Forums

Superchargers - The Ultimate Solution

Superchargers - The Ultimate Solution

In the Tesla forums, Superchargers seem to be highly debated. Who should have access, whether the access should be included with a Tesla or not, if it seems fair that someone who paid over $100,000 for their Tesla should have to wait for someone who bought the base Model 3.

I say, for Teslas, Supercharging should be included. The Supercharging network already gives Tesla a competitive advantage over other manufacturers whether it is included or not. I think including access to it would set them even further apart from the "competition".

Personally, I think it would be wise for them to "sell" quick charging capability to people who purchase their vehicle from other manufacturers. Help turn the Superchargers into profit centers. Use the capital to build more Superchargers. Allegedly, even the Chevy Bolt is said to be DC quick charging capable, but with what? Where will you be able to DC quick charge your Bolt?

I don't believe Tesla has ever been opposed to sharing their network. No other manufacturer seems to care enough about it to "pony" up any dough to help expand the network. With as large as the network already is, there would need to be a significant buy in. Sure other manufacturers have talked about trying to create a standard, but they all seem to want this infrastructure funded by someone else. I think most of them support the idea of it being funded by the government.

vperl | April 7, 2016

M3 will pay yearly fee based on several subscription choices, paid yearly , PayPal, check, or other electronic payment method.

No freebooters.. Most M3 are going to be townies. The travelers need to pay up...with usage of Supercharger S with the M3

kzodz | April 7, 2016

So, the current option is pay a flat $3,000 upfront fee or no access on all cars? Hard to justify the economics of that as an energy expense especially if you'd only be taking distance trips a couple times/year.

jordanrichard | April 7, 2016

Though your idea of offering usage of the supercharger to say, Leaf or Bolt owners as an aftermarket thing sounds good, I don't know that their cars can handle it. Rather, the wiring in their cars or at the very least, the charge port on those cars would need to accommodate the SC. I don't know that any adapter can handle the amperage.

vperl, you nor does anyone else knows for a fact that there will be a fee for M≡ owners. They may very well adopt the same approach as the did with the MS. The standard battery pack cars would pay an "enabling" fee, where as the higher packs will have the cost built into the car like the MS85s.

Though this is just speculation/uncertain which is why I said "may".

biggestfan | April 7, 2016

I don't believe the Leaf could handle DC fast charging at all in its current state (I could be wrong there), but I have read that the Bolt would be capable of handling DC fast charging. Only where would they get it.

I am sure the Tesla connector is somehow proprietary, so I guess people that owned other electric cars would need an adapter. I am sure they could build and sell an adapter that would work with the Superchargers. At a cost of course to the person who chose not to buy a Tesla. :)

The truth is Tesla has already stated that they do not yet know what Supercharging will look like for the Model 3.

jordanrichard might be right. Supercharging is now included with the Model S and Model X, but it hasn't always been that way. It used to be included only with the larger battery packs.

I expect to use Supercharging so infrequently, that if I will need to pay for it...I would rather pay per use then pay a flat fee. I don't take many vacations so I just don't see myself using it that much. I did however choose a Tesla because of the freedom Superchargers give Tesla owners. Well that and I like the way they look much better than the competition.

john.tara.ford | April 7, 2016

Keep in mind that model 3 will have smaller batteries due to increased efficiency and reduced weight of the car.
A 44 kwh battery for example would only take about 1 minutes to reach 80% charge. If Tesla manages to improve charging rate by 25% (I think possible) by launch of M3 you only need about 12 minutes for the base battery to achieve 80%. That alone will allow more M3s to charge at a given number of superchargers when traveling.

Red Sage ca us | April 7, 2016

Superchargers are already a 'Profit Center' because the current business model allows Tesla Motors to sell more cars. Just the simple fact that thus far they have been available at no additional charge has been a marketing boon for Tesla Motors. Superchargers are almost certainly a big part of the reason why Tesla Motors has gained in excess of $325,000,000 in revenue in the past week. That is about enough to build 812 Supercharger locations, each with eight charging spaces, increasing the current count by around 6,500 in all. And this is at an amount that Tesla Motors already considers to be between 1/35th (2.86%) and 1/42nd (2.38%) of Model ☰ revenue. Even with only half that much revenue on hand, Tesla Motors would be in great shape.

biggestfan | April 7, 2016

@Red Sage ca us

You are probably right there. I do know that Supercharger access was a big part of my decision to buy a Tesla. Well that and they just look sexier than the alternatives. They have been selling the only cars with 200+ mile range so far.

The Bolt will change that, but I haven't seen any timelines from other car manufacturers offering a 200+ mile vehicle.

Still think it would be great to charge cars from other manufacturers a fee per use to use the Superchargers. May really help build out the network.

finman100 | April 7, 2016

Leaf can DC charge. I have that option now and it enables some very nice roadtrips around OR and WA. 530 miles (over 3 days) on a southern OR coast camping trip, just to name one such trip. But no way to keep battery temps down. and it MAXES at 40-ish kW. and you have to stop every hour-ish to charge to get to the next DC charger, of which there is only one stall! THESE are all advantages to Tesla Supercharging and their battery tech. 2 years and counting...keep at it Elon.

Brucelli | April 7, 2016

Here's a need crying out for a solution. An independent for-profit charging / supercharging / battery swapping business. Like gas stations of the ICE era, but to service the quick charging EV's of the future. Ideally they would/could service Teslas, Chevy's, Nissans, (even BMW's), and help enable the EV/Green revolution that Elon keeps talking about. It would be supplemental to the Tesla network. There would be opportunities for additional revenue (Starbucks, Kwik-E marts, etc) while the customer's car is being charged....

cephellow | April 7, 2016

@John.tara.ford;
FYI, Smaller packs don't take less time to charge, they are not like gas tanks. Charge rate is related to battery chemistry, temperature and voltage, and will tend to share same or similar profiles to the larger packs with the same type of cells. That is why the competition with limited range and very small battery packs do not have a time advantage. Larger packs have a time advantage in that the effective amount of range on a per-time basis increases more quickly than smaller packs. Charging rates also dramatically slow as the pack nears maximum capacity. I'm New battery chemistries will improve charging time across the board, and larger packs will provide greater charging speed benefits in terms of range than smaller packs.

richard | April 8, 2016

IMHO superchargers enable long trips, and we all don't want to wait. If we have to wait (crowded superchargers) because everyone ahead of me is on long trips, I have no complaint; but if I am waiting for people who can (and should) otherwise charge at home I will be upset.

It shouldn't be free, and it shouldn't be a big lump sum charge like Tesla used to charge for S60--$2k is not justifiable for people who may only need SC a few times a year.

Why not a pay-per-use? Tesla should just charge the lowest rate that energy companies charge in that area, so owners have no incentive to use it for daily commutes, and long distance trip takers can benefit by paying the same rate as if they were charging at home at nights.

Afterall, the benefits of SC is enormous compare to other EV chargers for its charging speed.

yongliangzhu68 | April 8, 2016

Tesla could be looking at a long play on the Super Charger stations. It could open up to other EV brands in the future. However I think in the short term (next 5 years) it will be Tesla's ace in the hole for pushing Tesla EV's to the masses.

Once Tesla tops out car it sales (though that looks like it is a ways to go) and continues to saturate the world with Super Stations it could have capacity and footprint to be the world's largest and most profitable EV 'gas' station chain.

milesbb | April 8, 2016

If Tesla's goal is to promote Electric Cars over ICE Cars they will open up Supercharging to all EVs with a range greater then 200 miles. If they are trying to compete against other EVs they will not open up the superchargers to other EVs. The supercharger system is the perfect layout to enable long range EV usage, all of the other DC charger systems were not designed for and do not support support long range EV usage. Bringing additional manufacture's cars on to the system, paid by either the car owners or the car manufactures pays for more chargers and more charge locations. The system gets better for all long range EV's. I do not expect Chevy will support the supercharger system, they are vested in ICE cars. It would be up to the Bolt owner to pay of the usage of superchargers. Same goes for the coming 200mile Leaf.

Would it not be crazy wonderful to have Musk announce the he is selling the best Bolt option, "nation wide travel". Buy whatever long range EV you want but go to Tesla to make it wonderful. I can see the day when folks are buying modification kits, pulling out CHAdeMO and CCS inputs and replacing with a smaller simpler Tesla power inlet.

Maxxer | April 8, 2016

Don't worry, there will be hundred and thousand of charging stations popping up in the next years at drugstores, restaurants, grocery stores.

That's what will make the customer come and buy your products instead of going to the competitors.

Maxxer | April 8, 2016

Don't worry, there will be hundred and thousand of charging stations popping up in the next years at drugstores, restaurants, grocery stores.

That's what will make the customer come and buy your products instead of going to the competitors.

Tstolz | April 8, 2016

The cost of rapidly charging an EV is about infrastructure cost and the cost of the capacity of the service ... not the kWh rate of electrons. Tesla, or any future charging station operator, must recognize this simple fact and charge based on time hooked up.

jordanrichard | April 8, 2016

milesbb, Even if Tesla offered, for a one time fee, supercharging to Bolt or Leaf owners, I can see Chevy and Nissan telling those owners that they will be voiding the warranty by doing so.

For those proposing a pay as you go fee, Tesla may be restricted from doing such because that would make them a reseller of electricity.

Earl and Nagin ... | April 8, 2016

@jordanrichard,
There are plenty of pay-to-charger chargers (or EVSEs) out there. It isn't usually a problem.

bj | April 8, 2016

My Leaf came with Level 1 DC fast charge port (CHAdeMO) and L2 port (J1772) as standard. From the Tesla store you can buy adaptors that convert Chademo or J1172 connectors to the Tesla connector. But not the other way around. That stops non-Tesla EV owners charging at Tesla superchargers. But you all probably already knew that.

Red Sage ca us | April 8, 2016

richard inquired, "Why not a pay-per-use?"

I'll answer this as if I haven't done so at all in the past couple of years. Because the amount of money it would cost to process the billing transaction is more than it takes to Deliver the electricity for free. In other words, if the fee were high enough to make it worth charging a fee, that is to make it profitable, the cost to the consumer would be higher per mile than the cost of gasoline. Which would make the whole thing less palatable, because it would be both less convenient and less economical than buying a gasoline powered car. That's why not.

Red Sage ca us | April 8, 2016

wj: Since at least 2013, maybe earlier, the Supercharger network has been open to use by other manufacturers. Elon Musk has said repeatedly that as long as those cars can accept a full power Supercharger session it would be allowed. All he asks is that there be no per-use fees of any kind charged to the end user. He believes that the relative cost should always be built into the cost of the car, and that the details be worked out business-to-business as to the amount paid due percentage of participation. The problem is, no one has had a long range electric vehicle with a battery pack sufficient to accept a Supercharger connection. Now that the Chevrolet BOLT is on the horizon, General Motors has specifically stated they will NOT be joining the Supercharger network, nor building out a charging network of their own.

biggestfan | April 9, 2016

Wow, so the leaf will only accept a charge half as fast as the Bolt and about a quarter as fast as a Tesla. Guess I didn't realize that. Geez, you would have to make them pay for the time they were parked to make any money anyway. :)

Red Sage ca us
I knew Tesla wasn't opposed to sharing, but I guess I figured he must have said that the other company would have to chip in on the cost of the infrastructure.

KP in NPT | April 9, 2016

The pay per kWh issue varies by state, I've read. States that treat it like a utility are where you see per-minute cost structures.

bj | April 9, 2016

@biggestfan - whoops I got my terminology around the wrong way. The Leaf has Level 3 (not Level 1) charging via the CHAdeMO port, 480V DC direct into the batteries, and will charge to 80% from empty in 20 to 30 minutes. The L2 charger via J1772 is 32A AC and goes via the inverter, it will charge it to 80% from empty in about 2 to 3 hours. How does the Bolt compare with that?

I have only ever used L1 charging from my ordinary 15A garage wall socket overnight, it would take about 6 to 8 hours to fully charge it (it actually only draws 10A @ 230V). I just plug it in every night and it's always at 80% well before I need to drive it again the next morning.

biggestfan | April 9, 2016

@bj
That is pretty cool. Only reason I hadn't bought a Leaf is because my round trip drive to work each day is 80 miles. I think making the trip with electric would be great, but since it gets fairly cold in Minnesota sometimes I have viewed 200+ miles/charge the point where an electric would make sense because I know that range goes down when the HVAC system on an electric is running.

I do think that it is pretty cool that there are going to be at least a couple of options that will meet that spec somewhat soon.

mos6507 | April 9, 2016

"M3 will pay yearly fee based on several subscription choices, paid yearly , PayPal, check, or other electronic payment method."

You forgot to qualify this statement with "I predict".

Siotisj2004 | April 9, 2016

The reason that the automobile exists today is to allow everyday people to travel. People travel everyday. Heck, the interstate system exists to make going from one state to another with ease. I reserved my M3 because of the Supercharger network. I would love to simply drive up to the Supercharger and plug in for free. If Tesla is to sell the 300,000 plus cars then the network should be free. If not free I think that the 300,000 plus cars reserved will most likely turn into a few thousand cars bought.

biggestfan | April 9, 2016

The truth is that I think it would be the ultimate rub for other manufacturers to say that their vehicles could travel long distances due to their competitor Tesla. Okay I said it. :)

Telsa's SC network is definitely one of the biggest reasons I chose them. Well that and their cars actually look great.

bj | April 9, 2016

@biggestfan - yeah a daily 80 mile (130km) round trip in a Leaf in cold weather would be pushing it, unless your workplace has a charger to get you home. The newer Leafs have a bigger battery (30 kWh) than the one I have (first gen, 24 kWh) plus some efficiency improvements. My work roundtrip is only about 30km, not remotely challenging the Leaf's range. The most I've ever driven it in a day is only 80 km, still well under.

The main reason I reserved Model 3 was to replace my remaining gas-guzzler, due to (a) range and (b) Tesla superchargers, although the network is still very primitive in Australia (8 locations so far) but it should be better in 2 years when we actually get the cars. I will then be an EV-only household.

The final time I ever buy petrol, hopefully in early-mid 2018, will be a day to savour!

biggestfan | April 9, 2016

I have been wanting to drive electric for over 10 years. Since the development of the Roadster. So when I heard the secret plan I was excited...just didn't realize I would be waiting so long.

biggestfan | April 9, 2016

I live in a rural community, so working with computers, servers, and networks I do tend to travel for work. Would really prefer to make the commute in an electric, and actually in this cold climate would find myself using the pre-heat features. There is some infrastructure in Rochester where I work, but not much. They have 2 public level 2 chargers and a couple of them that are pay for use, but honestly by the time I add my commute I am ready to be done with it. Much rather prefer the idea of leaving each day with enough to get me home. 200+ mile range is the only way I see it making sense for me. Otherwise even small detour in moderate weather would be a big problem.

zero2hide | April 9, 2016
cephellow | April 9, 2016

@zero,
Article doesn't link to video or any evidence of actual quote, so I don't know what has to be walked back.If you could find the actual quote, that would be good.
On the reveal, it was ambiguous from what Elon said. In the reservation email confirmation it was clear that the capability was built in, but the free charging not so clear.
If the email just left it at "Supercharging" then I would believe it included free supercharging, instead it says "supercharging capability" which means no free supercharging.

jordanrichard | April 9, 2016

Earl and Nagin, the difference I believe is those companies are just in the business of providing a charging service, Tesla isn't. Also, from what I heave read and seen, these pay as you go chargers are in poor shape and often are not working.

Anyways, Tesla will most likely adopt the same arrangement they did with the MS when the 60 was the entry level pack. For the entry level pack size, there will be a one time enabling charge and for higher size packs, it will be included in the cost of the car. I further suspect that the enabling fee will be $1,000 vs $2,000 for the MS60.

Earl and Nagin ... | April 9, 2016

@jordan,
I'm not sure what the difference between Tesla and those businesses if they are both providing a charging service. I agree that many of the pay as you go charging stations are in poor shape. Its a very tough business model they're trying to use.
I don't try to predict what Tesla will do with M III charging. Only they have the real costs and data to make intelligent decisions as I've been watching them do for over a decade. All we can do is speculate blindly or you may be smarter than I am.

ram1901 | April 9, 2016

Two Points on the OP's idea:
1. Charging Model 3 owners to use the SuperCharger Network is no different than requiring an ICE vehicle owner to pay for their own gas. The benefit to Model 3 owners would be that their long trips are pre-paid for the life of the car.

2. If Tesla were to share their network with the likes of Leaf, Bolt, VW, etc they would have to sell a special adapter designed for the specific car that would contain circuitry that would allow for the charging (and at the appropriate rate and amperage) and thus they could charge a one time fee for the adapter that includes the cost of using the SC network built in. Or perhaps the adapter would send a code back to Tesla when plugged in and if the customer is not paid up, they would not activate the charge. There are all kinds of possibilities for this to be profitable in the long run.

But, why take away Tesla's advantage over it's so called competitors.
Wait a few years and then use the revenue from this sort of idea to fund expansion of the network to accommodate the many EV's that will be on the road. No other manufacturer has such a network in place and they've even said they do not plan to build such a network. That shows (GM's) commitment to EV's...

Red Sage ca us | April 9, 2016

zero2hide & cephellow: I have often lamented the fact that the editors at InsideEVs have a strong tendency to refuse to actually quote Elon Musk directly. It is as if they are afraid of getting sued by someone. They always paraphrase him, or paraphrase someone else's impression of what he might have said. They don't even quote press releases from Tesla Motors. It is a strange form of journalism in my opinion.

jordanrichard: Since the Reservation cost for a Model ☰ is 1/5th that of the $5,000 for initial Reservations of Model S, I sincerely doubt a Supercharger Activation Fee would be as much as $1,000. Likely if it happens, it will be no more than $500. Even with as many as ten times as many cars added per year, compared to Model S, the ratio of Supercharger usage per vehicle would still be relatively low at the majority of locations.

Earl and Nagin: My prediction is that there will be no activation fee, no discount for deleting Supercharger access, no billing on a pay-per-use basis, and no monthly, weekly, or yearly subscription program. I predict that simply buying the car will allow you to use Superchargers. I expect that it may no longer be 'Free for LIFE!' though. Maybe just for the original owner, and then an activation fee for the next one. Maybe just for the first three, four, five years... And then they'll let you know, as is the case with internet access for now.

ram1901: The problem with supporting short range vehicles with the Supercharger network is twofold: 1) Those vehicles would need to charge more often, and would need locations closer to each other; and 2) Those vehicles add a lot fewer miles at the same length of time for charging.

yongliangzhu68 | April 10, 2016

A couple of thoughts on opening the SC up to all EV's for free. Even if Tesla adds 2x the SC in the next 2 years they could still be taxed just by 300,000 new M3s coming online. Now add to this Volts, Leafs [or is it Leaves? :) ]and other EV's. You could see hour long 'electric' lines at many SC stations. And what Tesla owner wants to wait in line behind Leafs and a Volts to charge at a Tesla SC station that they subsidized.

I hope Tesla waits 5 to 10 years before making the SCs available and also charges other EV owners to use. It could be something like a $100 a year access fee and $10 per use.

Also I believe Tesla should implement a charge per use of about $5 or so on the M3 (people would kill to fill up their ICE for $5). Having a yearly subscription or free access will lead to overuse. Just charging per use seems to be the fairest option and will insure that the SC aren't abused by people doing their daily charges. Tesla has already had to send some letters to Model S (1%ers) owners that abuse the privilege. Imagine how bad it will be with the M3, especially if people pay a yearly subscription fee and feel the need to 'get their moneys worth'.

Also a yearly subscription fee would be problematic for people that don't buy it because they rarely go on out of town car trips. However they may have a once in a year unexpected trip they need take. What do they do for charging?

To me pay as you use seems the most fair and would be the best overall option to insure SC availability.

jordanrichard | April 10, 2016

Red Sage, I agree with the $500 figure you came up with. I came up with $1000 figure quickly to illustrate that everything related to the M≡ will be less than the MS. Actually if you think about it, since many people here are categorizing future M≡ owners are "freeloaders"/dollar pinching, who will be the first to use the superchargers as their primary source of charging, charging them for access would then just make them use the chargers more, to get their money's worth.

Badbot | April 10, 2016

I was thinking that if 'mooching' becomes a problem Tesla can enable the superchargers to check your address and if you are within 100-125 miles of home you get rejected!

SamO | April 10, 2016

I will say this as often as necessary:

Shame based charging is not sustainable.

mos6507 | April 10, 2016

I don't think cars that can't handle the full speed of SC charging should be allowed to use the SC network via adapters because they will tie up the stalls for too long.

Also, right now Tesla is scaling out based on its own vehicle sales. They shouldn't be responsible for putting in enough chargers to support any and all future 3rd party SC-capable vehicles unless the other manufacturers chip-in.

zero2hide | April 10, 2016

Some great points written here.
The SuperCharger network is a huge part of solidifying Tesla as the brand to beat in innovation and support of product.
Forget the GM Bolt; it's a non-starter. And from a brand that's worn out its welcome at the EV table.

I don't mind paying an upfront one time fee, AND a pay-per-use fee for my SC charge for long trips.
In Kuwait at one time, gas was completely free for Kuwaiti citizens but it led to abuse and complete carelessness at stations.
I'm interested to see how the M3 SC piece plays out.

Phaster | April 10, 2016

Perhaps a chip or swipe card could be sold with each Tesla. Superchargers could be modified to require the card to activate the current. The card could be recharged online, similar to a Presto card widely used for public transit. Current Model S owners could be provided a card with unlimited free charge, otherwise you add $/€/£ to your card. Other EV owners, if compatible, can buy Tesla cards. This limits the need to "network" the SCs to accept credit cards, while discouraging local supercharger use unless someone really needs a quick charge.

Phaster | April 10, 2016

Perhaps a chip or swipe card could be sold with each Tesla. Superchargers could be modified to require the card to activate the current. The card could be recharged online, similar to a Presto card widely used for public transit. Current Model S owners could be provided a card with unlimited free charge, otherwise you add $/€/£ to your card. Other EV owners, if compatible, can buy Tesla cards. This limits the need to "network" the SCs to accept credit cards, while discouraging local supercharger use unless someone really needs a quick charge.

jordanrichard | April 10, 2016

ed, do you even own a Tesla? I only ask because anyone with skin in the game wouldn't suggest such a ridiculous idea, especially considering how many example, to include my own, why suggest parameters would penalize people for having to get charge to get home form a long drive.

omarsultan.ca.us | April 10, 2016

Perhaps the Tesla folks that run this site can set up a sub forum specifically for how to "fix" the Supercharger network. Perhaps, to comment, you need to have actually used a Supercharger.

Red Sage ca us | April 10, 2016

wj: The Supercharger network has been 'open' to other electric vehicle manufacturers since at least 2013. They just have to build cars with a battery pack that can accept the level of power it supplies. The only other mass market car that has had at least a 60 kWh battery pack is the Chevrolet BOLT, and GM has already said steadfastly it will NOT be Supercharger compatible.

The Rimac One apparently has a 93 kWh battery pack, but it isn't Supercharger compatible either. Of course, they've built maybe twelve of them in the past three years, and each one costs a couple million bucks or so. Oh, and the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive had a 60 kWh battery pack too -- but they didn't want it to be Supercharger compatible either.

You won't have to worry about lines with anyone else hogging up space at Superchargers, unless it is vehicles from companies that are NOT part of the traditional automobile industry today. Google? Apple? Faraway Future? Who knows...?

Red Sage ca us | April 10, 2016

ed: The problem with such 'geofencing' is that there is no way to judge the intent of the user. If a car is discharged below 20%, 10%, or 5%, shouldn't it be allowed to Supercharge no matter how close the driver is to home? Why should a driver be inconvenienced to find a restaurant or hotel with an outdoor outlet they can borrow, just to get home six hours later?

SamO: +1! Correctomundo!

mos6507: I believe that is indeed exactly the plan in mind. However, Tesla Motors has installed J1772 chargers at some locations that were co-located with Superchargers. Those use different parking spaces, so there is no inconvenience to those who want to use Superchargers for their Tesla.

zero2hide: Well, that is the sort of behavior that birthed the phrase, "This is why we can't have nice things." But, until such time as there actually are a bunch of bad apples, I wouldn't throw out the harvest. The best form of prevention is to have sufficient preparation.

Phaster: Nope. No cards. No chips. No swipes, taps, or slides. Just plug in, and it works. Simple. The cost of administering a system of card recharging would be more than the cost of the electricity you would distribute to users.

richard | April 10, 2016

Red Sage: I understand the fee may not make much sense when factoring the billing and actual electricity cost. The idea is to keep SC from daily commuter abuse, so we can keep the SC for real need. In this situation Tesla can use the money to expand the network (new locations) instead of expanding the existing stations.

For this to happen it doesn't even need to be higher than home rate--as long as the benefit of taking free charge instead of charging at home is reduced, many people would be discouraged to do so. Just my 2 cents.

Being an owner, of course I want it to be free. But I'd rather see a bigger network and less wait.

Pages