Unlimited Supercharging Value

[HankLloydRight]

Not hypothetical, based on facts.

Your future estimated SC usage pattern is not a fact. It's a hypothetical. You can not predict the future with 100% certainty, and the insurance companies are not going to pay you a dime based on that. They might adjust the value by ~$2000, what Tesla used to charge for unlimited supercharging.

Again, review my scenario where every other month you total your FUSC car, and profit another $30k over book value for your car for your future predicted usage. I'm asking you seriously -- you really think an insurance company is going to fall for that?

Here's another hypothetical: Suppose the day after the insurance company compensates you for your FUSC that you, and only you, predict you'll "save" in the future (side note: not sure how "saving" money in the future by getting free power is even something that can be paid out in real money in advance, but I digress)... but suppose they actually do it... and then the next day you have an accident or get fired or something else happens where you can no longer work or drive. Your predicted FUSC "savings" value just went to $0. That's why it's not a "fact". It's a prediction.

I’ll take advice from a wiser man and stop feeding the trolls so good luck and see ya around.

Too late.

 

[gnuarm]

Your future estimated SC usage pattern is not a fact. It's a hypothetical. You can not predict the future with 100% certainty, and the insurance companies are not going to pay you a dime based on that. They might adjust the value by ~$2000, what Tesla used to charge for unlimited supercharging.

No one can say anything with 100% certainty. So do you feel it is unreasonable to predict lost wages which are frequently compensated for by insurance companies? That sounds exactly like what you are talking about.

As to the $2000 figure. That was a price at one time in the past. At another time it was included with the car, so free. Now it is so highly priced Tesla doesn't even offer it. That doesn't set the value just as what I paid for the car doesn't set the value for compensation. I can show an established usage pattern and the math is simple. Pretty solid footing really.

Again, review my scenario where every other month you total your FUSC car, and profit another $30k over book value for your car for your future predicted usage. I'm asking you seriously -- you really think an insurance company is going to fall for that?

You aren't making sense. The whole point is I can't replace the car with another car with free charging. That's why it would be compensated for outside the price of a replacement car. Do you really not understand that??? If I could get an equivalent replacement car with free charging I wouldn't have started this thread.

Here's another hypothetical: Suppose the day after the insurance company compensates you for your FUSC that you, and only you, predict you'll "save" in the future (side note: not sure how "saving" money in the future by getting free power is even something that can be paid out in real money in advance, but I digress)... but suppose they actually do it... and then the next day you have an accident or get fired or something else happens where you can no longer work or drive. Your predicted FUSC "savings" value just went to $0. That's why it's not a "fact". It's a prediction.

Wow! If you can't understand the nature of finance and establishing present value of future costs, you should just not be in this conversation. Anyone running a business where contracts take time to execute include a line item for "cost of money" and similarly include other factors to account for variability over time.

Uh, I don't work, but what does that have to do with driving? You mean if I have an accident and can't drive? That is not very likely, but potentially that could be factored in. Likewise someone in another discussion pointed out that the fuel savings from driving an EV has to take into account that not all cars will live the maximum life span because of accidents. That doesn't stop Tesla from predicting your fuel savings when you buy the car. That's based on exactly the same calculation, but with more variables including the price of gas. So is that totally bogus?

The people who set insurance prices are very good at these calculations.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Nevermind. Not worth it.

 

[EricBaltimore]

No one can say anything with 100% certainty. So do you feel it is unreasonable to predict lost wages which are frequently compensated for by insurance companies? That sounds exactly like what you are talking about.

As to the $2000 figure. That was a price at one time in the past. At another time it was included with the car, so free. Now it is so highly priced Tesla doesn't even offer it. That doesn't set the value just as what I paid for the car doesn't set the value for compensation. I can show an established usage pattern and the math is simple. Pretty solid footing really.




You aren't making sense. The whole point is I can't replace the car with another car with free charging. That's why it would be compensated for outside the price of a replacement car. Do you really not understand that??? If I could get an equivalent replacement car with free charging I wouldn't have started this thread.




Wow! If you can't understand the nature of finance and establishing present value of future costs, you should just not be in this conversation. Anyone running a business where contracts take time to execute include a line item for "cost of money" and similarly include other factors to account for variability over time.

Uh, I don't work, but what does that have to do with driving? You mean if I have an accident and can't drive? That is not very likely, but potentially that could be factored in. Likewise someone in another discussion pointed out that the fuel savings from driving an EV has to take into account that not all cars will live the maximum life span because of accidents. That doesn't stop Tesla from predicting your fuel savings when you buy the car. That's based on exactly the same calculation, but with more variables including the price of gas. So is that totally bogus?

The people who set insurance prices are very good at these calculations.

I find it comical that other people in the thread didn't understand the logic of your post and chose to argue instead. As a numbers person, I completely understand where you were going with this. If you were saving 100 dollars per month on "free supercharging" the insurance company should have been able to find a way to "capitalize" this savings and offer you some kind of offsetting credit for the loss in the event the car was totaled. It's odd that other people took such a combative stance. I'm curious if anyone has used this logic in negotiating with an insurance company in the event of a loss. To me, the reason I accelerated my Tesla purchase in 2018 was so that I would qualify for free unlimited supercharging. The value of this was limited at the time, but now that SC are becoming ubiquitous I think the value of USC is now higher. I now have about 5 SC within 30 minutes of me; at this point I could almost exclusively charge at a SC if I planned my week well. It's a completely different argument to decide whether it is worth my or anyone else's time to sit and wait to charge, but I could make the case I could take a walk or get on a conference call or something else productive so it's not a waste of time.

 

[Drrobmiller]

Interesting thread

So I rushed to buy a 2020 model x in May of last year just so I could get in on the unlimited charging. Just before I picked it up, the price of the car dropped $5,000 but I would lose the unlimited charging. Im financing,...not leasing as I feel this car will be lasting me quite some time. Probably the last car I ever buy....leasing from now on after this one.

So what to do?

Well,...I don't take long trips on a weekly basis. I have a wall charger at home so the car is always charged up in the morning. With taxes it really comes out to about $5,600 in savings.

I decided to take the money and in exchange for losing unlimited free supercharging. Now if I communited my brains out and took lengthy long trips every year I would have gone for the supercharging, but its not the case.

Im 58 and I figure this car will last hundreds and thousands of miles....so even if it lasts 200,000 miles over 20 years Ill be pushing 80 years old.

For all I know the car will get totalled or I wont be able to drive...lol. And when I get that old i doubt I will really care about saving a few bucks here and there because of the free charging. I may be fingerpainting in my crap for all i know!!!


But my situation of a home charger and maybe an average of 1 superlong road trip a year,...I bailed and took the cash.

If I commuted my brains out or planned on taking serious road trips per year, I would have grabbed the unlimited charging.

tough call that one.

As for this insurance reimbersment that started this thread....ummmm


rob

 

[OrthoSurg]

I find it comical that other people in the thread didn't understand the logic of your post and chose to argue instead. As a numbers person, I completely understand where you were going with this. If you were saving 100 dollars per month on "free supercharging" the insurance company should have been able to find a way to "capitalize" this savings and offer you some kind of offsetting credit for the loss in the event the car was totaled. It's odd that other people took such a combative stance. I'm curious if anyone has used this logic in negotiating with an insurance company in the event of a loss. To me, the reason I accelerated my Tesla purchase in 2018 was so that I would qualify for free unlimited supercharging. The value of this was limited at the time, but now that SC are becoming ubiquitous I think the value of USC is now higher. I now have about 5 SC within 30 minutes of me; at this point I could almost exclusively charge at a SC if I planned my week well. It's a completely different argument to decide whether it is worth my or anyone else's time to sit and wait to charge, but I could make the case I could take a walk or get on a conference call or something else productive so it's not a waste of time.

Insurance covers for what the average consumers usually ask coverage for.
I have multiple road bicycles in my basement, the basic insurance covers $3,000
when i wanted to cover my top end $10,000 racing bike, I had to pay a premium.

same thing with unlimited supercharging. Basic insurance coverage should cover the basic $2,000 determined value by Tesla. If a car driver consider it worth $50,000 because he drives West to East coast 25 times yearly, it pull be his responsibility to contact his insurance company to ask to pay for a premium to benefit from a greater coverage in case of the car being totalled and that subscription being voided.

Addendum: just realized this thread is 2 years old and my post is useless, should have asked my insurance company premium for loss of my time

 

[gnuarm]

The value of supercharging has nothing to do with how many miles you drive in a year. It has to do with how many miles you drive the car total. Someone mentioned 200,000 miles, let's run with that. $0.28/kWh is Tesla's going rate I believe. My car gets 3 mi/kWh average ballpark. So 200,000 mi / 3 mi/kWh = 67,000 kWh. Multiply by the cost and get $18,700.

If you compare to charging at home the cost is different. Many pay about $0.15 per kWh. I pay a low, low $0.08 off peak rate. Even at $0.08 per kWh the 200,000 mile cost is over $5000.

That's the math. You can argue about the utility of free supercharging since that is a personal matter. My driving pattern allows me to almost never charge at home and not wait at the charger. I shop or eat or conduct business. I am 25 miles from a city so once in a while I go in to get the groceries I can't get more locally. Next to the superchargers is a Mexican restaurant with a great Mojarra Frita. The charging barely takes long enough to order the food.

I recently had a business trip to North Carolina and stayed in a hotel with superchargers. I recharged while having dinner, then on the way home I stopped just north of Richmond to charge before the last leg home when I used the Panera wifi to send some emails and enjoy a bowl of soup. In fact, my problem with supercharging is it is too fast and my meals are often rushed.

The point being that I seldom plug in at home and so the free supercharging is worth $0.09 per mile to me or $18,700 or more.

BTW, the Glen Allen super charger seems to have been upgraded from 8 stalls to 20 stalls! Even then every other one was in use and I was a second car on a charger. It's nice talking to people you meet there. I have run into a few snobs who just want to be in their shell, but mostly folks are great.

 

[OrthoSurg]

The value of supercharging has nothing to do with how many miles you drive in a year. It has to do with how many miles you drive the car total. Someone mentioned 200,000 miles, let's run with that. $0.28/kWh is Tesla's going rate I believe. My car gets 3 mi/kWh average ballpark. So 200,000 mi / 3 mi/kWh = 67,000 kWh. Multiply by the cost and get $18,700.

If you compare to charging at home the cost is different. Many pay about $0.15 per kWh. I pay a low, low $0.08 off peak rate. Even at $0.08 per kWh the 200,000 mile cost is over $5000.

That's the math. You can argue about the utility of free supercharging since that is a personal matter. My driving pattern allows me to almost never charge at home and not wait at the charger. I shop or eat or conduct business. I am 25 miles from a city so once in a while I go in to get the groceries I can't get more locally. Next to the superchargers is a Mexican restaurant with a great Mojarra Frita. The charging barely takes long enough to order the food.

I recently had a business trip to North Carolina and stayed in a hotel with superchargers. I recharged while having dinner, then on the way home I stopped just north of Richmond to charge before the last leg home when I used the Panera wifi to send some emails and enjoy a bowl of soup. In fact, my problem with supercharging is it is too fast and my meals are often rushed.

The point being that I seldom plug in at home and so the free supercharging is worth $0.09 per mile to me or $18,700 or more.

BTW, the Glen Allen super charger seems to have been upgraded from 8 stalls to 20 stalls! Even then every other one was in use and I was a second car on a charger. It's nice talking to people you meet there. I have run into a few snobs who just want to be in their shell, but mostly folks are great.

There is a battle of 3 concepts here:
1) The value of lifetime supercharging determined by Tesla and the cost to the company
2) The value of lifetime supercharging for a customer charging at home most of the time (the average customer)
3) The value of lifetime supercharging for a customer charging at supercharger most of the time (your situation) which is probably an outlier situation when comparing to the usage of the majority.

now, to qualify for the 3rd situation, insurance companies usually charge a premium for a coverage of an outlier situation. Like my $10,000 road bicycle or your 200,000 miles supercharging usage.

the problem here is that this value was not pre-determined when you contracted your insurance policy so you would fall by default in category number 2.

Now, from a legal perspective, you would have to prove that your insurance company should cover your outlier usage of supercharging and not the average usage of supercharging.

 

[gnuarm]

There is a battle of 3 concepts here:
<<<snip>>>

Now, from a legal perspective, you would have to prove that your insurance company should cover your outlier usage of supercharging and not the average usage of supercharging.

You forgot to include IANAL

 

[OrthoSurg]

You forgot to include IANAL

You forgot to include I Abuse Superchargers