mtndrew1
Active Member
As far as I’m aware Tesla is the only company which sold and collected money for the promised capabilities.
Optimistic timelines are one thing, optimistic timelines for fifteen grand are another.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
There will be NO HW4 upgrade for HW3 owners
- Thread starter macmee
- Start date
As far as I’m aware Tesla is the only company which sold and collected money for the promised capabilities.
Optimistic timelines are one thing, optimistic timelines for fifteen grand are another.
You seem to believe that Nissan's battery dropping in capacity was a bad thing. Fair enough. Good for you, you seem to acknowledge that huge corporations are often not great to consumers.
But you also seem to be arguing that Tesla's sales story around FSD is fine and totally above board? More transparent than Nissan?
Your whole shtick is telling people they are biased against Tesla, without actually explaining why Tesla's behavior was totally OK. Right out of the dictator's handbook. Attack the person, not the idea, always the way you handle an argument when you have the high ground.
Not exactly. Lots of companies took money for their development of Autonomy
From investors.
Regulated by the SEC.
With a statement that investments may lose value.
Tesla sold it as a product. That you would get for sure if you pay your money. That the car already had all hardware for. That they had a video of it already working.
Investors and customers are totally different relationships with a company.
I think my post is quite clear wrt any contentions I may or may not have made. A "casual promise" of course has no exact (and certainly no legal) definition, and that is the point .. it's very hard to win a lawsuit when there is no binding legal agreement. Again, I'm not saying one way or the other on what is morally or ethical correct, just that "Elon said XXX" is a weak claim legally. So the huffing and puffing here about class-actions, and what car owners are entitled to (or not) is going to be hard to prove.
Legally, the best case for owners realistically is they win some reasonable financial compensation, which Tesla will appeal and will get cut in half on appeal, and after the lawyers have taken their cut in about 5 years time you will get a check for $100.
But again, dont underestimate lawyers. What do you mean by "fly"? If the car stayed 2 feet off the ground for (say) 10 seconds, does that count? You can be sure that Tesla, if they had to argue this in count, would claim FSD in its current form meets all the promise they made. You may disagree (as probably would I), but the court will disregard your expectations unless you can provide legally binding language (e.g. in a contract) that says more was promised.
Huge difference. You get this when you go to back a project at kickstarter:
And Kickstarter has a ban on CGI or other tricks to make people believe you are farther along in development than you are. It's clear that when you "back" a project in Kickstarter, you are investing in the development of that product, but it may fail and you may never ever see any value for your investment.
Show me Tesla's disclaimer on FSD in 2016 that makes it clear you weren't buying something, you were investing in a risky development process, and you may never get what was described.
Last edited:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Dude - go and readup. They took millions in federal govt funding to install chargers (along with ecotality) and leased us vehicles that never saw L3 chargers.
And L3 chargers weren't something that noone had invented yet.
Yes - and there was a class action suit Nissan settled.
Those who don't know history are always claiming "only Tesla does that".
DanCar
Active Member
All of them should refund customers money. Oh wait, that is only Tesla who took money on false statements.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Doesn’t that support the argument that Tesla should compensate FSD purchasers?
I'm not claiming only Tesla does this. I'm saying that just because someone else did it doesn't make it OK for Tesla to do it. Whattaboutisim is a favorite tactic of those in the wrong.
The fact that Nissan had to settle a class action over battery degradation that wasn't even advertised by Nissan as part of the purchase? Doesn't that make it super clear that Tesla is in the wrong here as well?
Again, the car had the hardware that Nissan said it did. You seem annoyed at Nissan yet you generally defend Tesla as doing the right thing. In what world is selling FSD with a faked video and not delivering for 6+ years not worse than Nissan selling you a car that can actually do L3 charging, but then you being annoyed that there were less chargers out in the world than you hoped?
Tesla under-delivered on superchargers for years vs their advertising as well, and now we're running into supercharging that costs more than Gas and huge lines. Am I allowed to go and readup on that?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
If you count media statements as "advertised as part of the purchase" (just as some people are counting Elon's statements on L4/L5 as advertised as part of the purchase), Nissan actually did say to the media that the batteries in the Leaf are expected to retain 70-80% of their capacity in 10 years:
"Nissan has said it expects to Leaf drivers to have around 70 to 80 percent capacity left in the pack after ten years."
Details on Nissan Leaf battery pack, including how recharging speed affects battery life - Autoblog
I don't think the plaintiffs of that class action suit used that however in their argument. They instead pointed to a statement in the user manual to expect a loss of around 20% over 5 years.
https://truthinadvertising.org/wp-c...el-Klee-v.-Nissan-North-America-complaint.pdf
Personally I make a distinction between what Elon says to media vs what Tesla actually has on their order page, but not everyone does here. Legally I don't think there would be much consequences for what Elon says in terms of contractual obligations to owners, but what they have on the order page would matter.
Last edited:
Who would have guessed that musk was/is an irresponsible lying sack who will say anything to get what he wants? Driverless from coast to coast, yeah, that’s the ticket. Pump the stock, take a dump on the customers.
I was an investor in Tesla and I was one of the first ones to buy Model 3 in 2018. I raved about the car to all my friends that one day they will own a Tesla just like an iPhone. But I then traded my model 3 for model x plaid without a radar. Would I still buy a Tesla? yes bc of the highway autopilot. But at this point, I feel Elon Musk stretched the truth.
Can you tell me why they are introducing their own version of Robotaxi? I thought our cars with FSD were supposed to be part of the Tesla ridesharing app that they showcased in 2019?
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
There is no possible way to retrofit HW4 to current cars period. Greentheonly on Twitter has confirmed this and he has always been right. Whether you pay 10K or free of charge it's not happening.
Exactly why I feel pisssed and stupid for these reasons. But I would still buy a Tesla for highway autopilot just no longer FSD. Elon is a genius and he knew exactly back in 2019 Robotaxi was not gonna happen.
you all think V11 all of a sudden gonna change the game? just like 10.69 was gonna change it? it will improve it but not without a driver attentiveness
Imagine the narive people that are paying for HW3 for 15K today no knowing about all the details and that there is no retrofit possible. This is just morally wrong
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Only after the lawsuit (which as noted did not reference those claims at all, only the ones in the manual) and it was over 5 years / 60k miles (not the full warranty).
Nissan upgrades US Leaf warranties, will 'restore' batteries that lose too much charge | Engadget
Why? because all his other companies succeeded when everyone said It wouldn't. Some of us were stupid and too naive to get it.
Similar threads
- Question
