Supercharging Price - What if it is $2500?

[CHG-ON]

I paid to enable supercharging on my 9-14 P85+. I totally get the OP's point. But I didn't do it thinking that I would either save money over gas or even break even. I did it to have the functionality. And I will say, it has proved priceless. While 95% of my charging is at home, there are places that I could not get to without a supercharger. Or, I would have to wait for a ridiculous amount of time at a L2 charger, which would make my trips untenable. So I paid for the incredible convenience. I must say, plugging in for 30 minutes while I grocery shop before visiting family and coming out to a charged up car is about as good as it gets.

I would be totally fine with a per kw charge over paying up front. I am sure I would end up spending less. But it wasn't an option then and still is not. It will be very interesting to see how this goes. It's still much cheaper to pay for electricity than gas. But I wonder about the psychological impact of knowing that one would be billed whenever they use it. It might cut down on locals taking advantage of the "free" charging they now have, thus freeing up slots. Though I have yet to see any valid data on how much of a problem this might be.

 

[timk225]

Paying about $3 every time I plug into a supercharger feels about right to me. I don't use it, I don't pay. Seems fair, to me.

 

[MassModel3]

'Tisn't.

Well, 'Tis for me (currently). But as so many have pointed out, 'tis ain't gonna be the case with the 3. Not by a long shot, I'm sure.

 

[ohmman]

Mod note: Changed title to be more accurate.

 

[CuriousG]

Post number 26 in this thread explains everything:

Now you can see why I sold all my shares

Well the guy is either:
A) Pathological liar
B) Full of excrement
C) On here to create FUD
D) All of the above

 

[xav-]

What if it is $3,000? I really wonder... ? Should I log a new thread for that?

 

[Az_Rael]

I fully expect the "lifetime plan" to be painfully expensive. Tesla does not price things cheaply as a general rule. So I would guess it will be at least $2500 and possibly more.

They may be wanting more people signing up for the new "plans" however that pans out. I am guessing the idea would be revenue generated over time vs a one time fee (either by monthly or yearly or by hour, etc).

 

[MP3Mike]

Paying about $3 every time I plug into a supercharger feels about right to me. I don't use it, I don't pay. Seems fair, to me.

But that would generate enough revenue to build and maintain the Supercharger network, so there would be no network to plug in to.

How do people not get that?

 

[S'toon]

I fully expect the "lifetime plan" to be painfully expensive. Tesla does not price things cheaply as a general rule. So I would guess it will be at least $2500 and possibly more.

They may be wanting more people signing up for the new "plans" however that pans out. I am guessing the idea would be revenue generated over time vs a one time fee (either by monthly or yearly or by hour, etc).

This makes absolutely no sense. Why on Earth would Tesla charge more for lifetime supercharging than it does on the Model S? Especially considering the car costs half as much as the S.

 

[TaoJones]

Pay per use would be great for the majority of people who don't happen to take long distance trips often.

Plenty of ChaDeMo already offer that.

While your point is well-taken, why should Tesla clutter up the SC network with poo-poo (ppu or pay-per-use schemes) because you want to save $2,500? Which btw it probably won't cost for the Model 3 SC access, but still - a used ChaDeMo adapter and $19.95/30 days of unlimited usage (AeroVironment network) of full-strength, fully-functional ChaDeMo) is about as close to free as it gets.

 

[Az_Rael]

This makes absolutely no sense. Why on Earth would Tesla charge more for lifetime supercharging than it does on the Model S? Especially considering the car costs half as much as the S.

Because they may not want people on lifetime all-you-can eat plans. That's probably unsustainable in the long run.

 

[xav-]

Because they may not want people on lifetime all-you-can eat plans. That's probably unsustainable in the long run.

My argument was that the average model 3 user is more likely to depend on superchargers for local charging than the average MS user (younger folks, not as likely to live in single family house, or to own etc).. This is especially true in expensive parts of the country where the tesla brand is hugely popular such as the sf Bay Area, LA area etc

 

[JeffK]

Because they may not want people on lifetime all-you-can eat plans. That's probably unsustainable in the long run.

They've actually mentioned how it is, in fact, sustainable and energy costs are negligible... Also, "lifetime all-you-can eat" plans separate them from the competition.

 

[TexasEV]

I paid to enable supercharging on my 9-14 P85+. I totally get the OP's point.

Reallly? All 85s always had supercharging included in the base price of the car. Only in 60s was it optional to pay to enable supercharging.

 

[Az_Rael]

They've actually mentioned how it is, in fact, sustainable and energy costs are negligible... Also, "lifetime all-you-can eat" plans separate them from the competition.

Right, but in that same talk, Straubel talked about how they would need to "phase in a financial transaction" in the future. I think we might be seeing the beginning of that with the Model 3.

 

[zenmaster]

Plenty of ChaDeMo already offer that.

While your point is well-taken, why should Tesla clutter up the SC network with poo-poo (ppu or pay-per-use schemes) because you want to save $2,500? Which btw it probably won't cost for the Model 3 SC access, but still - a used ChaDeMo adapter and $19.95/30 days of unlimited usage (AeroVironment network) of full-strength, fully-functional ChaDeMo) is about as close to free as it gets.

The SC network is a stop-gap necessary evil, in place while battery tech matures to enable much longer distances between recharge. Rather they use those millions on battery tech R&D rather than building filling stations. Meanwhile a long-distance travel, demand based funding model would support the necessary development just fine. Tesla already has the stats for travel locations.

 

[Shawn Snider]

Pay per use would be great for the majority of people who don't happen to take long distance trips often.

......... The SC's aren't a Gas Pump...... They don't have built-in Visa Card readers........ Why do people keep saying Tesla is going to do some retarded 'subscription' SC program.... /headshake

 

[JeffK]

Right, but in that same talk, Straubel talked about how they would need to "phase in a financial transaction" in the future. I think we might be seeing the beginning of that with the Model 3.

In the original patent US008643330, they describe cash, debit, and subscription models as well.

 

[SolarUnderwood]

That comes out to 1111 gallons of gas approx. or 50k miles.
I don't know about any of you but I won't be using it much.
Personally, I think 500.00 might be the correct amount. That's 10k miles of gas.
No, I don't think I'll ever get to charge up at sc stations for that number of miles in my life.
I have solar/wind and water power.
I probably won't be happy paying at the charger due to hacking.
I just might not get it at all.

Just my thoughts.

You're absolutely right, but superchargers are meant to be a traveling convenience that saves time. That said, it's still probably not worth $2500 for most.

 

[Shawn Snider]

Right, but in that same talk, Straubel talked about how they would need to "phase in a financial transaction" in the future. I think we might be seeing the beginning of that with the Model 3.

Link to the video/audio where Straubel says this please.