-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla open up the SuC network [in UK]
- Thread starter kelvin 660
- Start date
phil4
Member
I'm with Durzel. The charging network until now has been the #1 thing every reviewer has talked about. It's also pretty key in everyone I've talked to either who has or was thinking of buying one.
That stops being a differentiator. Then Tesla need to relay on the others, which just aren't as strong. Sure there's other things I like about my Telsa, but I also miss things like Apple Car Play and Heads up displays. And yes, competitors can do that. And if they can also use Superchargers, that's just a lot of good reasons to go elsewhere.
I also disagree that this help Tesla or their shareholders. Short term, sure... but anything more than a few months and it'll be very much downward spiral. Tesla make peanuts from the charging network, and even if it's open to everyone it'll still be peanuts. If they sell less cars, they have much less profit.
Or put it a different and rather extreme way. If Tesla stopped selling cars today. And instead relied only on an expanded the charging network, how long do you think they'd last? Their share price and income would take a nosedive, an their value with it. Gridserve are doing this, and they're hardly one of the most valuable companies in the world.
That stops being a differentiator. Then Tesla need to relay on the others, which just aren't as strong. Sure there's other things I like about my Telsa, but I also miss things like Apple Car Play and Heads up displays. And yes, competitors can do that. And if they can also use Superchargers, that's just a lot of good reasons to go elsewhere.
I also disagree that this help Tesla or their shareholders. Short term, sure... but anything more than a few months and it'll be very much downward spiral. Tesla make peanuts from the charging network, and even if it's open to everyone it'll still be peanuts. If they sell less cars, they have much less profit.
Or put it a different and rather extreme way. If Tesla stopped selling cars today. And instead relied only on an expanded the charging network, how long do you think they'd last? Their share price and income would take a nosedive, an their value with it. Gridserve are doing this, and they're hardly one of the most valuable companies in the world.
Pretty sure the gov will have a say in if that can happen or not. Once reliance on a certain network is established they’ll have to sell off part of it.
It happens with offshore windfarms after construction is complete. 1 operator can’t own all the asset so usually the turbines stay with the contructor, the offshore substations, export cable and onshore substations get sold to other investors (usually finance & pension funds)
Bantam
Member
Is that the new BP Garage in Shipley? For such a massive forecourt it puzzled me they didn't future proof it by installing EV chargers, makes sense now.Problem is not just Tesla’s. The infrastructure needs to be upgraded in a lot of locations hence the slow progress on other chargers. The fact is the DNO’s build substations to suit demand plus a small extra capacity for demand to expand in the area. To change the substations is a massive issue & doesn’t happen overnight. A brand new garage in Shipley wanted to add 4 EV charger points and was knocked back because the local substations didn’t have the capacity. This is happening all over the UK
Not sure I see him having that much leverage, with regards to the UK. The govt could just legislate chargers as public interest and mandate them being open to all.
The only way it makes sense to me is if Tesla/Elon's mission really is to push EV adoption along, at whatever cost to itself or the owners who have bought cars with a reasonable expectation of predictable depreciation, etc.
I am keen to see everyone move to EVs, but ultimately I am one guy who has a load of money in a car. If Tesla make decisions that wipe out a significant part of the value of that car, "for the greater good", then I have no choice but to take the financial hit in the short term, and then look elsewhere when it comes to my next car.
To be blunt - I'm happy to finance the advancement of Tesla within the EV sphere, by buying one of their cars, but I'm not happy about basically being kicked in the nuts on residuals, because of a decision never communicated to me when I bought the car, or that I have any say in, when the company figurehead is the 1st or 2nd richest guy in the world, and I'm just Joe Bloggs just hoping not to take a double digit % bath on the purchase price of my car.
Perhaps Elon does really want to see everyone in an EV, even if that means Tesla lose more and more market share/profits, and essentially wither away. It's not like he needs to worry financially about it. The rest of us, however...
I don't want to get all hyperbole about this but this decision (to open the entire Netherlands up) is making me seriously think about selling my car before it becomes a thing over here. I can't see how it won't have a significant impact on resale values, because the market to whom you're selling to doesn't even have to factor in the supercharger network anymore, as it'll be available to them whatever car they buy. And, as you say, there are plenty of manufacturers making cars better in areas where Tesla is lacking.
interbear
Active Member
Is there any info on what the pricing structure is in The Netherlands for Tesla vehicles vs non-Tesla vehicles on the supercharger network?
This is a key point. Tesla needs, in my opinion, to maintain a significant differentiator in the charging network. If it opens up access to all vehicles, then the only way to differentiate is pricing. By that I mean non-Tesla vehicles should pay significantly more. And even then, I'm not convinced it would be enough to persuade me to select a Tesla as my next car vs an alternative as I only use superchargers for around 10-15% of my driving.
This is a key point. Tesla needs, in my opinion, to maintain a significant differentiator in the charging network. If it opens up access to all vehicles, then the only way to differentiate is pricing. By that I mean non-Tesla vehicles should pay significantly more. And even then, I'm not convinced it would be enough to persuade me to select a Tesla as my next car vs an alternative as I only use superchargers for around 10-15% of my driving.
Makes me thankful I leased rather than bought tbh at least I won't be taking the hit personally. I have the greatest sympathy for anyone who has bought and will probably take a big hit though, assuming it goes ahead in UK. I'm not looking forward to not being able to get on a SC though just because an ID3 has taken 2 slots so it can get the lead plugged in from one!
It was certainly a big big part of my decision to go with a Tesla though and if I had known this was in the pipeline may have waited for delivery of something else.
I wonder where anti competition laws would stand on this? Unless Tesla can prove that part of the cost of purchasing one of there cars is going towards the cost of the SC network I don't see how they can charge more for a non Tesla to charge. There's no difference in unit cost for any ICE vehicle over another to fill up at any forecourt is there, so I don't see how Tesla can charge more per unit for electricity.
It's a nominal difference, and can be reduced by paying a monthly fee.
From InsideEvs.com:
phil4
Member
Price doesn't really remove the differentiator. Say my PCP is up on my model 3, and I'm looking now at the BMW i4 or whatever it's called. Yes, the Tesla chargers are more expensive, but you know what, I can use them... and that's only for the few times a year I do, so great to have the option.
Maybe they're charging more than double as a lot of cars use two spaces? Based on my use I'd be wary of subscribing to something I often don't use for a month or two.
I’d make a guess HMG will get involved at some point in the future. Just because a carmaker part owns something doesn’t necessarily give it the right to better costs for it’s own customers. Pretty sure car manufacturers hold shares in BP, Shell etc but you don’t get reduced costs at any fuel station for driving a particular manufacturers ICE vehicle. It’s unfair competition for other manufacturers in essence.
Similar threads
- Article
