I use public J1772 and CHAdeMO charging whenever it is available (which, unfortunately is not often -- the near perfect reliability of Superchargers puts other public charging infrastructure to shame). The Blink CHAdeMO chargers near my apartment have >50% downtime. The Nissan CHAdeMOs overheat more reliably than they charge my car. Even with it's problems, the CHAdeMo adapter is a wonderful addition to my car, and makes ownership without home charging much easier than relying solely on public J1772.

I think Tesla needs to do a better job of Supercharger use education, and this letter was a (poor) attempt at that -- many new owners are not technically-minded early-adopters knowledgeable about pedestal pairing, charge taper curves/charging more than they need, and leaving their cars blocking chargers after they have finished charging. Tesla does almost no education about public charging in their sales/delivery process, and that probably contributes to Supercharger congestion. It is somewhat disconcerting to get a letter asking me to reduce my supercharger usage when Tesla has told me that using superchargers is perfectly acceptable in my situation.

Very well said.

As I've noted, the non-garaged Model S owners are not the problem - not to mention they've been told by Tesla that they can use SCs without worry. The problems include ICEing by other owners, livery to an extent, and the absurd witch hunt for the "daily-charging local" who by and large does not exist. Much like crowding at SoCal SCs, it's a construct invented and perpetuated mostly by people who neither use SCs nor live in SoCal to begin with.

Finally, using the fear of the Model 3 as justification to persecute the no -garaged is equally absurd; a mass market car won't even *have* SC capability in the default model. As noted either here or at TM, the first Mustangs didn't even come with radios. Why? Mass market price point appeal.

But by all means, let the handwringing busybody contingent continue the kvetchfest.

Meanwhile, there appears to be an opportunity for clarification and welcome improvement on the part of Tesla. Owners and investors are waiting - to say nothing of prospective customers.
 
My 2 cents is that the idea of "free" superchargers is sustainable with the following caveats:
1) They are used primarily for long distance / road trips, as they were advertised since launch. Based on average US travel, this limits mileage to ~10% of overall travel (in reference to trips over 100 miles). The Tesla fleet currently stands at ~5% of travel on superchargers.

2) Tesla needs to come up with another alternative for city charging (perhaps with the HPWC destination charger program in garages, where presumably the electricity is paid for by the parking fees). As the math by others show, city superchargers are not sustainable as a "free" option. The cost per car is simply too high for Tesla to cover all travel. One other idea is to have a rebranding of city superchargers, maybe call them "urban chargers" for example, where those chargers have a fee (and superchargers remain free).
 
Based on average US travel, this limits mileage to ~10% of overall travel (in reference to trips over 100 miles).

That's silly.

Let's see, I have 5k miles now in 2 months. I took about 2900 miles of roadtrips (4 roadtrips so far). So that's almost 60% of my travels. Given, it's summer and we drive more. Over the course of a year, I'd guess my roadtrips would come out to maybe 30% of my overall travels.


I wouldn't have gotten a Tesla if that were a requirement (10% of all travel be roadtrips). That would also discourage a non-negligible amount of potential buyers.
 
My 2 cents is that the idea of "free" superchargers is sustainable with the following caveats:
1) They are used primarily for long distance / road trips, as they were advertised since launch. Based on average US travel, this limits mileage to ~10% (if I recall correctly) of overall travel. The Tesla fleet currently stands at ~5% of travel on superchargers.

2) Tesla needs to come up with another alternative for city charging (perhaps with the HPWC destination charger program in garages, where presumably the electricity is paid for by the parking fees). As the math by others show, city superchargers are not sustainable as a "free" option. The cost per car is simply too high for Tesla to cover all travel. One other idea is to have a rebranding of city superchargers, maybe call them "urban chargers" for example, where those chargers have a fee (and superchargers remain free).

That's completely contrary to Tesla's commitment to DENSITY as well as DISTANCE.

Can't paint metro areas with the same brush as the other 90% of the continent.

So far, those SCs are not only sustainable but necessary to support the user community.

Perhaps a more realistic scenario than continuing to perpetuate the antiquated canard that SCs are for distance only would be to recognize that the business model for the mass market call will be altogether different than for the Model S/X.

There's room for everyone at SCs - non-garaged and garages alike - as long as ICEing by EVs as well, and commercial/livery concerns are addressed. By and large, people are spoiled. I used to wait 20 minutes on the way home at the Costco to get gas every week or two before getting groceries at said Costco. Now I stop at the adjacent SC every so often and at non-peak times. But if I had to wait that same 20 minutes, I'd be fine with that. Voila - just doubled capacity for you.

I do like the idea of more HPWCs, however. Fortunately, so does Tesla, whose commitment to DESTINATION is significant, if understated.

DENSITY
DISTANCE
DESTINATION

No additional fees necessary. Charge (no pun intended) up front, and keep it simple. And that doesn't even include solar.

In a generation or less, all new construction will require EV charging anyway. With incentives to retrofit. And that cool under-road EV charging that they're testing in the UK. Let that sink in for a bit :).
 
I used to wait 20 minutes on the way home at the Costco to get gas every week or two before getting groceries at said Costco.

We do this too. We learned a trick (that we still use for our ICE), show up at Costco 15mins before closing, do your shopping, and after Costco closes get gas (gas station is usually open an hour after the store closes). There are virtually no lines by that point.
 
I think Tesla needs to be careful with this because if Elon wants to promote electric transportation and his goal is to take away all the reasons that most people have for not buying this will not help. Yes most people would not mind paying if it is reasonable and if so then remove the $2000 I paid to be supercharging enabled. This is a slippery slope and maybe down the road Tesla needs to do this but they need to think it thru as to how it impacts future electric travel.

Unless your car was delivered without Supercharge enabled, and you paid to add it later, you didn't pay ANYTHING for Supercharger. It was "included".
 
Also, while they advertised "free for life", they didn't advertise "unlimited for life" (there's a subtle but important difference between the two).

It amazes me to what extent some people are willing to defend a public, multi-billion company who made such statements.

I guess we will see lawsuits by angry owners in case Tesla ever decides to limit SC use or access. Then, the courts can decide what was advertised/promised and what is exactly included for the lifetime of the vehicles.

The only way to ever escape this mess would be to grandfather all current owners and change the rules going forward (for new buyers after date X in the future).
 
...and the absurd witch hunt for the "daily-charging local" who by and large does not exist. Much like crowding at SoCal SCs, it's a construct invented and perpetuated mostly by people who neither use SCs nor live in SoCal to begin with.

Really? I know and work with a Model S owner who has boasted that he hasn't plugged into his home connector once since the Redondo Beach Supercharger opened. He lives near it (about 8 miles) and has a 56 mile daily round-trip commute to work. He uses the SC as his daily charger, usually on his way home from work, and has expressed great satisfaction that Tesla has been paying for all of his fuel costs. Every Friday evening he does a range charge for the weekend, or so he has said. I don't know if he has received the email.
 
There's room for everyone at SCs - non-garaged and garages alike - as long as ICEing by EVs as well, and commercial/livery concerns are addressed. By and large, people are spoiled. I used to wait 20 minutes on the way home at the Costco to get gas every week or two before getting groceries at said Costco. Now I stop at the adjacent SC every so often and at non-peak times. But if I had to wait that same 20 minutes, I'd be fine with that. Voila - just doubled capacity for you.

You would wait 20 minutes to locally charge instead of just doing it at home? How much were you saving per gallon at Costco?
 
...and let's not kid ourselves. That $2,000 was built in to the price of all the other cars that came with the capability. Even on the 60's, Tesla just flips a software bit somewhere to let Supercharging work once you pony up.

Elon's said this on multiple occasions that the cost to use the superchargers were built into the price of the cars. So there ya go. We already PAID the privilege to use them as much as we want.
 
Unless your car was delivered without Supercharge enabled, and you paid to add it later, you didn't pay ANYTHING for Supercharger. It was "included".

Merril's signature shows he had a 60, so he/she did indeed pay for it, just as a discounted option. (It was $2k on order or $2.5k subsequently, IIRC US prices correctly)

TBH psychologically this is the worst possible situation, because having physically paid for something human nature unfortunately means people are more likely to want their money's worth. (not that I'm claiming this is Merrill's case at all, but as an observation in general for deals of this nature, not just Supercharging)

Tesla have done 4 things so far to attempt SpC usage as far as I can see. Some more subtle than others:
1) Change the emphasis in all public facing material, toward long distance enablement
2) Introduce Trip Planner, with one of the objectives being minimizing dwell time
3) Remove any notion of payment for SpC use across the range (including CPO cars).
4) Warn users with this letter

Circumstantially this really does suggest their is a problem with how things have panned out with the costing and/or usage models.
 
You would wait 20 minutes to locally charge instead of just doing it at home?

If home charging was an option, I'd happily charge at home. Who wouldn't want a full tank/charge each morning? When you live in a harbor, you get what you get.

Meanwhile, I appreciate Tesla's commitment to the non-garaged as expressed prior to and during the sales process.

For every exception (see above freeloading garaged local), there are hundreds of not thousands who happily charge at home if possible and who in any case never/rarely use SCs to begin with.

Livery and ICEing >>> freeloading garaged locals - all of whom are relatively easily identified anyway.

In short, in Tesla I trust - but verify.
 
...and let's not kid ourselves. That $2,000 was built in to the price of all the other cars that came with the capability. Even on the 60's, Tesla just flips a software bit somewhere to let Supercharging work once you pony up.

No it wasn't. That's urban legend based purely on speculation Tesla were setting aside the entirety of the pre-order revenue of a 60, against 85s.

Truth is $500 has been set aside per car, and that $500 is supposed to last the "lifetime" of the car. That "lifetime" is 20 years! (It's in the SEC filings, but requires reverse financial engineering to figure out. )

This all would have been based on actuarial assumptions, with a non representative set of owners and usage patterns for where we are today. Unfortunately all the circumstantial evidence, of which this is just another example, would point to these assumptions being out enough to cause Tesla a problem.

Classic, classic, classic mistake with these sorts of offers. Be it Chinese restaurants, voucher schemes, free holiday offers, you name it. Where you play the odds of take up, and get it wrong you catch a cold. Accounting history is littered with examples!
 
Circumstantially this really does suggest their is a problem with how things have panned out with the costing and/or usage models.

Tesla has had a number of "it seemed like a good idea at the time" moments. Just look at the threads on new limits and fees on Ranger service.

- - - Updated - - -

No it wasn't. That's urban legend based purely on speculation Tesla were setting aside the entirety of the pre-order revenue of a 60, against 85s.

Well, whatever it was, Elon has stated that the cost of Supercharging is built in to the price of the cars.
 
It amazes me to what extent some people are willing to defend a public, multi-billion company who made such statements.

I guess we will see lawsuits by angry owners in case Tesla ever decides to limit SC use or access. Then, the courts can decide what was advertised/promised and what is exactly included for the lifetime of the vehicles.

The only way to ever escape this mess would be to grandfather all current owners and change the rules going forward (for new buyers after date X in the future).

I'm not sure the vile is needed, as I don't believe anybody (even Tesla) has place any bonafide limit on Supercharge access, nor will they retroactively do so.

Any change to the plan for Model S cars will be after XX date / serial number, and virtually nobody believes the same plan will be offered to other cars (however, I'd bet Model X will get the same plan).

In the grand scheme of things, the 100,000 cars running around with grandfather "unlimited" plans will hopefully be small to the millions of Tesla cars on a different plan.
 
As I have been saying for months, Tesla's biggest ongoing problem is they're klutzes at communication. They lack the empathy, sensitivity, leadership, creativity, discretion, humor, accountability, and plain old good sense when it comes to the corporate bureaucracy communicating to the outside world. They lack the imagination to do wonders with technology -- to integrate it creatively into the car, into the TM website's My Tesla section, and into the mobile apps -- to make the communications between company and customer as wonderful as the car itself. They have not shown any consistent understanding of the importance of managing expectations. This leads to customer confusion, customer disappointment. A disappointed customer is the worst thing a company can have. Especially in the social media, always-on internet age. Of ALL companies Tesla should understand this. They do not. Or they do, but they haven't made it a priority. It reflects poorly on management, and management is sorely responsible for these screwups.

As I have also been saying for months, ALL of this is fixable. It takes management recognizing and admitting there is a problem, understanding the urgency of correcting the problem, finding competent people who know how to fix the problem in terms of process, people, and IT infrastructure, trusting them to be turned loose to make the changes, and making it clear to the whole company this is how things will be done from now on: each employee whose job outwardly faces the customer world needs to be accountable. Systems need to be put in place, and quality assurance tests done and verified, that when the company communicates out to the world, the message is correct, the appropriate recipients receive the message, inappropriate recipients do not by accident receive the message, and things just WORK.

This is not Tesla today. It NEEDS to be Tesla soon or the company will be in a world of hurt come mass deployment of the X and the 3.

After going through 140 posts in this thread and saving a few to respond to, I have to respond to this one now before reading on. Yes, most of us here are fanbois and fangurls and even investors (I'm all three... but only #2 on Halloween ;D ). But there are huge issues here with this letter, and to brush it under the rug just because it does offend you personally is not really the ideal response, imho. Maybe it's partly because I work in the world of public communications, but I'd say most of my concern is that Tesla is now a huge company that should have better checks in place to guard against such things.

Objectively, whether you think it should have or not, this letter pissed off a lot of Tesla owners... Tesla fanbois even! Because it accused them of doing something wrong that 1) doesn't apply to them, and 2) doesn't fit with the loose and strong promotion of the Superchargers provided for a long time.

I agree that it was first of all a big error in the algorithm, which should have had enough checks in place (this is a Silicon Valley company, after all) to have not messed up so badly, and then was also a big error in the communications for not being more cautious in case the person receiving the email shouldn't have received it. Of course, the latter is slightly more forgivable since they obviously thought they were sending these letters to the right people.

This is a mistake on a few levels, and given the repeated concerns from numerous people here about communications errors, I think it's well warranted to write what you wrote and encourage a big shift in this side of the business before it's "too late."

TMC forum members are great at realizing things before the crowd, but when it is something negative, we should realize that the best response is to try to get the problematic pattern dealt with rather than infinitely forgive Tesla because we love the company, love Elon, love the mission, and love the vehicles. The mass market will not be so forgiving, and the result would be counterproductive.

On to reading more responses here. And, yes, writing up a story, which is still forming in my head, for very influential fanboi sites that I know is followed by many more influential sites... which is one reason why I, for one, am exceedingly cautious about how I communicate and frame issues. The ideal, of course, is to help the world (or help society help itself, to be more direct).