Oct 2, 2012
ModelS1079 Battery sure to have the same Model S 8 year warranty or better... 85kWh is 8 year, unlimited mileage.�
Oct 2, 2012
ChadS [Replying to RDoc]
More data is always good; I don't fault you for wanting to know.
But in fairness to Tesla, you don't know what gas will cost 5-8 years from now either. I wouldn't refuse the car just because of one unknown cost if the alternative is a gas car. (If you've already got another EV, then that may be a good reason). Tesla is probably waiting to see what their costs are like. They don't want to lose money on the program; but they won't want to price it so high to scare away new buyers or drop resale values, either. So while it will likely cost more than we wish, I don't think it will be ridiculous.�
Oct 2, 2012
ckessel It's sort of a given you won't know. No one will know because no car, except possibly the roadster, will have been around that long. If Tesla made some absurd warranty and all hell broke loose on longer term battery issues, they'd go bankrupt. If hell doesn't break loose, you'll have reasonable maintenance on the battery and degradation will be graceful.
Is an often used and abused saying here, but it's part of the cost of being an early adopter, the cost being the uncertainty in this case.�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman As a patent attorney that represents Panasonic (the supplier of the batteries to Tesla and the Toyota Prius, although the Prius batteries are different technology), data exists with respect to the lifetime of the batteries and the level of charge that will be retained over time. Thus, Tesla can determine a cost for maintaining the battery warranty. Note that Toyota warrants the battery for 8 years/100K miles (I believe 10 years/150K miles in California) with absolutely no annual service required to the battery to maintain the warranty. I bet there are numerous people on this website that own the Prius with high mileage on them that have had no problems with the battery and have not done anything special to maintain them. Tesla is just being secretive about what, if anything, they will require with respect to maintaining the battery warranty.�
Oct 3, 2012
efusco Whoa, hang on there. The Prius uses very different technology and battery control technology than a BEV. Toyota's battery management protocols are extremely conservative and protective of the battery and, thus, even with significant time and degredation it can maintain its performance characteristics.
But utilizing that sort of protective algorhythm in a BEV would cripple it. For instance, the Prius maintains the SOC at all times between 40%-80% and rarely does it vary outside of the 50%-60% range. Thus even with 50% loss of capacity the Prius can continue to run normally. You'd have to nearly triple the capacity of a BEV to run within that kind of battery conserving range.�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman Evan, I did say the batteries in the Prius are a different technology. But the fact is that Panasonic, and thus, by extension Tesla as their customer, has extensive data as to the capabilities of the batteries over time. Panasonic has been involved with Tesla for some time, and knows how Tesla is utilizing the cells. My point is that data as to the anticipated life of the cells is available based on computer projections. While this data is confidential, it is available to Tesla.�
Oct 3, 2012
efusco While the technology is relevant, it's the battery management and usage pattern that is critical here. It is a realistic impracticality for someone to "wear out" their battery in a Prius b/c of the extremely tight battery managment. In an BEV one could really abuse the battery with extreme charge and discharge cycles.
And knowing what battery replacement prices and such are going to be also make things more confusing.
FWIW, the battery replacement costs of the Prius battery are outrageous considering their size...so that's part of their insurance.�
Oct 3, 2012
RDoc Sure, but the question is what constitutes "early". I don't anticipate getting my X for another 18 months or so.
If 18 months after initial deliveries of the battery, and over 2 years after initial testing, they are still saying the customer has to assume the risk, that's stretching "early" IMHO.�
Oct 3, 2012
ElSupreme Using NiMH data for Li-Ion use is worthless! It would be better to compare two different manufacturer's Li-Ion cells with similar chemistry than comparing Panasonic's NiMH to their Li-Ion. Heck Panasonic's primary alkaline AA batteries can only handle 1 cycle!!�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman Let me make it clear, Panasonic and Tesla have the data (based on computer models as real world time experiences do not exist yet) for the exact batteries used in the Model S, both with and without Tesla's management system. The two companies have cooperated together.�
Oct 3, 2012
dsm363 There is probably a difference between computer modeling and real world performance though (likely small) and Tesla isn't as established as other companies and can't afford the big hit that it would take if they provided a bigger warranty then the models predicted and got soaked for the costs.�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman I think RDoc is not concerned about the battery warranty itself; Tesla has already established that as being 8 years/unlimited mileage (for the P85). I think his concern is what Tesla is going to require in order for him to keep the battery warranty valid thru year 8. Tesla (with Panasonic) certainly has enough data based on the computer models to tell Model S owners that nothing special needs to be done to maintain the warranty on the battery thru year 8, or alternatively, that "x" specific maintennance is required to be performed each year (every other year, etc.) in order to prevent voiding of the battery warranty. This gets back to the issue of what maintennance is going to cost for years 5-8.�
Oct 3, 2012
hcsharp I think some of you might be missing swegman's point? Maybe? He's not saying anything about NiMH or Prius data being relevant to Li-Ion usage and data. What he's saying is that Tesla and Panasonic have more than adequate data to predict the lifetime of the Model S Batteries and what is necessary to keep them healthy and maximize their life. With this information they can tell us now what is necessary for annual maintenance to keep the warranty intact. For unknown reasons, they are not disclosing the requirements or periodic cost at this time even though it would be helpful for many of us.�
Oct 3, 2012
ckessel I think the Model S battery cooling technique is new. As is the form factor in which the batteries are held. While Tesla may have long term information on the cells, they wouldn't have any for the infrastructure around them. They may not know what sort of maintenance will be required on that in 5 years.�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman Hcsharp, that is exactly what i was trying to convey. Manufacturers come out with new technology products all the time; the Chevy Volt; the first generation Prius, the first Panasonic plasma display, etc. Based on computer models, the manufacturers are able to determine (estimate) their reliability and thus, set a price for an extended warranty and required maintennance (if any). You could buy a 7 year extended warranty for the Chevy Volt and the Prius from the first day the cars were offered for sale, and know what service is required to be performed at what interviews. Tesla is not telling its customers at the prresent time what maintenance needs to be done in years 5-8 (both for the car and the battery), let alone for years 1-4, and what an extended warranty (i.e., 7 year or 8 year warranty) would cost. I think this is what has RDoc concerned. And he is right. You can not make an informed decision on whether to buy the car without having all the information. I believe Tesla is doing themself a dis-service by not announcing this information prior to requiring people to finalize their order. I canceled 1 car (signature model) partly due to this lack of information, and deferred the 2nd car to March, 2013, again partly due to the lack of this information being released.
I love the driving of the car and its exterior appearance. I have some reservation with the interior and certain features that were deleted. But I have concerns about the long term aspect of the car. Since it is new technology, I would prefer to lease the car. In 3 years, the car will be even better and better batteries will be available. But that is not currently an option. So, unless Tesla announces what maintennance is required for years 5-8, its cost, and whether an extended warranty (with cost) is available, I will be forced to defer again or cancel the order. Neither option is good for Tesla's bottom line. While a reservation holder will move up if I cancel or defer, it is one less car that Tesla sells.�
Oct 3, 2012
RDoc Precisely!�
Oct 3, 2012
Robert.Boston Someone has to bear the residual value risk. In a lease, the leasing company does. With a new car from a new car company using new technology, that's a riskier proposition than leasing companies prefer to take. So, at least initially, that risk has to be borne by early adopters.�
Oct 3, 2012
swegman RB, why? The Prius was new technology when it first came out, yet leases were available. The Chevy Volt also had lease options from day 1. To hedge their bet, the leasing company can set a lower residual value to cover themselves. The lease cost per month would be slightly higher, but many people (myself included) would prefer that over buying the car. Especially when V2 of the car will be improved from V1, and battery range will likely be improved. For example, my wife gets a new Lexus every 1 to 3 years because shelikes to drive a new car, including new technology that becomes available. I bought an Audi A4 and took a greater hit when I sold it 3 years later than when I leased an Audi A6.
Bottom line is if you are a person that likes to get a new car every few years, for the new technology or you just like to drive new cars, a lease can be cheaper than buying the car and then selling it. And you don't have to be concerned with extended warranties and in some cases routine manintennance (the Lexus dealer does every other service for free for her).
BTW, I recall Elon stating several years ago that batteries were just an interim solution, that they were working on using super capacitors to store enegy to power a car. The benefits would be greater range and vastly faster charging. I have no idea how far along they are with that idea, but who knows, maybe they can have it ready in time for V3 .�
Oct 3, 2012
hcsharp Why can't the leasing company assume the worst case for residual value and price the lease accordingly? How would that be any different than what they do now? I agree the buyer will bear the high cost of the lease but it shouldn't prevent leasing from being an option. Tesla is capital constrained so they can't back leasing themselves but leasing companies should be able to do it easily. There are plenty of lending institutions willing to make auto loans at extraordinarily low rates for the Model S (and Roadster!) so I'm not sure why a leasing co would have a problem.�
Oct 4, 2012
Robert.Boston I apologize if my thinking wasn't clear. Let me try a different way.
A lease is a financial structure with three inter-related components:
If, as @hcsharp suggests, the leasing company lowballs the residual value, the "put" option will provide little value and the depreciation charge will be substantial. In short, the lease payment will be high and the terms unattractive.
- A "put" option that allows you to sell the car back to the leasing company at a fixed price (the residual value);
- A depreciation charge that collects the decrease in the value of the car (purchase price - residual value), amortized over the life of the lease;
- An interest charge for carrying the unamortized portion of the vehicle value.
It is true that the Prius had leasing available immediately. I suspect that Toyota guaranteed the residual value, which is a risk that an industrial giant could afford for a low-volume car. Tesla is not in a position financially to make a similar guarantee.
There is a risk about the residual value. No one knows the market value of a 2012 Model S in 2015. That's true for every car on the road, of course, but with no track record and an unfamiliar package of technologies, the resale value of the Model S is particularly risky (by which I mean there's a lot of variance in the expected distribution, not necessarily that it's all downside risk). The option value of the put (#1 above) increases with variance (as do all options), so that drives up the price of the lease. An Audi A6, however, has a well-understood residual risk, so a lease can be attractive.
Banks are willing to loan us money to buy the Model S because they don't bear the residual-value risk (unless they repo the car).�
Oct 4, 2012
hcsharp I forgot about the option. So basically low-balling the residual value will just be offset by the loss of value from the put option. They will essentially be stuck with all the cars if they have high depreciation, while the buyer holds the option if the cars keep value. I wonder who is backing the Volt lease which is surprisingly attractive.
Banks have to repo a certain number of cars and the percentage no doubt goes up if they depreciate fast. So they do bear some residual value risk yet the interest rates are the same for a Roadster as they are for a Corolla. Perhaps they require a larger down payment for riskier cars?�
Oct 4, 2012
neroden Right. And that would be legal.
Which is why that's actually illegal, under the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, as I and others have pointed out.
Entirely reasonable.
That's because it is shady -- to be specific, it's in violation of federal law.
Is anyone here trained in the right kind of law to get Tesla to pay attention? Tesla needs to get a slap upside the head about their bad practices before it gets them in enormous amounts of legal trouble. Hopefully they'll be behaving themselves in 3 months, but if they aren't, this is the sort of thing which could sink the company into bankruptcy due to lawsuits, and it's *totally unnecessary risk*.
- - - Updated - - -
Indeed I think they could get a waiver.
However, they haven't gotten one yet. I just checked the indexes to the Federal Register, just to be absolutely sure.
You don't generally get to violate the law and *then* ask for a waiver.�
Oct 5, 2012
Fedderman Funny! Truth is, in California, the HOV stickers can make your car go faster...�
Oct 8, 2012
Discoducky Tesla Model S Service Contract: $600/Year, Or Warranty Voided
Sounds like David isn't taking this lying down. He seems to be taking the "ask Elon" route and getting answers. It's a good read with this tidbit at the end:
Also, has anyone actually purchased the plan yet or passed on it and outside the purchase window? I think the first Sig owners are nearing (over) the 30 day window. It struck me reading this as TM might have just put out the highest # they thought would cover their a$$ and maybe that # will go down once the P#'s start coming out or it will go down once cars start coming in for their 4 hour "systems check" and their is nothing wrong with them (aka it's more like a 15 to 30 minute systems check). Anyway, I hope it will go down and that TM would pass that on to their owners if every car that is checked doesn't have anything wrong with it.�
Oct 8, 2012
Mycroft IMO, they're going to stick to their guns on this one. At least until the Model X comes out in 2014. They have to pay for the roll-out of the service centers and with nearly every owner opting for the pre-payment plan, they'll have money up-front to fund that roll-out. They'll have ~$19M from just the first 10,000 cars sold, which will pay for a few service centers.�
Oct 8, 2012
dsm363 Again, it's only $475/year if you prepay which he doesn't mention. He doesn't even layout the entire pricing structure or 3 options.�
Oct 8, 2012
ElSupreme IFF you drive less than 12,000 miles a year. I plan or being close to double that.�
Oct 8, 2012
gg_got_a_tesla No mention of wheel alignment either; that's usually a 3-figure item in my experience. Not that it is absolutely necessary to do that every year...�
Oct 8, 2012
djp Here's the checklist for the Roadster annual maintenance, which is also $600.
Prep
� Fit protective covers to seats, footwells, steering wheel and rear body. Remove rear under-tray diffuser assembly.
Transmission
� Inspect for leaks and check fluid level
� Inspect/check torque reaction mount, and tighten sub-frame bolt to 80Nm
Motor
� Inspect shroud for damage/blockage
� Clean insulator ring
� Inspect motor cable and clean phase lugs
� Hi-pot test motor and motor cable assembly
� Apply Penetrox to motor cable lugs at the PEM during re-assembly
� Inspect motor cable routing
� Visually inspect motor encoder for contamination
� Clean motor fan
Battery Pack
� Check torque of mounting hardware
� Inspect BMB cover gasket
� Check cooling system (manifold, end fittings, hoses and clamps)
� Check level of cooling fluid and record specific gravity __
� Perform battery monitor test
HVAC
� Inspect condensor and lines. Clean condensor finning (if needed)
� Evacuate and refill refrigerant charge
Brakes
� Check operation of parking brake and adjust if necessary
� Inspect brake pads and discs. Specify pad thickness: Front Driver side __ Front Passenger side __ Rear Driver side __ Rear Passenger side __
� Inspect hoses, pipes and hydraulic units
� Check brake fluid level
Steering / Suspension
� Check condition of front and rear suspension, including ball joints and gaiters
� Check that the torque of rear toe link inboard fixing is 60Nm
� Inspect dampers
� Inspect front and rear wheel bearings for end play
� Inspect drive shaft gaiters
� Inspect steering wheel function
Wheels / Tires
� Inspect tire condition and record tread depths: Front Driver side __ Front Passenger side __ Rear Driver side __ Rear Passenger side __
� Check that the torque of wheel bolts is 105Nm
� Check Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) and specify setting: Comfort __ Range __
� Set and specify tire pressures: Front Driver side __ Front Passenger side __ Rear Driver side __ Rear Passenger side __
Electrical
� Inspect operation of charge port door and lubricate connector ramps
� Inspect operation of all interior and exterior lights
Body
� Inspect operation of (lubricate and adjust if needed) all hinges, latches and locks (including drivers door, trunk and ignition)
� Inspect operation and condition of seat belts
� Check wiper operation, washer jet position and refill reservoir
� Replace wiper inserts
� Check horn operation
� Check operation of alarm and keys
� Replace battery in both keys
PEM
� Visually inspect PEM chassis for damage
� Check operation of PEM and/or motor fan
� Check condition of baffle
� Clean megapole heat sinks when PEM is removed
� Check torque of mounting hardware during installation
� Measure ground strap resistance __
� Inspect seals of Motor Inlet Cable Cover and Top Access Hatch
� Clean PEM fan
VMS
� Download and review vehicle logs
� Check firmware revision and update before and after service, if necessary
� Reset service interval indicator (12 month/12,000 mile service)
Drive
� Perform vehicle test drive
Clean
� Vacuum interior and wipe all interior surfaces
� Wash vehicle exterior
� Fit soft-top and adjust tension cable
Charge
� Charge battery to full capacity in Standard Mode�
Oct 8, 2012
dsm363 I agree the article is right to bring up the issue but should include all the options and questions including for people who drive more than 12,500 miles per year.�
Oct 8, 2012
MikeK I'm not surprised Tesla is trying to remain silent on this. When you're doing something indefensible, any attempted explanation just sounds pathetic.�
Oct 8, 2012
RDoc That's an interesting list in that there's nothing at all exotic on it. Except for the vehicle logs and a few other items, everything seems pretty simple. Mostly it looks like an inspection. For example, with the exception of the A/C refrigerant, the fluid are just checked and topped up.
I'm still not seeing anything that justifies cancelling the entire warranty. Neither of the earlier examples of the transmission catastrophically failing while still full of oil, nor the display dying would be caught by this check list.�
Oct 8, 2012
strider As I posted up-thread, there is actually a fair amount of work that goes into Roadster service. This is related to the motor and PEM being air-cooled and the complex mechanisms by which this achieved. Tesla techs have to remove the PEM, clean it out, check and clean out the blowers, etc. Also the battery mgmt is 1st generation so I would expect there are tests that can only be performed with a Tesla laptop plugged into the car. I'm fine with this.
But w/ Model S being liquid cooled and the battery mgmt should be more advanced I just don't see how it can take $600 worth of labor every 12k miles. If Tesla can convince me otherwise I'll pay it.�
Oct 8, 2012
hcsharp It was made clear to me before I bought my Roadster that the annual service was optional and would not void the warranty if I failed to do it (unless failing to do it caused damage normally covered by warranty). We haven't seen the list for the MS, but there is a lot that needs to be done at a Roadster annual service, justifying the fee IMHO. Due to being built for easier servicing in the first place, and water cooling, the MS requires a lot less at its annual (this was confirmed by a service tech - not that he's an authority).
Tesla usually does the right thing when confronted with their mistakes. I'm waiting (hoping) for them to do that again.�
Oct 8, 2012
dsm363 I'm hoping they can just make it $475 or $600 per year and leave the 12,500 miles up to you in terms of servicing items on your own if you choose to do so. If you do the appropriate things and bring your car in once a year then the warranty stays intact.�
Oct 8, 2012
digitaltim +1000 dsm363
It is either this or no fee for first 4 years. I have lobbed my opinion into TM.�
Oct 8, 2012
westerndh I find it interesting that so many people are against this charge, yet I�ve seen few real world examples of what people have spent on service/repairs over many years.
In my case, I just sold my 2004 Volvo XC70 and I kept a record of all service costs over 9 years ownership which I've summarized the numbers below.
First number = I paid, second number = Extended warranty paid
2012 $908 $1,179
2011 $294 $0
2010 $1,050 $6,963
2009 $1,496 $6,231
2008 $298 $70
2007 $629 $518
2006 $319 $21
2005 $1,035 $576
2004 $0 $0
Total $6,029 $15,558
Average I paid per yr $669
Average warranty company paid per year $1,728
Bottom line, over 9 years, I paid $6,029 and the warranty work paid was over $15k (mostly after the 4 year factory warranty expired). Including the cost to purchase 2 extended warranties, my total out of pocket was $11k, an average $1.2k a year.
Ok, so I know my car was a Ford era Volvo, but I don't think these numbers are that different to many real life experiences I hear people talk about, so in my view, Tesla's offering is a no brainer, particularly adding in the convenience of Tesla Rangers coming to my home and the positive experiences people have reported with them.
Cheers�
Oct 9, 2012
Chas F I think many people opposed to this amount (including me) feel that you can't compare maintenance of an ICE car to the Model S because of the greatly reduced complexity. Assuming the S has 80% (somewhat random number) less moving/wearable components than an ICE, we would expect to pay 80% less for maintenance, or around $120/year on average. You could argue that software updates would bump that number up, but really? My yearly iPhone OS updates are free so why would I expect to pay so much to maintain an EV?�
Oct 9, 2012
mnx Just like there is a cost for those iOS updates (you paid for them through the price of the phone), there is a cost to building out service centers...
�
Oct 9, 2012
Chas F IAnother argument for including it in the cost of the car....�
Oct 9, 2012
dsm363 That doesn't mean it costs you less, it just hides the cost. It's just a different way of pricing it. I'm sure they'll probably include it in the future since people want 'free' maintenance included in the cost of the car.�
Oct 9, 2012
ElSupreme The only problem here is that you can only compare the first 4 years. Tesla has no price structure past that point. If you average your first 4 years only add up to $425 (even if you count 2008 in stead of 2004 you only have $570 per year). And if you drove over $50k miles in that time frame the Tesla cost would be even more. The price is on par, not less.
I expect to pay maintenance costs. I expected them to be less than an ICE cost. That isn't the case for the first 4 years. After that I think the maintenance on the Tesla will start to be an advantage (even at $600 per 12,000 miles) over an ICE. I think the turning point will be at about 100,000 miles though, as a modern ICE pretty much cruises until then. But then spark plugs, transmission work, water pumps, all start to die. And around $150k-$200k you have to start worrying about major transmission and engine repairs. The model S should need filters, and maybe some coolant pumps and keep going strong.�
Oct 9, 2012
RDoc Including the service in the price of the car though puts it out where people can see it before they buy the car. Personally, my problem is not with spending the money on service/maintenance, it's with Tesla doing a particularly egregious bait and switch.
There still is nowhere on the Tesla site, except for GeorgeB's reply to the service blog post, that says you have to pay for the warranty. GeorgeB made a big deal about legally required footnotes, but there isn't one on the Specifications page where the warranty is described, it just says it's "included". So what else that's "included" will have to be paid for and when will it be announced? For example, what is the battery warranty for years 5 - 8 going to cost?
The problem isn't money, it's trust.�
Oct 9, 2012
ckessel That would depend on the cost of the part and the difficulty of the what's required to repair or maintain it. In your first sentence you mention that you can't compare maintenance of an EV to an ICE, so consequently the costs for maintaining the EV/ICE components probably shouldn't be assumed to be comparable either.
Take an absurd extreme example of a part that's highly reliable, but requires nano-scale molecular inspection by a PHD level physicist each year. Maintenance would be pretty expensive in that case. Obviously a crazy example, but I can believe Tesla's EV parts would require a different sort of inspection/maintenance than an ICE part. Not PHD nano-tech different
I can say I'm disappointed the service charge isn't significantly lower than an ICE and I think Tesla's PR led us to believe it would be, but I don't have enough knowledge to say if the charge is actually unreasonable.�
Oct 9, 2012
George Parrott I have in other places, already complained about the amount of this service charge. I will continue to protest and I will continue to look and consider ANY other option from Acura (NSX) or even Cadillac (ELR) before I finalize my delivery of the Model S. I am OK with paying for a very well-equipped Model S (I am looking at close to $100k out the door), but I absolutely HATE continued regular payments for anything. I have a large solar array on our home, because I don't like monthly electric or gas bills, and even the MUCH, MUCH more complex Chevy Volt has nothing like "service costs" of $600 per year. I would be comfortable with a cost structure of something like $2-300/year for the first 3 years and then maybe $500/year for years 4-5 of ownership with another jump to maybe $600/year for years 6-8. But starting at $600/year for what is "service" is simply padding the warranty risk cost back to the consumer!!!!! EVs are simple in terms of support/service demands, so the service prepaid costs should be inline with those expectations. Big issues of support cost to Tesla will be warranty covered anyway!�
Oct 9, 2012
dsm363 It is $475/year if you prepay for 4 years and don't require unlimited Ranger visits. You likely have a service center within driving distance since you live in California. These payments are obviously part of an early adopter penalty if you want to call it that. They cover service and part costs, hiring new Rangers and building out new service centers and other expenses. Tesla is a young, growing company burning through a lot of cash. Comparing costs to a $35k Volt which is being sold for a loss and that costs is being absorbed into a multi-billion dollar company is hard to do.
I agree that Tesla should just build part of the cost into the car and lower the remainder to $300/year lets say. People would have an easier time with that.�
Oct 9, 2012
polera257
I agree with you about regular payments. I also have solar panels and have not paid for electricity for several years. Think the Cadillac ELR is a sharp car and have been watching it for a while. I feel the way this service plan is being done is horrible just like the additional charge to the 60k battery supercharging. I don't buy for one minute the story George B posted about it being a mistake. I feel as if Tesla is changing things as they go along and the res holders are just supposed to go along with it and all is forgiven. It doesn't work that way. Have a meeting, decide what is included and what is extra come up with a charge for the extras and make it public, period. No more George B posts with excuses. Just the facts and make it final or keep it unresolved. But to go from TBD to included would cause most people to think supercharging was included not hardware included and 1000.00 to activate the hardware. If I did that in my business I would be called a cheat and have the State down on me so fast I would not know what happened.�
Oct 9, 2012
hcsharp Software updates should not be considered a maintenance item for the customer to pay. The only exception would be if it enabled new features that weren't promised when the car was delivered. Software development is usually a capital expense for almost everything. The cost of bug fixes should be borne by the manufacturer.
For Tesla to defend their opportunistic maintenance fee by saying it includes "software updates" is ludicrous. New features that are enabled by software should be optional and sold that way.�
Oct 9, 2012
dave Is anyone else concerned that releasing the maintenance schedule AFTER they've already priced the service plan will lead to it containing exaggerated items that may not actually be required, in order to justify the mandatory service plans?
"We have to tweak the "fluxcapaciitorgizmodrive" every 12 months. It's very technical, you wouldn't understand."�
Oct 9, 2012
dsm363 For comparison, I took some friends for a ride who aren't into EVs at all and they absolutely loved the car. I told them about this maintenance controversy and they thought the $475-600 fee seemed appropriate for a car like the Model S. I realize not everyone feels that way.�
Oct 10, 2012
strider Well, we have the RAV4-EV's maintenance schedule already and since the drivetrain is the same as the 40kWh model S there isn't a ton of stuff they can jam in there w/o opening themselves up to criticism.�
Oct 10, 2012
Rifleman Part of the problem is that "a car like the Model S" can mean anything from a $50,000 daily driver to a $110,000 high performance beast of a car. While the service fees for the P85 are in line with its competition, for a base 40 kWh model, it represents a significant increase in service cost over the competition. To make matters even muddier, many 40 kWh buyers are comping the car against brands like Buick, Acura and Lexus, not against cars that also start at 50k, as the lifetime fuel savings of the Model S bring the lifetime operating cost into the same range as the lower level premium vehicles from these brands. The fee of $600-$700 (depending on where you live) per 12500 miles completely breaks this cost comparison. The price point for owners signing up for the 4 year plan is better, but the required up front cost would eat into the money available for a down payment for owners who are financing, and is not an option for many.�
Oct 10, 2012
Robert.Boston Would the complaining have been louder or softer if Tesla had announced an across-the-board price increase of $2000 in January, and then announced in September that the "white glove" 4yr/50k miles service plan was free?�
Oct 10, 2012
RDoc I think people would have been ecstatic! I would have been.
As I've said before, the current situation leaves a very bad taste in a lot of peoples' mouths, myself included.�
Oct 10, 2012
VolkerP softer. No one would have finalized if he couldn't bear the additional $2k.�
Oct 10, 2012
swegman It would have been softer. As i previously said, I have owned Audi, MB, Lexus vehicles, and either the manufacturer or the dealer has provided free service for the cars during the warranty period. I recently looked at the Caddy XTS, and it includes free maintennace during the warranty period. I've only had to pay for service with the Toyota Prius during the warranty period, but that cost less than $100/year. And even toyota now provides free maintenance for 2 years.
To me, what Tesla is doing has a bad appearance, and is out of line with other car manufacturers. I understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch, you pay for service one way or the other. But building the cost into the price of the vehicle, as the other car manufacturers are doing, is the better approach. At the least, it would make Tesla look consistent with the offerings of Caddy, BMW, et al.�
Oct 10, 2012
Tempus i'm just not sure i get that attitude. Obviously a lot of people feel that way (that it would be better to roll the service price into the car price and basically hide it from the buyer), but if you're paying the exact same amount anyway, wouldn't you rather know what the breakdown is? It just seems like people are saying - go ahead and hide these costs that you are still paying, and i'll feel better about buying the car... just don't get it.�
Oct 10, 2012
VolkerP Imagine this conversation in 2009.
Me: "Darling, I want our next car to be electric."
Wife: "Will it hold our kids? If not, I want that minivan."
Me: "No, no, look here, 5+2 seats, $50k, up to 300 miles of range."
Wife: "Ok, go ahead, and make that reservation payment."
in 2011:
Me: "Tesla announced pricing. Batteries come in steps $10k for 70 miles each."
Wife: "Sure the base version will do?"
Me: "we really should consider the next size. And we must order air suspension or defer our reservation even further."
In August 2012:
Me: "Darling, great news! Supercharging is included in our mid-size battery model. That's at least a $500 donation towards us!"
Wife: "What's supercharging?"
In September 2012:
Me: "Uhm, we need that service plan to maintain our warranty. That's another $1900." :redface:
Wife: "Ok tell me what other cost increases are in the pipeline? We're approaching $90k with that $50k base model, BTW." :frown:
Me: <mumbling perhaps a data plan, dunno, cold navigate with maps or smartphone instead... satellite radio subscription... set of winter tires would be good, we're talking 19 inch rims here, these start at $1000... need electrician to work on our garage.../> :redface:
In October 2012:
Me: "Remember that supercharging option? Well I dunno if we still need it but now it's $2k."
Wife: ...
It would have been a lot easier to start this with $52k instead of $50k. It's still uphill work to sell this vehicle to me, and I've pretty much stopped talking about it to other people.�
Oct 10, 2012
Adm I am getting the 40kWh battery and I really, no really, don't care as long as Tesla takes good care of my Model S.
I am quite surprised on how this thread just keeps going on repeating the same (some valid) arguments time after time after time.. I'd say: Get organized and write a letter to Tesla if you really care this strongly about this issue.�
Oct 10, 2012
RDoc The problem is exactly that, you don't know.
The cost of the service contract is nowhere on the Tesla site except buried in a response to a blog post. If it were up front in the price, there'd be no question of what the cost was.
Then there's the issue of what will the 5 to 8 year battery warranty cost. Since Tesla seems to have a policy of charging for "included" items and notifying people only after purchase, aka "bait and switch", there's a real question of what's in store.�
Oct 10, 2012
Tempus ok, come on - now you're just passing misinformation.
Service | Tesla Motors
that is NOT in any way "buried in a blog post"
but that's really not the point - i get that people are upset that we (and i include tesla here) didn't know up front what the full price was going to be for service (and for supercharging in some cases), and we still don't know the extended warranty.... these are early adopter issues. It's not bait and switch. it's tesla publishing information as they have it - and yes, that sucks for some early adopters, but such is life in that scenario.
In 6 months or a year, these will all be complete non issues. people who are signing contracts at that point will know exactly what the costs are, and I for one think it's much better that they break out costs to this extent as opposed to having everything just hidden in the base cost of the car.�
Oct 10, 2012
strider Because it's easier to justify as an "early adopter penalty" if the car is more expensive yet maintenance (on a "low-maintenance vehicle") is cheap/free. It also allows people to finance the cost if need be since it's rolled into the purchase price. Also, the fact that I know the breakdown has me really upset as I don't see the value in what they're charging for service. If the price of my car was $95k with free service for 4 years instead of $93k then that would just be the cost of the car and I could pay it or not. But now it feels like I'm not only paying a lot for the car but now I'm paying a lot for service.
I know it doesn't make any sense and that it's an emotional response but it is what it is. I'm not Spock�
Oct 10, 2012
dsm363 I agree. This is all early adopter issues. I don't think any malicious intent is here on Tesla's part it just that they're moving things out the door as fast as possible and nailing things down when they can. Could things have gone smoother in retrospect? Sure but they usually step up to the plate and do the right thing when it's possible.�
Oct 10, 2012
RDoc Misinformation - Really?
Before making such claims, try to find somewhere on that page or any other on the Tesla site apart from GeorgeB's reply to the blog post that says you must buy their service to keep your warranty intact. Lots of car companies offer paid service plans, none I'm aware of will void your warranty if you don't buy it.
If you can't find it, please post an apology.�
Oct 10, 2012
ckessel It doesn't say you must buy Tesla's service because the actual warranty doesn't require it.�
Oct 10, 2012
Tempus I'm completely not going to rehash that discussion again. besides, here is your quote that i was responding directly to:
in fact, the cost of the service contract is directly in the link i posted. I don't see how George's message on this site is even directly relevant.�
Oct 10, 2012
RDoc There seem to be at least two camps here, those who think the service is required to maintain the warranty and those who don't.
I'm with the ones who think it's required since GeorgeB, a person of some authority explicitly stated that it is. If it isn't then that's pretty bad since he's trying to scare people into buying something that's not required and is a deliberate falsehood. I doubt that.
If Tesla thinks it's required, but legally it isn't, which is a real possibility, then it will be fought out in the courts. That's not something I want any part of. If the service sounds expensive, a lawsuit will be substantially more.
@Tempus: That quote was in direct response to the question of including mandatory service in the price of the car or not. If it weren't mandatory, this thread wouldn't exist, note the title of the thread "Warranty/Servicing - official Tesla responses (incl GeorgeB)".�
Oct 10, 2012
ckessel Or George isn't a legal guy and knows maintenance is required, but didn't realize the warranty doesn't (and can't) restrict such maintenance to Tesla.
There may be two camps of thought, but one is based on a forum posting and the other is based on the wording in the actual legally binding warranty and that's the only one that's going to matter.�
Oct 10, 2012
Tempus Ok, i see your point re the context, i wasnt reading the two as the same since plenty of ice cars include x years of service in the price of the car, and that was the context i took your quote in, and that part of the discussion has little to do with whether georges comments were legal or not..... Frankly thats a whole other ball of wax which i wasnt trying to address�
Oct 10, 2012
bonnie Or a third camp, which believes the warranty is the controlling legal document and that George's post, while not as clear as it should have been, was not a deliberate falsehood but only an error in wording. I assume good intent here. So far that's worked pretty well for me.�
Oct 10, 2012
hcsharp I don't think there's a third camp. Tesla made a mistake but I don't think anybody had bad intent. @RDoc I wouldn't assume that GeorgeB was trying to scare anyone. He either messed up his wording or he didn't understand the requirements himself. Based on his language I'm somewhat confused by the difference between annual/12.5k inspections and annual maintenance.�
Oct 10, 2012
vfx Are any of the phone updates things that were supposed to be included? I like that Tesla came out with the car early and is upgrading on the fly. It's brillaint marketing. At some point the firmware upgrades will be things that people havve been asking for but never promised. Or things that Tesla thought would make the car better. That's when the value kicks in.
- - - Updated - - -
Should include a 2.0 12V battery replacement.�
Oct 10, 2012
RDoc What's unclear about this quote from GeorgeB's reply to the original service blog post?
This is from the original blog which is all about this service/inspection plan. I don't really see how GeorgeB's post could be referring to anything else.
It's quite possible that voiding the warranty like this is illegal, however, it's pretty clear that at least GeorgeB thinks that's Tesla's policy. Thus far there's been no other word from Tesla denying it either. I'm hoping the silence means they are reconsidering their position, not just stonewalling.
As I've said before, it might be possible to win a court suit, but that's going to be a long, difficult and very expensive process.
Tesla really needs to get this clarified. It's already starting to filter out to the auto press and isn't going to help them sell cars.�
Oct 10, 2012
Citizen-T My God, is this really still going on? I for one would like to applaud George B's instincts on what whining deserves changes (the supercharger bit for those already locked in) and what doesn't.
I'll tell you what is "leaking into the automotive press": Model S spanking the M5 in a drag race.
Here's my advice. Stop comparing every little detail to its ICE counterpart. Tesla can't make Model S a better ICE than the ICE kings, and they can't make themselves a better traditional car company than the established players. The only way to win this is to play a different game. Sometimes that means no more haggling over price. Sometimes it means you have to wait for your car. Sometimes it means free fuel for your road trips and new features over the air, and sometimes it means no free service under warranty.
Every time I read "every other car manufacturer does x" I throw up a little in my mouth.
Step back and take another look at the big picture here. Go have a look at that thread with pics of everyone's kids in the driver seat of the Model S. Go watch some Tesla grin videos on YouTube. Pull out those pics you too at the factory tour last year. You know, that American factory that is now building American cars, guess what, it is still there.
Tesla has earned my trust. I wouldn't take my car anywhere else to be serviced, whether it is allowed or not. If they say it costs $600 a year, so be it. I probably spend a lot more than that on a lot of things that I care a whole lot less about (coffee for instance).
Different business models are, well, different. And I definitely want different.�
Oct 11, 2012
westerndh Very well said!
�
Oct 11, 2012
efusco That's the statement I'd choose to lock this 'shark jumped' thread on.
Evan, Via Tapatalk�
Oct 11, 2012
mnx I say it's time to close this thread already�
Oct 11, 2012
bonnie I agree, it would be a good final quote for this thread. Policy is to leave threads open, BUT, there is nothing stopping people from constantly quoting that post. Like I just did.
�
Oct 11, 2012
dsm363 Maybe we should unsticky this. When any clarification becomes available and the warranty is fully understood, a new thread can be started discussing it.
Since everyone is quoting it, why not? Great post too:
�
Oct 11, 2012
bonnie Thread is unstuck. Good suggestion, I hadn't even noticed.�
Oct 11, 2012
Jaff + 1001 ...well stated Sir!
�
Oct 11, 2012
strider You can try and shout people down all you want but there are two things here that Tesla has to contend with and they're not going away no matter how loudly you sing kumbaya:
1) In order to succeed they need more than EV-fanatics to buy their cars. There aren't enough of us. They need people who truly are cross-shopping 5-series, A7, etc. and these people WILL compare TCO. And right now the TCO of a Model S is NOT lower than it's ICE competitors. Based on limited knowledge today about battery longevity, we must assume that fuel savings will be chewed up by an eventual battery replacement. Yes it has a ton of benefits over an ICE which is why I'm about to own two of them but buying a Tesla is not an economic decision.
2) Tesla states all over their marketing materials about how Model S is a "low maintenance car" yet has service fees that are the same or more than ICE cars. So they need to eliminate the marketing verbiage or bring service fees in line with that messaging.
I am FINE with paying to help build out the service network as an early adopter. But to do that they should add the cost to the car and keep the service fees low. It's related to the optics of #2 above. Whenever I talk to people about EVs I go into the amazing performance, etc but also about how much simpler an EV is than an ICE. So then people ask what the service costs. W/ the Roadster I could say that it's hand-built, 1st gen, lots of labor to check the Lotus chassis, etc. But now w/ Model S the price is the same and it really baffles people. Adding a couple thousand to Model S and Model X to catch the more wealthy early adopters to build out the service network and then w/ Gen III have reasonable service fees. I don't want Tesla to be known as an "expensive to own" car as it goes against what EV's are all about.�
Oct 11, 2012
Jhall118 Either way, the Gen III will have lower service charges. Either because Tesla lowers them by then, or because 3rd party garages get the certification to service them. If a service tech no longer works for Tesla and works for some other shop that had the equipment, there's no way they could successfully pull the warranty card.�
Oct 11, 2012
Beavis Yes, we know already. Everything that can be said has been said. We are on page 49 so posting hasn't gotten the anti- service plan crowd any closer to their desired solution. It is time to stop posting about how this makes you feel and take action that might get you to where you want to be. Contact TM and tell them you are willing to walk away if they don't do what you want them to do.�
Oct 11, 2012
swegman I agree with item (1) of strider, above, and can give a perfect example. I have a friend looking at buying a new car, a loaded Audi A6 for a cost of about $65K plus. She looked at the Tesla at the scottsdale, az location. Upon hearing that there is a yearly maintennance fee for the Tesla, she said forget it. The Audi she is considering includes free service for the length of the warranty.
You can argue all you want that tesla is a startup, and needs the money to build service locations, Superchargers, etc. You can argue all you want that over a 10 year period, the tesla will be cheaper (and i debate this, as I know very few people that keep a car more than 6-7 years; actually, I only have 2 friends whose cars are older than 7 years). If tesla can not convince the non-EV fanatic to buy the car, it will all be for nothing. Tesla needs to convince the average person on the street that the car is worth buying. So far, EVERY person I know that is looking for a new luxury car has written off the Tesla solely because of the yearly maintennance plan requirement. Every sale they lose is one step closer to failure. They should have done what the other car manufacturers do; add it to the cost of the car and say yearly service is included for no additional fee.�
Oct 11, 2012
Beavis Ok, let me help you. My advice is to draft a letter to GB giving him your reasons that the service fee should be less, zero, or whatever. Let him know your demands. Go through every page of this 49 page thread and identify everyone that has voiced a negative opinion about the service plan. Send each one of them a private email through this site asking them if they will sign your draft letter to GB. Then send it with the signatures and reservation numbers. Be prepared to threaten to give up your reservation and sue for your deposit. If you aren't willing to do that then this is all just impotent whining because GB reads this never ending thread and there has been no action on their part to address your concerns.�
Oct 11, 2012
swegman Kroneal, I have already canceled one reservation and have deferred the second reservation to see what happens. I have discussed my concerns with them. To date, it has fallen on deaf ears at Tesla. All they say is they will consider the concerns raised by me (and others). They already lost one sale to me, and they may also lose a second sale to me. I want Tesla to succeed. I gave them deposits about 3 years ago. I believe in the potential of electric vehicles.
I am not suggesting that the service should be cost free. I am stating the cost should have been included in the cost of the car (yes, raise the cost of the car $2K for the purchase of the car), so it is not "visible", just like BMW, Caddy, Toyota, etc. have done, so that when the average person on the street looks at cars to purcahse, they don't go and say that the Caddy (or whatever) includes free service while Tesla is asking me to pay for service. It is the average person on the street that Tesla is ultimately going to need to convince to buy the car if Tesla is to be viable.
Also, don't forget that the majority of average people finance their car. Having the service cost built into the price of the car allows those people to finance the cost of the service. They will not be able to do that by purchasing the service plan 30 days after taking delivery of the car (not taking into account that the cost could be financed on a credit card, which probably has a higher interest rate than a car loan, and avoiding any discussion that if the purchaser can not afford the cost of the service plan, they should not have purchased the car in the first place).�
Oct 11, 2012
Beavis Again, we know all that. I am suggesting that one of you needs to lead an organized effort instead of posting continuously about this issue. One or two isolated cancellations isn't going to get it done. Grab the pitchforks and light the torches. Storm the castle.�
Oct 11, 2012
qwk I can't believe you guys are still debating this.
Just wait until Tesla runs through their deposit holders to finalize, when the list stops, asses are going to pucker. This won't take long since they are more than halfway through. Then what? They definitely underestimated their customer base. I bet most of their reservation holders are not your typical Benz or Beamer drivers like they had hoped.�
Oct 11, 2012
rcc I can't believe you guys are still arguing about this either.
I am a BMW owner. Believe me, the TCO on a Tesla is definitely lower than a BMW. Just an extra oil change a year (because I'm sorry but I'm going to change the oil more than once every 15K miles) costs >$100. I *know* that if I were paying BMW for service, I'd be paying lots more than $600 per year.
I'll agree that bundling the service price into the car is better from a marketing perspective but I'd bet large amounts of $$ that until very recently, they didn't know how much they were going to have to charge for service. They probably still don't know how much the service will truly cost them. I just hope they don't lose much money on it.
The stores are the key to pulling in reservations from BMW/Mercedes/Audi owners. That and great press from the automobile mags. They're getting more stores and great press. I think they're going to be ok as long as they don't get hit by some major disaster.�
Oct 11, 2012
ElSupreme I was and still am fairly vocal that the maintenance cost of the Tesla is much higher than my expectations. I was told they were cheaper than an ICE, but they are not. But bitching and moaning this much about a thousand dollars (you should have been expecting some maintenance costs) over 50,000 miles or 4 years is crazy. Am I sore about it, yes. Is it really going to change my decision? No.
Is what they did outrageous? No. Is what they did unfair? Not really. Could they have gone about it a little better? Probably, but in hindsight you can go back and do just about anything better.�
Oct 11, 2012
efusco My feelings exactly. I might say what they did is a little unfair and unexpected. And I think going with a 1 year 15k mile would have made me feel a bit better as that's my annual mileage, and at 12k I'm looking at an extra fee every 4 years. But, so be it. I knew I was buying a high end luxury sedan and I knew there would be a cost to that. 6 months after getting the car I'll rarely speak of it except when questioned why maintenance isn't cheaper by outsiders.�
Oct 11, 2012
swegman I'm sorry, but I don't think you understand that what I am saying is that tesla shot themselves in the foot. I'm not bitching about having to pay $2K for the service. I'm complaining about the way they did it. I can afford the service cost without any problems. I am fortunate enough to be able to pay for the cars in cash, no loan needed. In fact, I could buy several times that without needing a loan. The point is the average person can not. We are early adopters and many are willing to put up/accept anything Tesla does/says. But that will not fly with the average person who doesn't care if the car is an ICE or an EV and has to take a loan to pay for it. Those people are going to write off tesla because of the need to pay for service. The majority of the population could care less if they buy an electric vehicle or a gas vehicle. They are concerned with whether they will have to pay for service, and when confronted with other manufacturer's cars that offer "free" (included) service, they are voting with their pocketbooks and buying the other cars. I have personally witnessed that. As I indicated above, a friend in AZ looked at tesla just this week and decided to get the Audi because the car includes the service. I have other friends that I suggested the car to that said no because of the service cost fee during the warranty period. This hurts tesla and reduces the chance of them being viable. I want to see tesla succeed, but I am concerned that they are not making wise decisions. I think they may have miscalculated who the average buyer is. The average buyer does not want to pay for service when they can buy a competing car in which service is "included".
Please note that I have no financial interest in tesla, no stock, no intent to buy stock. I am only interested in seeing tesla be viable to produce the best car they are capable of, as it will spur other car makers to innovate, and that benefits everyone.�
Oct 12, 2012
Chas F Your point is well taken.
I will say though that I don't think this will impact the viability of the company as most people buying this class car will grumble but pony up regardless. Those that don't care whether its an EV or an ICE will probably not buy the Model S anyway because of the comparative costs. My guess is that if the service was suddenly changed to be included and you pressed your friend for a decision longer than 10 seconds, she still would not have purchased the S. Lastly, remember that this is a stepping stone in a much larger plan. Gen III will most certainly not have this high service cost and will sell in much higher volumes than the Model S.
Having said that, it still pisses me off to pay $600 a year for inspection, wiper blades, and brake pads (not even). I am still getting the car and will minimize the pain with the prepaid option.�
Oct 12, 2012
swegman Chas, we could go on and on forever on this subject, so this will be my last post on this matter. If what you say is true ("Those that don't care whether its an EV or an ICE will probably not buy the Model S anyway because of the comparative costs"), Tesla is in deep trouble. Elon promoted the car as being the best automobile, not the best EV, and there are only a limited number of people that want the car because it is an EV. The majority of the buying public couldn't care less whether it is an EV or an ICE. They are looking for a car that meets their needs. And to most of them, that includes service for no charge duing the warranty period.
As for my friend, I asked her and she said if service had been included, she definitely would have ordered the Model S. Since it is not, she is buying a loaded A6 tonite at the North Scottsdale Audi dealer for a little over $70K.
I also noted above that several other people I know decided against the Model S because of the service cost issue. It is hard to argue with someone about this issue when they point out that their BMW M5, Caddy XTS, Audi, etc. (and even low cost Toyota) includes service.
We are all intelligent people and know that when all the costs are added (price of car with included service vs. price of car and seperate maintennance fee), they are equal. But people have become accustomed to included service during the warranty period on upscale cars (and even every day cars like Toyota). What i am saying is that Tesla should have raised the MSRP of the car to include the maintennance service fee. Then, the average person on the street would feel the Tesla is comparable to other cars.�
Oct 12, 2012
ElSupreme As a $1900 adder she could have had 50k miles worth of maintenance. Why does it have to be in the cost of the car.�
Oct 12, 2012
efusco I argue that if you can't see that the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) is dramatically lower for the Tesla than an Audi A6, then the presumption of "intelligent" is questionable. We're really talking about a tiny fraction of cost...she'll spend that $1900 in the first 6 months on the Audi in gas and maintenance.�
Oct 12, 2012
swegman Elsupreme and Evan,
I asked her and she is not paying anything extra for the service. She said service is being included with the car she is getting for the length of the warranty. Whether the Tesla will have a TCO lower than the Audi or another car depends on how long you keep a car. Since she (like I) usually get rid of a car before the warranty expires, the TCO for a model S may not (or may) be lower. I don't know.
In the last 15 or so years, I have kept only 1 car beyond the warranty period; that being a Prius, for which I spend less than $100/year in service costs, not counting the price for new tires. I switch cars often. My wife replaced one Lexus after 11 months, an Infinity after 3 years, and is looking at replacing her current 2.5 year old Lexus . She does this because she likes to drive new cars. I have replaced my Audis and MB just before the warranty expires because I don't want to deal with potential headaches after the warranty expires. The Prius is the only car in the last 15 or so years for which we paid for scheduled maintennance. How long you keep a car has an effect on the TCO. You are probably correct that the Tesla has a lower TCO if you keep it for 10 years if we assume the maintennance fee for years 5-10 remains $600/year. If you replace cars every 3 to 4 years, it may not be true, depending on how much you drive. Personally, I will probably put about 6k to 7K on the model S each year. So, over a 4 year period that would be 24,000 to 28,000 miles. The difference in price between gas and electricity may not offset the maintennance fee cost. I personally have never bought a car based on its gas mileage, but rather on the fact that i liked the car as a whole. With respect to the Prius, I was attracted to it not because of the gas mileage, but because I would only have to fill up every 3-4 weeks.�
Oct 12, 2012
dsm363 For a 25 mpg car with gas at $4.50/gallon you're looking at $4,500 in fuel over those 4 years or $2,250 for a 50mpg car if I did the math right (for 25,000 miles). You'll spend $1000 dollars over 4 years for the Model S assuming 4 cents per mile of electricity.
If the psychological effect of paying for the service plan really freaks people out and causes them to not buy the Model S then they should build part or all of the cost into the car by raising the base price. It seems that the service plan could totally or mostly be evened out by fuel savings for most people.�
Oct 12, 2012
ElSupreme This is irrational behavior. And in my experience trying to cater to this ends up being harder than it is worth. With the one exception of trying to take advantage of such irrational behavior.�
Oct 12, 2012
ckessel If you switch cars that regularly, I'm not sure what the point is in even thinking about TCO since money is not much of a factor in your car ownership priorities.
I'm not judging those priorities, just pointing out TCO doesn't mean much when the O part of that is so short.�
Oct 12, 2012
Beavis Uh, no it's not. You know that it is time to stop posting when you say you're going to stop posting but you don't stop posting.�
Oct 12, 2012
swegman Dsm363,
It does freak people out. That is why I said up the MSRP of the car. As another example, my boss (owner of the patent firm I am with) makes $500K plus per year. Throws money around like crazy when we take out clients and for his personal pleasure. Yet, when he purchased his Porche Panamera at list price (about $120K), the one thing he negotiated was that maintennance be included. So yes, it is my opinion that the majority of people do not want to incur an additional service cost after paying $50k plus for a car. It may not be rational, but that is the way it is. Thus, my suggestion that it be built into the price of the car.
BTW, are you paying $4.50/gallon for gas? What state are you in? Iin AZ, my friends told me that gas is about $3.50/gallon. In VA, I paid $3.58 the last time I filled up (about 3-4 weeks ago).
Ckessel, I indicated that I dont buy a car based on TCO. Someone else raised that issue.
Kroneal, I respect your opinion (and everyone else's opinion), but this is a public forum. I never tell someone to, for example, stop posting, you are stupid or shut up (you did not say any of this). If I don't like or am not interested in a thread anymore, I stop reading it, while others can continue to post. I want Tesla to succeed. I dont think they will if they don't make some changes to be competitive with other car makers. They face enough obstacles, what with 4 states (which includes Arizona) asserting that tesla's stores violate their laws (something you think Tesla would have looked into before opening stores).�
Oct 12, 2012
dsm363 I agree with you that they should just include it in the MSRP. Would take that issue off the table.
I probably should have used $3.75 or so for gas prices. Gas will likely continue get more expensive overtime. This is interesting though
InflationData: Gasoline Inflation�
Oct 12, 2012
Norbert I don't think they'll raise the MSRP, though. They might wait until battery prices go down and then, instead of reducing MSRP, perhaps include service for the warranty period.
Another thought on a frequent argument here, that maintenance/repair costs for EVs are supposed to be less costly:
While that is probably true in general, it may not be true for Tesla at all, for a few years, as it will have a lot of fixed costs (for building up a service network targeted for future volumes and geography, and operating it) while the volume of actually sold/serviced cars is still small. I'd expect that their service department, with investments/hiring/etc included, will make a loss for quite some time.
Another thought: comparing $475/year to $600/year with Ranger included, that seems $125 for at least one Ranger service. I'd doubt that covers the average cost for Tesla, given that there will be a lot of Model S's away, some far away, from the existing centers. Plus the training cost for all the new hires.�
Oct 12, 2012
phx182flyer Filled the Merc up last night. Premium is 3.97/Gal here in PHX.�
Oct 12, 2012
v12 to 12v Be grateful you have inexpensive gas until your Tesla arrives. I haven't seen premium under $4 for a long time.�
Oct 12, 2012
swegman Dsm363, interesting article.
Phx182flyer, I was referring to the price for gas in the Gilbert, Queen Creek, Chandler, Mesa area. I believe Phoenix proper may be higher, as is Scottsdale.�
Oct 12, 2012
kcveins Agreed. Premium is $4.20 in the burbs and $4.50 in the city (Chicago)�
Oct 12, 2012
swegman I was in Chicago and Madison, WI this summer looking at colleges with my son. I was surprised that gas was more than $0.50/gallon more expensive in Chicago than in Madison, with the price in Madison being comparable to the price of gas in Northern VA.�
Oct 13, 2012
swegman Price for gas in Gilbert, AZ at 9:30 am this morning was $3.53 for regular and $3.70 for premiun according to a friend that was filling up his Lexus at Costco. Yes, he drives a Lexus but buys gas at Costco.�
Oct 13, 2012
Lloyd San Diego $4.93 regular and $5.39 premium�
Oct 14, 2012
dsm363 I didn't mean to take this off into a discussion about gas prices. Just trying to show that the higher than anticipated service plan is lessened by gas savings.�
Oct 20, 2012
neroden If so, Tesla should have issued a correction by now. It hasn't. There's going to be lawsuits. With only 2500 Roadsters, there weren't enough buyers to run into people who were willing to sue over such things. With 20,000 Model S per year, someone's going to go ahead and demand their rights, and Tesla's going to have a big, nasty fight on their hands. Unless they shape up.
This makes me uncomfortable as a stockholder.
�
Oct 20, 2012
ckessel I have to say I have no idea what you're talking about. Lawsuits over what? What are those 20,000 people a year going to get upset about? There's nothing in the warranty to get upset about.�
Oct 20, 2012
rdunniii IBM lost the legal battle to require manufacturers or any other specified providers maintenance in order to maintain warranties or support 25 years ago.�
Oct 21, 2012
hcsharp Tesla's policy with the Roadster is different. Tesla made it clear to me before I bought mine that skipping the annual service would NOT void the warranty unless it caused damage otherwise covered by warranty. In fact there are lots of Roadster owners who don't pay for the annual service and Tesla is fine with that. Their warranties are still intact. They need to have the same policy with the Model S. In addition, most Roadster owners have been treated very well by Tesla service. So there's lots of good will and not much incentive to sue.�
Oct 21, 2012
Norbert I'd speculate that in addition to free wipers, you'll also get some parts exchanged for free which Tesla finds to have minor issues (as opposed to serious ones which would require a recall). And they'll need to examine the cars as a matter of post-delivery QA, given the pioneering technology.
Aside from legal questions, if anyone else than Tesla would do the service, they would surely want it to be, in the interest of the customer, a Tesla-certified technician who is in, and remains in, close contact with Tesla. And those don't exist yet.
- - - Updated - - -
I think the difference to the Roadster is that Roadster owners who buy the first low-volume electric exotic sports car, are prepared to accommodate the unique requirements of the situation. Whereas with the Model S, Tesla has to deal with a mid-volume situation and will be getting ready for the high-volume Gen3.�
Oct 21, 2012
jerry33 While that statement is true, I don't see how it's relevant. Every car manufacturer has service requirements that if not done will will void the part of the warranty the particular required service covers. Telsa isn't doing anything different here that I can see. The problem is that the Model S maintenance costs are more than some "high maintenance" cars and Tesla has said that the Model S is "low maintenance" so it appears as if Tesla has done some false advertising. At the very least they have set up a set of expectations about service that they aren't going to meet. I don't see this being a problem later on because those who order after the first 6,000 cars have been delivered will have everything laid out and they can choose to buy or not buy.�
Oct 21, 2012
Norbert That seems a different discussion than the one I commented on, although they are not completely separate.
Regarding the price, I thought a much earlier post from Nigel showed that the price is in the range of those from BMW/Mercedes once the initial service period is over. Personally, I don't know much about service price, except that my last car (GM) required oil changes (synthetique recommended) every 3,000 miles. A warning light would light up otherwise, and oil would get low after maybe 5,000 miles. At something like $35, that alone was already $140 per 12,000 miles.
Tesla repeats the low maintenance claim on the very blog in which it announces the price, and argues that the price includes software updates, wear & tear parts, and Ranger service (which is probably more expensive than the cost allocated).
Having said that I don't know much a about service costs, I think the price is ok *if* the checks are really thorough, and perhaps also includes small non-scheduled improvements. And additionally, as long as the tech is new, which almost always causes costs. You might think: why should the customer pay for the tech being new, but then: who else should pay for it? And since Tesla still needs to grow in terms of service centers etc., that's difficult to compare to the prices an established manufacturer is able to offer.
PLus: the Superchargers are free, and charging for them would be difficult.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét