Submitted by Getting Amped Again on Tue, 2012-08-21 15:00
Am I the only one that is somewhat insulted by the obviously arbitrary cost differential between the 40, 60 and 85 kWh pricing? I realize this is TM trying to maximize their profit, which is all well and good, but wouldn't it be more appropriate if the cost difference was at least somewhat tied to the actual material costs of the components?
This is akin (to me at least) to the oil companies charging $4.00, $4.15 and $4.30 for Regular, Mid and Premium gas, when I've been told that the refining cost difference is a few pennies per gallon. It rubs me as "we can gouge you because we can".
I really want the 60 kWh battery but think $10K is too much. What price would get you to upgrade your Model S? For me it's about $5000. I have no idea what TM's incremental cost is, but they might actually generate a higher per-unit profit if they lowered the cost but more people upgraded. All they need is the data of what people are willing to pay to pull the trigger. Please post yours.