No other car gets new software, so I don't see why that should cause Teslas to depreciate more. So far my car bought in 2013 isn't being ignored. One day it might be, but so what? Any other 2013 car would still have its 2013 software now.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla will never stop innovating. Major revisions every 12-18 months.
- Thread starter Az_Rael
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Some can continue to wish that will happen, but Elon has made clear that Tesla does not operate that way and will not operate that way in the future. I support his approach, with both my TSLA investment and with owning Teslas and planning to own more in the near future.
Krugerrand
Meow
Krugerrand
Meow
Elon finally realizing that his old proverb of "always" is a good time to buy a Tesla is wrong and it actually is, as I've put it, never a good time to buy a Tesla.
Mind you, I'm not saying never buy a Tesla. I'm just saying it is never a good time, really. The adding as well as dropping of features is quite random from a buyer perspective. Oh, the innovation of dropping ventilated seats and interior design options...
Other car companies dont make "major" revisions every 12-18 months. They do it every 5 years.
That definitely is NOT accurate. Tesla is continuing to upgrade software and add features to all Model S, no matter how old. Those who have newer hardware do get different features (AP-1, air suspension, tech package, D vs non-D and so on) but nobody is abandoned with Tesla. In fact it is clear that software updates are one of the factors supporting higher resale values for Tesla cars.
One indisputable fact is that many Model S owners are either first time buyers of new cars or have never bought a car this expensive before, or both. That certainly contributes to the shock of instant depreciation. Those of us who've done this a few times are not surprised. That is one of the joys of CPO for any expensive vehicle, letting somebody else take the big initial hit.
A second fact is that the national, regional and local incentives reduce the effective new vehicle price and consequently make initial depreciation vs MSRP higher.
Almost all BEV's used pricing reflect that. BMW i3 has had both $5,000 cash off, subvened financing and dealer incentives on top of that. Right now they have no published consumer incentives other than subvened financing but there are handsome dealer incentives. When such things happen used car values plummet.
That last subject is not prevalent at Tesla, although they played with it quite a bit 3rd quarter last year, after which Elon killed the practice.
Whatever does affect resale values, software updates is one that decreases depreciation, not the other way around.
Major releases every 12-18 months is great. The small iterative feature improvements throughout the year, instead of waiting to bundle them into calendar year, is what makes Tesla an exciting. I would say that this approach benefits new customers more and makes existing buyers discontent more quickly. This schedule has benefited Tesla by selling more products and the culture has kept them advancing quickly. This speed makes competitors such as Lucid, Bolt and FF less interesting (imagine if AP2 and 100D hasn't been released).
Imagine if the releases were bundled once per year...you may get something like this (for illustrative purposes and not accuracy).
September 2016: Facelift, HEPA, 60D
September 2017: AP2, 100D, Glass Roof
As a new buyer, I purchased the Model S in August because of the facelift, HEPA and 60D. If these items were consolidated and pushed to September 2016, I probably wouldn't have gotten a Tesla until the end of the year. AP2 was released 2 months after my delivery and I was definitely discontent for a short period. However, I love the vehicle I purchased and do not regret the decision.
If Tesla didn't release AP2 until September 2017, I would be less excited about the company and probably wouldn't be interested in checking TMC or Tesla reddit. Tesla would also be at risk of having a legacy innovation schedule as compared to newer entrants.
When you consider the depreciation curve, the quicker cycle only hurts those who are selling in less than 2 years. The depreciation curve on an annual basis will be the same because at the year end, all the same features would be released, whether it's a quarterly release versus annual.
Imagine if the releases were bundled once per year...you may get something like this (for illustrative purposes and not accuracy).
September 2016: Facelift, HEPA, 60D
September 2017: AP2, 100D, Glass Roof
As a new buyer, I purchased the Model S in August because of the facelift, HEPA and 60D. If these items were consolidated and pushed to September 2016, I probably wouldn't have gotten a Tesla until the end of the year. AP2 was released 2 months after my delivery and I was definitely discontent for a short period. However, I love the vehicle I purchased and do not regret the decision.
If Tesla didn't release AP2 until September 2017, I would be less excited about the company and probably wouldn't be interested in checking TMC or Tesla reddit. Tesla would also be at risk of having a legacy innovation schedule as compared to newer entrants.
When you consider the depreciation curve, the quicker cycle only hurts those who are selling in less than 2 years. The depreciation curve on an annual basis will be the same because at the year end, all the same features would be released, whether it's a quarterly release versus annual.
Last edited:
No, the "model year" usually is a few minor cosmetic changes for marketing reasons. Major changes to legacy car lines are on 6-8 year cycles.
Last edited:
mmd
Active Member
You cannot blame people entirely. In the early days of Model S, Elon has tweeted cases where used Model S sold for more than new. Those days, there was really a long line for production. Recently, I believe he also tweeted Electrek's bad research article (using asking prices, not selling prices) that showed Tesla's hold their value better than MB, Porsche etc. Canuck's post above is in contrast to what Tesla has hinted in the past.
Last edited:
I would have to disagree with this, for the simple fact that I have a few friends who are owners for 2012-2013 Models and they are definitely feeling left out in terms of software. Tesla's software team is only so big, so to be able to support multiple major versions of their OS will be problematic as they scale and create new versions, think of it like Windows OS and how they need to officially discontinue support to legacy versions like WinXP. Point is Tesla's business model is that "we will keep innovating as a means to generate demand" which will force legacy owners to trade in and upgrade, making Leasing the ONLY viable option for driving a Tesla short or long term.
Depreciation will definitely increase as more models are coming out....why would someone pay for a Model S pre-2013 when they can get an AP1 or AP2 cars with vastly superior build and features?
Nothing is forcing owners to trade in, other than their desire to have the new features which depend on new hardware. Theirs (and my) 2013 cars work just fine and can do everything they did when new, and more. If your friends are feeling left out, it's not because their software isn't being supported.
I am thinking it will be 3 year or so before Tesla can squeeze out the capabilities of AP2 hardware. Trying to mess with AP3 is just starting back again to square 1.
Tesla lease prices are horrible. I did some math and it appears to lease a $70,000 car from Tesla you could get $140,000 worth of car from someone else. Better to worry only on AP generations and don't sweat the other stuff.
Umm No
Attachments
AnxietyRanger said:
This is forever like Countergate, right?
Look, I'm not even saying I'm wishing Tesla does this differently. As I said, some of us are pondering if it might be wiser. Some of us may even have an opinion it would be wiser and we express that. That does not mean we expect Tesla to change it or even hope. We just have a view on the matter.
You can support whatever you want, of course.
I am thinking pacing themselves a little might be beneficial for Tesla, e.g. the back and forth in January 2017 does not seem optimal to me. And it has been similar quarter to quarter - in Q4 it was the 5 seater Model X that turned into a bit of a joke of its own with missing parts etc etc. With a little more planning many things would simply pan out smoother. They might get some benefit out of that. As they mature, maybe they will see the benefits. Maybe they won't.
I find Tesla a bit of an amateur show a bit too often for comfort. Fixing that might be useful.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Tesla has said they won't do any other shade of grey. Tesla understands that you and others don't like it, and perhaps prefer the traditional automaker model which generally waits for model years before making changes. But Tesla also understands that there are many of us who far prefer immediate and erratic innovation -- without even one second of delay.
I don't believe Tesla is saying who is right or wrong on this issue since there is no right or wrong. It all comes down to a matter of preference and Elon Musk has now explicitly told us Tesla's preference -- which anyone who followed Tesla already knew but it's good he clarified it for those who don't follow Tesla as closely as us.
So shouldn't we end this discussion? You will never convince me you are right, nor would I even try to convince you I am right since there is no right or wrong.
You'd be surprised how many people are shocked to find out how much their vehicle has depreciated by just driving it off the lot. In my view, telling this to people on a Tesla forum is helpful. It's fine that you disagree, but selecting this out for criticism as being "hardly helpful" is bizarre to me. What harm is done in telling people this? People who buy a Tesla need to know, perhaps even first and foremost:
1. Innovation is erratic and constant. The day after you buy your vehicle, improvements may be on the next vehicles that roll off the assembly line; and
2. You are buying a significantly depreciating asset.
Last edited:
AnxietyRanger said:
Something funny there?
Remind me again which large-battery Tesla/EV do you have and are you in the market for @Krugerrand?
I have been in the market for two Teslas now and am looking for the next EV, so I am definitely paying attention to what is becoming available and making realistic assessments of the situation. Today a large-battery EV is basically only Tesla in most of the world (excluding a few exotics). That is absolutely true and has been so for the past years, of course.
But in 1-1.5 years time there will likely be at least two-three such choices: of course the Bolt/Opel Ampera-E, I expect to be able to buy that then, and then at least Audi Q6 e-tron, Jaguar I-Pace and/or a Mercedes Benz EV. Possibly a more serious Volkswagen is on the market as well. As I said, the charging network and the software updates may not be comparable, but in many often ways these may be even more mature cars (e.g. interior comforts) and the large-battery EV experience will be there.
As for self-driving, companies like Audi and Volvo certainly have been developing very robust hardware and software suites for that. The new Audi A8 is now launching with Level 3 beyond what Tesla does today. They have more and better sensors than Tesla. What they do not have is Tesla's aggressive software update method, so it will different type of development. But in 1-1.5 years time, it is quite possible they are still very interesting in that sphere as well.
Charging networks I expect to develop the slowest. The Supercharger indeed is quite unique, but I rarely use or need that in my first car, let alone the others, so it is of very little consequence to me. Home charging is what matters and good range to operate day in and day out, and for a few days in a row if need be. For that more options definitely are coming in 2018. But I agree for Supercharging it will likely take longer than 1-1.5 years in much of the world.
Last edited:
I don't think Elon actually told us that. They told us Tesla innovates in 12-18 month cycles. That would still remain true if five-seater Model X would ship with all of its parts in December 2016 and January 2017 wouldn't witness four different product changes in its first weeks, including a sudden removal of ventilated seats. If 90DL hadn't been rushed on market, maybe Countergate could have been avoided.
Innovation and constant change certainly does not have to mean erratic beheaviour. It can mean that, sure, but it does not have to - and my argument is, it might be wise that it didn't. It would make the purchase process more pleasant and it might contribute more positively to Tesla's quality reputation to pace things a little.
This is not an on/off thing. Already today Tesla tests and schedules their product changes to some extent. They have to. They don't release anything the second it is ready in some lab. There is planning already now. Adding a little more planning to that is not destroying the concept, it might be simply prudent.
Anyway, people said the same during Countergate - that Tesla had made up their mind and that was the end of it - but there feedback generated change at Tesla. Is good.
Because I feel it is a strawman on a car forum and a thread like this. You paint the opposing position an exaggeration and by answering that exaggeration of yours you lead the conversation astray. Trust me, people on this thread understand cars are significantly depreciating assets. Talking to them like to a child is not helpful. The conversation was about whether or not Teslas, the way they are developed and sold, are more depreciating than usual - compared to where they might be if their development and release schedule might be different. (That is actually an interesting question in itself, to which I have not really thought about an answer.)
If you think that many Model S and Model X users complain about the constant changes just wait till Model 3 users come around and Elon starts offering different versions after a large chunk of buyers just invested in their first Tesla. I have no issue with refreshes but lets keep it consistent with model years. Heck a 2016 could have an old front and also AP1, Another 2016 could have new face and AP2. It makes it frustrating to existing buyers and also frustrating for future buyers. I am not sure the reasoning why they make so many changes mid year.
Similar threads
