Supercharging letter from Tesla 8-13-2015

[lg_golfs]

I like to Supercharge. It gives me a chance to see and say hello to other Tesla owners as well as talk to prospective owners. Heck, one time I spent a nice chunk of time happily telling a new owner how to use his TACC.

I would be more than fine with some sort of fee to use local Superchargers if I had enough range to get home. I also however would never use one if it was packed and I could make it home with the charge I have.

 

[Andyw2100]

It won't be long before someone with letters after their name picks this up and runs with it. The policy they used was aggressively trying to pull as much revenue forward into the current year as possible.

FWIW The SEC have already questioned Tesla over Supercharging, and I felt Tesla's response was pretty weak. I wouldn't be surprised if the next question is much more specific asking for OPEX figures, not "cost" which TM have replied with asset value, and projected CAPEX:

Finally we have the "change in accounting estimate," which is what the Supercharger liability accrual is considered. Financial statements are full of estimates. When circumstances change, or hard data prove that the calculations are materially incorrect, then the change is a current period item, and prior years are not restated. If the dollar amount is material, Tesla likely would disclose in a footnote (or management discussion) something like, "Supercharger usage over the past twelve months has exceeded our estimates by approximately $X per Model S sold. Accordingly, we have revised our revenue deferral per unit sold from $Y to $Z. We charged to operations approximately $AB,CDE,GHI in the current period to reflect this change in estimate."

Whether their "estimates" could run afoul of SEC requirements and invite scrutiny by their staff is something that I have no experience with in my professional career.

This may be a crazy thought, but is it possible that Tesla intentionally sent the letter to a larger audience, to improve their position if they are questioned by the SEC again, or simply to improve appearances to the investors if they do have to make that "change in accounting estimate?" I admittedly have only the most limited understanding of this stuff, but it would seem a more widely distributed letter could help in either of those scenarios.

 

[omarsultan]

They did in Rocklin, CA with solar.

I am not sure what they did in Rocklin is a scalable solution--its two huge banks of solar panels pointing in two different directions. It might work in other Tesla-owned locations, but that is a lot of infra and space for most of the SCs that are essentially on borrowed real estate. As other folks have pointed out, the offset does not have to happen at the point of consumption, so perhaps they pursue the panels-plus-storage-in-the-desert option?

 

[Scotty]

I think he meant that if could make it home, but would arrive on a very low charge, he rather charge up at a supercharger on the way home so the car is still ready in the evening in case something comes up, worst case maybe a emergency.

Thank you. My comment strictly applies to my use / concern / situation.

1) I'd like to fully charge (top up so to speak) at home, but wait, My MS WARNS me that charging to max range will decrease the lifespan and range of my battery pack.

2) I'm will get an 80% charge at any one of the SC's when I'm near them, even when heading home (45 to 100 miles) so as to have the ability to drive the car later, before a slower, acceptable charge could be achieved using my HPWC.

I don't limit this to 'emergency trips, however. I plan on driving my MS in lieu of my other ICE vehicles. I do not plan on driving my ICE car because my MS is charging at home (in lieu of SC usage) but doesn't yet have sufficient range. So I'm going to have to drive my ICE, because I'm charging at home but don't have enough range, because Tesla sent me a letter after I bought my MS labeling me an abuser of their highly touted, publicized and marketed SC network.

If we expect EV's to become more mainstream, we have to be able to present them as equitanle to ICE usage. If I have to drive my ICE to a gas station to put enough gas in it for a suddent trip, the actual fueling might be 5 minutes, to get max range on my ICE. With a SC on max (not shared) I'd be sitting there for an hour. Let's not even talk about 120 Volt charging, or 240V charging at less than 40 Amps.

My question to you all is this.

What truly prompted the letters?

1) Tesla has sold 10's of thousands of MS's, with the cost of the SC network incorporated in the price. Is Tesla now pinched by the $3 or $4 it costs to charge my MS?

2) Are they becoming more aware of congestion at SC'? How could anyone not see that one coming; as more MS's get sold, SC usage will increase. 5 gas stations don't adequately service a small city. Why wouldn't anyone expect usage to increase as the number of Tesla's on the road increases.

3) There are plenty of locations that clearly point out that long distance trips are not the single criteria Tesla would have us believe drives their SC network planning and implementation. Rocklin, Folsom and Roseville.... The LA area If I'm driving the I-5 corridor, Harris Ranch is overwhelmed. Talk about a lond distance trip mandated SC stop, but it is grossly ill equipped to handle but a few Tesla's, but in the Roseville area, the network can handle orders of magnitude more Tesla's charging .

4) Is this to manipulate Tesla investors? Sure, Tesla shares your concern about additional vehicles requiring additional SC locations, but hey, we've sent out a letter!

5) We're not even talking about the additional demands of the Model X, and perhaps the Model 3. Hard to speculate, since Tesla is more secretive than _______ (fill in the blank).

6) Tesla is trying to deflect attention away from something. Don't know what, for sure. I hardly think that the SC usage is killing Tesla as a corporate entity.

And I'm sure there are other thoughts and/or conspiracy theories out there.

Scotty

 

[dsm363]

You can top up at home. Just set your slider to 90% and plug in at 80A if you feel you need that much speed in charging.

It's been said before the letter went out to people that shouldn't have gotten it too.

 

[ohmman]

I can't imagine someone seeing 80A charging as being limiting. I get 58 miles of range per charge hour. I suppose if you drive 100 miles home, then need to quickly turn around and do another 100 mile outbound trip, it would be limiting. But at that point, you're not really going home. Home is a stop on a supercharger-enabled trip.

 

[tinm]

I went to a Tesla test drive event this weekend and got to chatting with two Tesla people there about the notorious supercharger "abuse" letter. They knew nothing about it. They were kinda of shocked to hear it'd gone to people for whom there's no evidence of overuse of a local supercharger.

 

[Electroman]

I cringe reading that there are some Tesla owners who somehow think that they have prepaid $2000 worth of electricity charges and therefore they have a right to consume $2k worth of electricity no matter what.

 

[mknox]

I can't imagine someone seeing 80A charging as being limiting. I get 58 miles of range per charge hour. I suppose if you drive 100 miles home, then need to quickly turn around and do another 100 mile outbound trip, it would be limiting. But at that point, you're not really going home. Home is a stop on a supercharger-enabled trip.

Not everyone can provision a 100 amp (80 amps delivered) circuit for charging without incurring considerable expense. For instance, I have a 20 amp (16 amps delivered) circuit currently and with some expense can get that to a 50 amp circuit. Anything more would require a complete service upgrade along with utility costs for provisioning the additional capacity. Not arguing the silliness of local Supercharging, but just sayin'...

 

[yobigd20]

That is one really good suggestion. They might even add a t-shirt for the top ten people each month.

one could game the system by blasting the heater and unplugging and plugging back in over and over and over again. then i wouldn't need to buy tshirts anymore as tesla will be providing them to me for free every month

(why is this the first thought that pops into my head? must be a closet hacker haha)

- - - Updated - - -

I cringe reading that there are some Tesla owners who somehow think that they have prepaid $2000 worth of electricity charges and therefore they have a right to consume $2k worth of electricity no matter what.

isn't that what tesla implied when elon states that 'they built the cost of using the superchargers into the car?'. aka that translates to me that we all have the right to consume as much as we want.

 

[bonnie]

Some of these comments remind me of when I took my parents to a buffet in Las Vegas. I'd never seen two people eat so much food. It was unbelievable!

"We're going to get our money's worth." ... "No Mom, I think you're trying to cheat the casino at this point."

The gas in the car later in the day was not all in the fuel tank. My poor son who was in the back seat with my mom ...

 

[yobigd20]

I cringe reading that there are some Tesla owners who somehow think that they have prepaid $2000 worth of electricity charges and therefore they have a right to consume $2k worth of electricity no matter what.

heh, speaking of the devil, check out David Noland's article that just hit the web moments ago: Tesla Letter To Rein In Local Supercharger Use Goes Wrong

and his exact words:

The way I see it, I paid $2,000 for the right to Supercharge.

 

[ohmman]

Not everyone can provision a 100 amp (80 amps delivered) circuit for charging without incurring considerable expense.

Absolutely agree. My comment was more directed at the implication above that 80A might be considered limiting.

 

[mknox]

Absolutely agree. My comment was more directed at the implication above that 80A might be considered limiting.

Right. I have 80 amp chargers at work, and it is crazy fast compared to home. At 80 amps, I can gain 10% in 1/2 hour. A full 0 to 100% charge would take only 5 hours (and who actually goes empty to full?).

 

[davandy]

I agree we paid to use the superchargers. What I see as abuse is Tesla taxis in
Amsterdam using the superchargers to charge there Tesla between shifts, that's commercial
use and local.

 

[smac]

heh, speaking of the devil, check out David Noland's article that just hit the web moments ago: Tesla Letter To Rein In Local Supercharger Use Goes Wrong

and his exact words:

There's another pertinent point here, what is interesting is he has changed his use since a Supercharger opened up at his favourite restaurant.

As the roll out continues, I predict the convenience of matching the charge time to a productive task you may do anyway will simply go up. No doubt Tesla will be on this to an extent with their location targetting, but it's got to be hard as they've stated the criteria for an SpC will have nearby restroom and food facilities, which sot of puts you in those sort of areas.

Personally I'd welcome a PAYG model. I don't do enough miles, so begrudge subsidizing David's usage (Actually I don't for individuals that are considerate, but specifically I begrudge funding Taxi firms out of Heathrow that clog the Superchargers)
(DISCLAIMER: I haven't actually paid for it yet, but I think I will at some point because otherwise I'll no choice to take the hit straight off asking price come resale.)

 

[Scotty]

I appreciate the faster charging at the SC, even with the 80 Amp HPWC at home.

Let's for just a minute, look at this from another angle. If you are not fiscally concerned about Tesla ownership, and think you'll just replace your existing Tesla with a new one, whenever the factory warranty expires (or you want the new P90DD, with implants:wink, then this next issue might not concern you much.

If I'm charging at home, at any AC charging rate, I am thermally stressing the on-board charger(s). The higher the charging rate, the higher the thermal stress. Since we are talking about 240VAC at 80A (vs 120 VAC at say, 10 Amps), thermal stress is a factor in the service life of MS chargers. Thermally stressing components and assemblies can lead to premature failure. Chargers, particularly 10 kW chargers like the one (or 2) in the MS, go through a thermal cycle during each charge cycle. At an out-of-warranty cost in excess of $3000 each (including parts and labor), keep this in the back of your mind. Plugging an enabled MS into a SC causes a contactor to disconnect the charging port from the chargers' AC inputs, and then connects the charge port connectors directly to the battery pack, switching from AC charging to DC charging. That's the clunk you hear after plugging in the SC cable. Including the charger(s) in the 8 yr, unlimited mileage warranty would merit further consideration. Perhaps you're not aware of charger failures in the industry. That's a factor I'm aware of, as I'm in the Electric Vehicle industry, and chargers are a highly stressed and failure prone item. Just look at how many Delta-Q, Lester, and OEM branded golf car chargers are sold on eBay. But then, Tesla chargers aren't available on the open market, are they?

If I need to charge at 80 Amps, it's a no-brainer. I am aware of the thermal stressing on both of my on-board chargers.

Scotty

 

[TexasEV]

heh, speaking of the devil, check out David Noland's article that just hit the web moments ago: Tesla Letter To Rein In Local Supercharger Use Goes Wrong

and his exact words:

For those who haven't read his previous posts and this one, don't give him the extra clicks, I will summarize by saying he bragged about using a new local supercharger to save on his electricity cost. This is an additional data point showing the letter algorithm had false negatives as well as false positives.

Also he of all people should know that he didn't pay $2000 for the "right" to supercharge, he paid $2000 for the hardware and software in the car for DC charging. He bought a 60 with supercharging option and later upgraded the battery to 85 (the one and only person known to have been able to do that). This $2000 figure keeps getting thrown around as people thinking they paid that amount for supercharging. No one knows what amount of the car price goes for the capital expense of the supercharger network or for the ongoing expense.

 

[Oba]

... No one knows what amount of the car price goes for the capital expense of the supercharger network or for the ongoing expense.

Well, we do know from the SEC quarterly reports... $500.

 

[smac]

Also he of all people should know that he didn't pay $2000 for the "right" to supercharge, he paid $2000 for the hardware and software in the car for DC charging. He bought a 60 with supercharging option and later upgraded the battery to 85 (the one and only person known to have been able to do that). This $2000 figure keeps getting thrown around as people thinking they paid that amount for supercharging. No one knows what amount of the car price goes for the capital expense of the supercharger network or for the ongoing expense.

Technically not the hardware, it's already on board on all 60s, I confirmed I can do an upgrade OTA.

TBH It should never have been an option. Making someone pay for something inevitably makes them want to get the most from it, and even for 85 owners that didn't need the pack size they will have prescribed a hard value to the Supercharging

I think even in the early days Tesla were making margin on batteries, so this was really a push to get people to spend more on the bigger pack even if they didn't need it.

I was torn, but I figured if I didn't change my usage patterns the 85 was overkill, and lugging round all that extra weight was crazy. (I wasn't particularly price restricted per se, I just wanted a car that could do what my previous car could and didn't see the point spending more than I needed.)

Unfortunately it's lead to this meme that you have $2k worth of SpC included in all cars. In some ways I'm glad they are just shipping all cars with SpC now, but the meme will live on for a long time.