So, assume Tesla approaches a restaurant or a mall (where restaurants are present) with a 10-year agreement to lease/license an 8-stall patch of their existing lot for semi-dedicated EV charging. In nearly all cases, those restaurants will get a bump up in customers as compared to prior years for the reason of having captive Tesla drivers -- not with every stop, but with many. The restaurants get added website exposure; Nav icons; mentions in the charger-tracking sites: Chargerville; Plugshare, etc. In contrast, the restaurants have more bathroom visits by non-paying customers; continuous lot maintenance (resurfacing and snow removal); as well as occasional discussions over EV v. ICE priority in the stalls. I can't even begin to calculate if there is some increased insurance costs -- but for now assume Tesla covers any liabilities that come from charger operations. Given these costs are likely outweighed by increased business, and that Tesla pays for all SuperCharger maintenance and electricity, does Tesla pay the land-owner/restaurant for the lease, or does the land-owner/restaurant pay Tesla to be present on their property. I believe that in the first 100-200 installs, Tesla probably had to make some payments in their leases, to the land-owners. However, now that it appears that Tesla is here to stay, and is the darling of the stock market, I suspect the land-owners are lining up to get SuperChargers on their property. Your thoughts?