Why I won't buy a Tesla Model 3

Yes, fully optioned = presumed $70k

I always figured in the back of my mind that the supercharging option would be additional based on the base price of $35k. But some are trying to argue that $2k is too low. Then what is about right? 5k? 10k? This puts the theoretical optioned out price above $70k.

There's a missing component in this solution. Do you mean keep the burner? I don't like the Leaf nor the Bolt, which aren't really much more affordable than the Model 3.

I think I brought up $2k, but some thought that this was low-balling it for the Model 3.

 

As already mentioned, $70k for the Model 3 is pure fantasy. I don't see why you presume that number.

I don't know why you would base it on the base price. Do you have any evidence this is the case? I always figured it would be based on the average cost of the service over the lifetime of the vehicle. This may be slightly less for the Model 3 as it will be more efficient than the Model S, but certainly not by the same ratio as the base price difference.

No, there is no missing component. Are you a one car household or multi-car household?
If multi, replace one of the vehicles with a BEV, if one, replace it with a plugin hybrid that allows you to drive your daily routine using electricity and save the gas for long trips.
The Bolt will be MORE expensive than the Model 3. We don't know yet what the second gen Leaf will cost.

A number of people have, as that is the only data point we have.
As for some thinking that price is low, you would have to ask them as I don't ascribe to that belief.

 

$2000 and $2500 after purchase is what the lifetime access was priced for the Model S. I only see it being higher for the Model 3 if Tesla had really underestimated this price to begin with. With the addition of non-lifetime plans, I don't see why they would go lower.

The $70k price probably came about by using Model S prices for options. Being a smaller car, in a lower cost segment, many of those options will be priced lower for the Model 3.

 

Compared to the Model S it is; it is less than half the starting price of that model.

 

I wasn't 'arguing' about a price guess ... but my guess of $3k was based on theoretical profit of the original 60kWh model S, back when supercharging was a $2k option on it. Thus the supercharger option added ~ 3.5% to the msrp of the base cost. Since the profit margin is smaller on the less expensive model 3, it would necessarily require more of a price hit for supercharging than the model s - due to the much larger sales volume / over-all potential supercharger users needing to supercharge.

Another "guess" that one might entertain is the whole notion of "packaging" like Toyota does (and virtually EVERYONE hates). If you buy a new Hybrid Camry for instance, "... Oh !! you want "lighted" mirror vanity sun shades? That comes with bundled accessory package xyz ... which is included, with the $1,500 sunroof, & the equally expensive this & this and this (which you don't even want) .... now ... are there any other options you'd like to order sir ?". And voilà ... you now have your $10 worth of light bulbs and plastic covers for your vanity mirror sun shades, at a cost of $2,000 (shaking head). I hope the Model 3 doesn't get bundled options like Toyota does ... but it is one sneeky way to add a lot of profit to extras you may want to include.

 

You mean like how the BMW 3 series starts at $33,150, but can be optioned out to $62,995?
Tesla might make an everyman's car in the future, but right now they are a luxury brand, and follow the luxury brand norms for pricing and packaging.

 

I'm expecting Tesla to keep the lifetime Supercharger access cost the same as it was for the Model S. $2000 is a bigger hit on a $35k car than a $60k one. With the introduction of less than lifetime plans, I think most Model 3 buyers would rather opt to put that $2000 towards longer range, dual motors, and other add ons.

I guess Tesla could price lifetime higher to further encourage the new methods of paying for Supercharging paying. The $2000 price for the old S60 is fairly well known, and would quickly be relearned if Tesla priced higher for it on the Model 3. There is also the risk, that higher price would embolden mooching the system.

 

Double the base price is my rule of thumb. Maybe it needs amending, as Trollbait makes a good point.

What I intended to say is that based on the relatively low base price of the Model 3, I always thought supercharger access would be an option. This latest decision doesn't surprise me.

Ok, there was some missing information when you laid out the options before, but I thought this was the only configuration you could have meant. That only leaves a Volt for me, priced *barely* under the Model 3.

I meant in the last several pages of discussion.

It feels like I'm arguing in a vacuum here. They actually did explain their rationale just earlier today (thanks, hill). You interjected about other points I might have made in passing ($70k maxed out options) in my response to his earlier opinion about $2k for supercharging being a low-ball speculation for the Model 3.

 

A $2,000 option for lifetime unlimited charging would be a steal for Model 3 customers, but don’t count on it.

Here are a couple economic reasons why it’s unlikely to happen:

1) Demographics: Model S and X customers have a lot more discretionary income and in general value convenience significantly over getting free electricity. Charging at home is easiest. Superchargers are convenient and necessary for them, but not worth driving several miles for most of these owners to charge locally. Home ownership is very high, so destination charging at home is essentially the rule.

Musk understood these costs and probabilities and figured spreading costs of Supercharger infrastructure and electricity among the Model S and X customers could be easily covered in the price of the vehicles.

2) Selection bias: those who would buy a Model 3 and opt for lifetime charging (over pay-per-charge) are much more likely to become Supercharger squatters in their local neighborhood. That would really annoy Model S and X customers who place great value on the convenience of an open charger when driving long range. Model S/X drivers are high profit customers that Tesla would not want to annoy. With a $2k option, these Model 3 users could easily use more than $2k in electricity alone in a few years, but the true cost to Tesla is much more when equipment/infrastructure is counted.

One of several possible work-arounds would be for Tesla to find a way to prevent or limit local charging. Another would be to cap total KWh per month or year.

Either way, an option for $2,000 unlimited Supercharging on a base ($35k) Model 3 doesn’t pencil out. Musk is very smart guy, so he will make the numbers work.

 

Don't know the Tesla specifics. Regardless, Model 3 owners will be quite a different demographic. To get an idea, though, the average U.S. driver does 13.5k miles a year (Average Annual Miles per Driver by Age Group). At the average U.S. $0.13/kWh, and at 3 miles per kWh, thats ~$600 per year. For comparison, the EPA estimates the annual electricity cost of a Model S to be $650-750 depending on the trim.

Now most Model 3 drivers will charge predominantly at home if the incentives are aligned properly. But an option for $2k for unlimited charging on a $35k Model 3 and we will have a whole lot of these customers losing their minds and clogging up the Superchargers. Model S/X owners would not be happy, and Musk knows it would not be wise to put them in that mood.

 

Forgot to put in an estimate for miles/kWh, will correct.

 

If going on price paid for fuel alone, a Prius Liftback will win in most scenarios. Especially with great gasoline prices these days.

Here in California, the holy land of PHEV/BEVs, both gas and electricity is more expensive relative to the national average. Either way, many place a large weight on the environmental thing as well. In California, we have one of the cleanest grids in the nation and many PHEV/BEV owners here have solar, so the eco thing is a big part of the choice to plug-in.

 

It is. But you don't beat my civic 1987 paid 900 CAD$ 260000 km that I repaired and did the maintenance myself. It was pretty cheap to run, you'll need many years to repay the car with your gas savings to reach that.

Buying a new car cost a lot and model 3 will not be an exception. The point of the discussion here is not really about saving money.

Now, you'll be able to buy a used model 3 in 5 years and at places where the price of gasoline is high (Qc Canada is 1.10$ per liter), you'll really save money ! Electricity here is cheap.