Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I see a lot of improvements in the last year. At first when the communication channel transitioned to being 100% through the Tesla app, it was a bit unclear how to contact service, which caused some months of confusion. Now we know that if you need service, you book an appointment, Tesla triage the request and contact you back, usually same day, then if possible solve with a Ranger appointment (or remote diagnostic). I had one booked last week on Friday for a loose wheel-arch trim, got a call on Thursday from the Ranger who "had some spare time, was in the area and could pass by, do it today", to which my answer was "sure!"

Since when did things like this ever get resolved sooner than planned, it's top-notch service, and having the foresight to have the necessary parts in the ranger's car (MCRed P85) ahead of time is smart

I also suspect that we here in this forum have probably experienced the worst of Tesla Service in the past, not least because many of us were early adopters, early build cars which needed some attention more than would be considered normal, also during the period when the company was scaling fast and through long periods of parts shortages, so our perceptions are skewed somewhat negatively. On Twitter, I interact with a lot of Tesla owners who've bought their car in the last three years and other than accident repairs, seems very few require any service these days. The build quality of the cars is way ahead of where it was

Well said! We've been amazed at the service but I can't say we have much experience, even after owning two cars for over three years. Mostly stuff like installing new tires or upgrading our FSD computers at no charge ( both times they contacted us and requested we schedule it). Last month they replaced the under-fairing after I tore it off the mounts on snow plow debris. They replaced it quickly, with smiles and at no charge (I definitely wasn't expecting that)!

I have no doubt some peoples experience is less than perfect because there is no way every experience is going to perfect. It's impossible, the best Tesla or any company can do is to try their best. There are going to be disagreements about who did what, who scratched this, who dented that, the goal is to keep them to an absolute minimum. Just as some auto dealerships are crooked and try to skate from problems of their own making, some customers are less than honest and try to get the company to fix things they didn't do (by claiming the small scratch or dent to their otherwise perfect car wasn't there when they brought it in or some other such nonsense). It's important to realize the customer isn't always right.

Tesla is a pragmatic company and wants to provide fair and honest service at an affordable price. Their goal is not to make money on service. Unlike legacy auto dealerships who have dealerships that exist to make a profit for their small business owners (and sometimes it's not such a small business with the modern 'auto groups'), Tesla Service Centers only exist to serve the buyers of their vehicles, they do not try to make as much profit as possible (or indeed, any profit at all). The profit comes from the sale of new cars so they have to keep their customers happy. But that doesn't mean they have to act like every customer is always right. In fact, I'm glad they don't because we would all pay for that.

So, the question becomes, where does Tesla draw the line? How do the managers of Tesla Service Centers decide when to perform free work and when to bill the customer? This is an important question because it determines how much paid service will cost. We would all pay more if Tesla just assumed every customer was always right. Currently, Tesla does not have lower rates than legacy dealerships, at least not dramatically so at this time. And that's because a new entrant to the market that is growing as quickly as Tesla has a very low ratio of paid work/free work. The average age of their fleet is still very young and within warranty so the economies of scale for Tesla to provide low cost paid service simply aren't there yet.

That said, it's not in Tesla's best interest to "cheap out" and refuse repair when they are logically responsible. I'm pretty sure they have given their Service Managers a very straight-forward and sensible policy to follow. I'm guessing it's about what you would expect it to be: If Tesla is at fault, or it's likely that Tesla is at fault, repair/replace for free with a smile. If Tesla is likely not at fault, charge for the repair/replacement. Of course Service Managers are human to so this involves some subjectivity as to who's likely to be at fault. The good thing is that, unlike just about every dealership out there, Tesla Service Managers do not have to hit certain financial targets to earn a fair salary and they will not get paid more if those financial goals are exceeded. So, they are not incentivised to cheat and lie like most legacy auto service managers are. It's never going to be perfect, but it's a lot better than what's already out there and as the out-of-warranty/in warranty ratio continues to grow, we can expect Tesla to offer ever-increasing industry-leading value when your car needs non-warranty service or repair.

There will always be a few "squeaky wheels" who loudly proclaim how unfairly they've been treated but Tesla doesn't have a lot of incentive to not try to operate in a fair and pragmatic manner. So, when I hear the typical "horror service story" I take it with a larger grain of salt vs. similar stories at legacy dealerships that have more monetary incentive to screw the customer. In both cases it's possible the customer is being reasonable but, in my experience, Tesla Service Centers are far more pragmatic and reasonable than dealerships.
 
Arenko, doing exactly what autobidder does. Show we the EVIDENCE that tesla somehow provides a better ROI on energy trading than they do.

The value of the software will be largely dependent on how much profit it is able to return. It's not necessarily a straight-forward programming endeavor either as one action can start a chain of reactions. Timing will play into it as well. It's the kind of problem that responds exceedingly well to the skilled use of AI. I can see how a skilled auto-bidder might be able to prevent a fossil-fueled generator from starting up which could then lead to more profit in the following hours. Just one example of many.

I'm not foolish enough to assume one is better than the other (or that they are both identical). However, given the nature of the problem, I know who I would put my money on. 😉
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kbM3
can start a chain of reactions.
Which also suggests the size of the network of connected auto bidder devices is key. There's a definite advantage to being first. Or at least first to get to a certain size in any particular area. I would think Tesla likely has California in the bag. It's a big world though.
 
I googled it and was surprised on the answer




I though it'd be a lower percentage of EV miles.

It's important to realize, the study does not even pretend to be a representative cross-sampling of the average Volt owner. Indeed, it would be reasonable to assume that a number of people in the study took it as a challenge to see who could drive the most electric miles and those not interested in the electric aspect of their car might not even be motivated to participate. No attempt was made to control for this.

As a Tesla investor, it's important to understand the dynamics around PHEV's, particularly with the powerful government incentives that are being bandied about. Statistics only mean what they mean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JusRelax
FWIW even the tiny company I'll be using as an autobidder alternative handle frequency response as well as energy arbitrage over longer periods. As I understand it, in the UK the national grid will pay you to effectively rent some battery space from you for the next 30 minutes. They then pay you whether they dump power on you, or take it out, or both many many times...
So the activity (energy being stored/retrieved) is high frequency, but the capacity auction is way, way slower (half hour chunks). This is just UK, the US *may* work differently. Frankly I'll pay GridImp to handle the implementation details.

But my point is, all the market options (peak shaving, demand-shifting, frequency response) are available from pretty much anyone. Even small startups. This is *NOT* high frequency trading. You do not need super-fast fiber links and ASICs to trade energy (at least not yet).

I LOVE tesla energy (as an investor). I think it will be huge. I just don't think it will necessarily win the biggest market share. It seems much easier to get a container-sized battery from alpha-ess or tesvolt right now than it does from tesla. Tesla energy cannot ramp fast enough to meet demand.
Have you seen the video on theTesla VPP software?

I posted it in a grid related thread.

Like FSD Autobidder using Neural Nets, so the volume of training data is important.
In turn Autobidder is a small part of the VPP jigsaw.
For different reasons fleet size and capacity is as important in a VPP as it is in FSD.

Finally Autobidder is part of a comprehensive suite of software aimed at management of grid services.

And most important is the quality of the Tesla Solar, Powerwall, Megapack etc and the ability to scale up to meet rapidly expanding demand.

Yes overall I think Tesla faces a bit more competition in the energy space than it does for automotive. But I doubt many competitors have the same comphensive suite of products and the same energy storage pipeline.
 
As a Tesla investor, it's important to understand the dynamics around PHEV's, particularly with the powerful government incentives that are being bandied about. Statistics only mean what they mean.
IMO, this is a key point. The Volt is unlike many of the other PHEV in America. Many of the other PHEV have the same model ICE vehicle (i.e. - Ford Fusion vs Ford Fusion PHEV). Many of these PHEV were priced around $2-5k more than the base model of the equivalent ICE model, and had more features than the base model. After government rebates, the PHEV ended up being either equivalent price or cheaper than the base ICE model (particularly after state rebates as well), with better features. Smart buyers without a preference for either would buy the PHEV simply because it's a better value, never ever plugging it in. The Volt would be much less likely to have this kind of buyer because the volt is a PHEV exclusive model.
 
It's important to realize, the study does not even pretend to be a representative cross-sampling of the average Volt owner. Indeed, it would be reasonable to assume that a number of people in the study took it as a challenge to see who could drive the most electric miles and those not interested in the electric aspect of their car might not even be motivated to participate. No attempt was made to control for this.

As a Tesla investor, it's important to understand the dynamics around PHEV's, particularly with the powerful government incentives that are being bandied about. Statistics only mean what they mean.
For the sake of history, a bunch of us speculated that the $7.500 US Federal Tax credit was primarily focused at GM and the Volt.

(from IRS.gov website)
"...the credit is equal to $2,500 plus, for a vehicle which draws propulsion energy from a battery with at least 5 kilowatt hours of capacity, $417, plus an additional $417 for each kilowatt hour of battery capacity in excess of 5 kilowatt hours. The total amount of the credit allowed for a vehicle is limited to $7,500..."
($417 x 12 = $5,004, + $2,500 = $7,5004 (ie $7,500))
However, when I had a Volt, 10.2kwh - 10.3kwh was the maximum I could draw from the 16kwh. around 65%
 
It's important to realize, the study does not even pretend to be a representative cross-sampling of the average Volt owner
Indeed. In 2016 GM said the Volt numbers across the board were 1.5 billion EV miles out of 2.5 billion total:
Also:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan Detweiler
Not a single one of the half dozen proposals in congress in the last year or two would do anything even remotely like that- so that sounds like pretty FUDtacuar unfounded speculation to me.

The absolute most "anti tesla" version still adds a $10,000 tax credit for Tesla customers, compared to todays $0.00 credit.
Incredible to me that people waste time posting about congress/biden trying to hurt tesla. Your earlier post was spot on, Tesla and GM are both the big winners on the current proposals and history shows which company will actually make the best use of the subsidy.
 
Why are so many investment people so scared to talk about Tesla's poor service?

"Let's brush it over there". - oh, thank God, we dont have to address that. Now, let's watch the stock price go up."
Not scared, but probably because some of us are still waiting for our first poor service experience in over eight years of Tesla driving.