Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Australia & New Zealand' started by Electric_Blue, Sep 7, 2016.
Uber prices change by the minute based on demand,
Paint upgrade options just got US$500 cheaper as well . This might've happened at the same time as the $35k Model being cut, but I only just heard about it.
That's a US$1500 price cut for options I wanted - very happy with that.
But when I just went onto the US M3 configurator, the Standard Range is totally gone (only SR+ and up shown). That's surprising, I thought the SR without Autopilot was the 'off-menu' option that's only available though stores now, not the entire SR.
Email from Tesla rep to an Aus reservation holder:
question is, what is that gonna be? SR? MR? LR? LR RWD? LR AWD?
Hahah sorry, I seem to be stalking you across Reddit and now TMC. This was me.
Hahaha, sorry! I figured it had been 8 hours (that's like an eternity in EV news), I hadn't seen it anywhere so might as well share! And as @alexeiw123 suggested, go for the reddit karma grab!
Can't you just take the A$60K and adjust for tax, import duty and exchange rate to figure out the approximate US$ MSRP equivalent, and therefore know whether SR+ (US$40K), LR w/AWD (US$50K) or P (US$60K)?
It'll be an SR+ I would say.
If I understand it correctly, the 'off-menu' Standard Range is now a software locked SR+, with no other physical differences?
If that's the case (and assuming the SR hasn't been completely dropped by the time we order), that could definitely be a way to save $s on GST Stamp Duty .
If an SR without Autopilot, with a $1000 paint option in QLD is roughly Au$58,562 ($2k delivery + 10% GST + 2% flat QLD Stamp Duty). Then the same SR+ with AP is Au$64,611. That's a Au$7048 difference (just over US$5k).
If Tesla charge less than that to upgrade at a later stage, we've 'optimised' the purchase to keep taxes paid lower.
Although, the difference is more than what the SR+ was before the price changes (extra US$2k for SR+ and US$4k for AP after purchase). So may be a mute point....
Happy to have everyone's input, but if Tesla charge less for the software upgrade, there might be a way here to save $s.
Tesla does some strange things. They would produce a car and then deliberately make it worse than what it could be by "software locking" it. Does this happen in the computer world or anywhere else?
I guess if it helps to save some taxes then it makes sense.
You're making the mistake of thinking a Tesla is a traditional, conventional piece of hardware called a car.
It's not that at all.
I just want them to remove the luxury car tax. Given that Australian manufacturing has ended, how is it still there? Better question, what can we do to go about pushing for its removal?
I know, that's why I asked if computer companies do something similar.
The politicians love to justify the existence of the LCT by saying "if you can afford to buy a Ferrari you can afford to pay more tax", or "we will use the money raised to employ more nurses and teachers".
With the upcoming Federal election, no politician is going to talk about it. Labor certainly will not remove it, we would be lucky if they don't increase the rate. The Libs will not want to be seen as favouring the rich so they won't remove it either.
How many people bought 'HD ready' TVs before they could view any HD content? Same for UHD TVs.
They buy the TV then pay out more money later for Blu-Rays, Netflix or whatever. The content. Or 'features'.
You buy a smartphone then pay more money for apps later.
You trial software for 30 days then pay for the full version or a subscription. You upgrade the software later when it offers more features.
Times change and so does the way we pay for stuff. Yes, computer companies and software companies have been doing things this way for a long time and will continue to do so.
Hardware which needs a computer of some sort to work conventionally used dedicated CPUs. Now we have FPGAs which are basically very large, powerful, flexible devices capable of doing all sorts of things defined by the software running on them. This is the future of electronics or any complex piece of hardware, including cars.
We don't see Apple making two physically identical iPhones with different pricing, but one is slower and has less battery storage because it's been hampered by a software lock, and it can be upgraded for a fee. Anyway, I don't want to start an argument, just finding some of Tesla's practices a bit strange.
The only financial justifications for this pricing structure is:
- A software locked battery may have less warranty issues down the line as it is not routinely charged to 100%
- It ends up being cheaper for Tesla to make in the long run due to a simplified production line while maintaining a tiered pricing structure
- It lowers the cost of entry, meaning they sell more cars and a healthy percentage of owners will come back later and pay the upgrade cost when they can afford to
But @tom_cauf you would still pay GST on the after delivery sale. So you only save the 2% stamp duty.
Actually as an owner of multiple iphone phones of the same type, I can confirm that they do indeed make some of them slower and some with a lesser battery. They just cant seem to tell me how to unlock these to be the same as the ones that work well.
Closest comparison in my mind is when AMD used to lock some of its AMD Phenom 955 Quad Core CPUs down to Dual core and sell them as Phenom 550s. There was then a way for consumers to unlock the two cores to get a full 955 (albeit with less overclocking capability as only the lower quality chips ended up getting binned as 550s)
The obvious thing at least to my naive mind for Tesla to do, is to sell a SW locked car for under the LCT threshold, you buy it, and then pay a bit more to unlock the features, thus avoiding the LCT. But I bet there are clauses in the legislation that prevents a new car seller from doing this sort of thing, otherwise it would be all over the place. Does anyone know if this is true?
I think the issue is covered under the part of the legislation that deals with tax avoidance