3Victoria
Active Member
Well you have had a good dizcussion and bad-mouthed various. Are we sure there actually is a policy change? So far it is one incident.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla service loaner policy
- Thread starter andrewket
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
There are ways to adapt without breaking promises.
The OP indicated that the real concern was what would happen when the Model 3 came out, and that Tesla wanted to get out in front of that, so was making the change now. Tesla did not want to have a "class" issue with Model S and Model X customers receiving better service than Model 3 customers.
That's all fine.
So why not have the new policy affect all new sales, and allow the old policy to remain in effect for existing customers? Tesla could even explain to existing customers that if they want a Tesla loaner, the wait for service will be, say, two weeks, but if they are willing to accept an ICE loaner the wait will be only, say, one week. This would partially solve the crunch for loaners issue in a reasonable and fair way, without completely removing a promised option.
I agree that Elon Musk does not set out to intentionally deceive. I just think he does not place as high a value as he should on not breaking promises or under-delivering to existing customers. In general, policies should change for customers who have not purchased yet. That leaves things pretty black and white, as you're not winding up in a situation where you are disappointing people.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
There are many things that are common in the auto industry. We expect more from and were promised better by Tesla.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
I don't expect Tesla to pay for warranty repairs for excessive launch mode yahoos.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
Some of those yahoos spent $20 thousand, $30 thousand, or $40 thousand more for their cars than the non-performance versions would have cost. If Tesla was going to limit the cars' performance ability, they needed to say so up front, as they are now doing with a disclaimer on the website. They shouldn't unilaterally and retroactively reduce the performance capabilities of the car!
This is getting off-topic, though, and there is a thread dedicated to the discussion of this. It's here:
Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I also agree with you holding Tesla's feet to the fire. There's nothing wrong with that.
I just don't see it as an intention to deceive and I don't want to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater.
If Tesla made no mistakes, I'd be surprised. Instead, I'm surprised they're still alive and I push back against you because I don't think you give enough credit where credit is due. That's all.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
That is fair.
But I hope you would agree that maintaining large fleet of expensive loaners, constantly rotating and depreciating said fleet is incredibly stupid business decision. I don't know what Elon was thinking when originally initiating that policy, except that he wanted to be different in every way?
This finally explains why Tesla has so many demo cars with mileage, cars that need to be nicely discounted to be moved; I had no idea this was going on. I was actually (secretly) afraid there was quiet plan and employees intentionally put some miles on new cars, so they can discount those cars last two quarters, (Q3 and Q4 this year) to empty the pipeline. Pheeeww...
Obviously, I have no Tesla of my own yet (am investor and have M3 reservation), but I've been a car guy for a long while. No one else is doing it this way, with a good reason. Usually when there are loaners, they're few in numbers, mostly lower end models, they serve for a long-ish period of time (~1 year) and are then sold. They're not sold willy-nilly during their tour of duty, but at the end, to control overall depreciation of the loaner fleet. Earliest model year cars are put to service and are sold towards the end of that model year, inside of the same year
Anyway, what this is telling me is that:
a) Jason Wheeler runs some numbers on depreciation/revenue and then slapped Elon hard, or,
b) Tesla expects to be able to sell everything they can make in 2017, easy, and is going for margins; batting down hatches to be able to go through without capital raise if it has to.
This is just a cost control at work. It doesn't mean it won't change, when there are cheaper Model 3's to serve as a loaner fleet. Tesla has been spending as a drunken sailor, I'm glad there is someone paying attention. And yeah, it does suck for those used to higher standard, but how much of a problem this really is?
Last edited:
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I generally don't see it as intention to deceive either. I would just like to see Tesla work harder, which at times might mean spending more, to keep promises that have been made.
And I think I do give credit when it's due. Here's part of one of my posts from a few days ago, when I was the first to post about receiving a new firmware version in the firmware thread:
(Bold just added.)
Newscutter
Member
This has not generally been my experience, though I did have one halo loaner for one weekend trip. But that was just because Tesla decided at last minute they didn't want me to take my car... so they reluctantly handed it over. The rest have been (at best) equal to my car or older--- but I'm not complaining, happy to have ANY free loaner! Just pointing out that Tesla promises are "flexible".
I would say the thing about deception, overpromise/underdeliver, policy changes etc. at Tesla quite likely comes down to this:
1) At times irresponsibly optimistic statements beforehand. I think most agree there is probably no intent to deceive here, though at some cases there might be a case of they really should know better and reasonably could be expected to know better that to announce such things.
2) Followed by an unfortunately constrained willingness to discuss such underdeliveries frankly when they happen. I think we have enough evidence already to suggest Tesla is not very transparent about issues. This is the part where questions of actual deception might arise.
3) Instead of timely transparency, the propensity of trying to fix such underdeliveries through some present-day weaseling, more promises and future products (e.g. fix P85D issues with P90DL and then fix P90DL issues with P100D...).
Things in 1) are made worse by some really bombastic announcements Tesla made very early on in their existence, like the ranger service, the service network policies as well as free all-you-can-eat Supercharging. All of which they now have a hard time keeping and have made some really significant changes to the worse. Tesla's tendendy to 2) does not help here, because they are trying to change things quietly or by making it sound as little as breaking promises as possible... when actual frankness would increase transparency and probably buy more customer loyalty.
This is my speculation on what is going on. I really wish they would change culture here. What they do is valuable and special enough as it it, without the hyperbole. These antics are potentially endangering that more than helping it.
1) At times irresponsibly optimistic statements beforehand. I think most agree there is probably no intent to deceive here, though at some cases there might be a case of they really should know better and reasonably could be expected to know better that to announce such things.
2) Followed by an unfortunately constrained willingness to discuss such underdeliveries frankly when they happen. I think we have enough evidence already to suggest Tesla is not very transparent about issues. This is the part where questions of actual deception might arise.
3) Instead of timely transparency, the propensity of trying to fix such underdeliveries through some present-day weaseling, more promises and future products (e.g. fix P85D issues with P90DL and then fix P90DL issues with P100D...).
Things in 1) are made worse by some really bombastic announcements Tesla made very early on in their existence, like the ranger service, the service network policies as well as free all-you-can-eat Supercharging. All of which they now have a hard time keeping and have made some really significant changes to the worse. Tesla's tendendy to 2) does not help here, because they are trying to change things quietly or by making it sound as little as breaking promises as possible... when actual frankness would increase transparency and probably buy more customer loyalty.
This is my speculation on what is going on. I really wish they would change culture here. What they do is valuable and special enough as it it, without the hyperbole. These antics are potentially endangering that more than helping it.
Last edited:
mhonig
Help - cards disappeared on Model S Console
I had been promised a loaner at the Tampa CS but instead got an Enterprise loaner. A month later I was charged for it. Part was rebated but not for collision waivers which I didn't ask for, particularly since Tesla prepared the rental forms and the Enterprise bill said to bill Tesla.
Andy has shown himself to be a reasonable person on this forum for a long time and to intimate otherwise is ridiculous. I don't think any other reasonable person here wants Tesla to self-sacrifice or sabotage their business - I expected them to recoup whatever costs they were incurring as part of the service charges. Now, if due to hubris or any other reason they are having to perform so much warranty work that it is costing them a fortune then that's a whole other issue that won't be resolved by taking away customer perks.
Since Tesla boasted about its loaner program on its blog a couple of years ago perhaps they could be just as communicative with a new blog post explaining why it's changing now (if that indeed is the case).
Not every Tesla customer cares about Tesla's "bigger picture" goal. Many of them just want the best car for the money. If Tesla is willing to lose some of those customers and only wants the ones who care about their bigger picture goals then they seem to be getting on the right track.
Last edited:
This is the post in which I believe.
FWIW, once I did have an Enterprise loaner. That was for an unexpected 12v battery change. I would not expect anybody to be prepared for every since unscheduled emergency loaner. I must say Enterprise offered me anything they had with no charge to me. That was nice too.
@JonMc - Thank you for the clarification!
Mike
EDIT: For those that don't know, Jon is in charge of Tesla's Service
Last edited:
OMG, I would have been very angry about that. If they (either Tesla or Enterprise) messed up the forms by adding collision, then THEY needed to handle it, not you.
I think they need to offer loaners, since even the $35k entry-level luxury brand market offers loaners. It was always a perk for buying a Lexus/Acura/Audi, etc. vs a Toyota or Honda for the same price. I think the real problem is the service backlog. Annual service appointments should be able to be done while you wait, or provide a free shuttle service for services that are complete in one day. That reduces the loaner demand to only multi-day repairs. It seems like some locations are so backed up that they don't get to an annual service for a few days, causing everyone at those locations to need a loaner.
Thanks Jon. Glad you are still around to shoot stuff like this down. Keeping promises is important!
