Model 3 Supercharging Payment and Activation on touch screen

Model 3 Supercharging Payment and Activation on touch screen

If model 3 is going to be mass produced, It will probably be tough to offer free charging for life to so many vehicles.

Only a possible build up of Solar Powered Superchargers prior to the Model 3 release might help offset the huge wave of cars needing the option for free.

I would suggest Tesla charge for Supercharging a model 3. There will be no need to upgrade the existing superchargers with payment options. The "Tesla way" would be to only allow payment via the comfort of your touch screen in your car.

The Model 3 would detect when a supercharger is connected to the vehicle similar to when a Model S or X detects supercharger connection...bypassing the onboard chargers.

Next a payment window would pop up on the Model 3 screen asking the owner to approve charges to their Tesla account (credit card, paypal) or perhaps the ability to enter your credit card number of choice on the screen.

Once the driver approves charges to their account the vehicle would start charging.

Supercharges have been popping up like crazy but it seems like they will be used to capacity with Model S and X.

Perhaps it will not be possible to accommodate Model 3 Supercharging with 100s of thousands of cars on the road.
If it does become possible, the above payment option might be the way to help finance the buildup of more superchargers.

Bikezion | 25 décembre 2014

Why change something that works so well? If it is sustainable for the S and the X why not for the 3? It is a completely scaleable model. Here is my "back of the napkin" math. The "Tesla way" is what they are already doing. P.S. Since October they have 100 more superchargers!

Bikezion | OCTOBER 28, 2014
A sustainable business model comes down to economics. The supercharger network wins. Tesla charges $2,000 for lifetime access with an S60 and includes it with an S85. Tesla has sold 50,000 model S cars. Most are S85's. We'll assume that the 60 owners purchased supercharging access. I'm sure there are very few without it. There are a handful of S40 owners. So 50,000x$2,000= $100,000,000 in revenue. The 2 costs I seem to remember for supercharger construction are $150,000 without solar and $300,000 with solar. Most of them do not currently have solar, with the goal being more superchargers over solar for existing superchargers. Tesla currently has 223 superchargers world wide. $150,000x223=$33,450,000. $100,000,000-$33,450,000=$66,550,000 minus the few with solar and the ones currently under construction. Let's say that equals 100x$150,000=$15,000,000. $66,550,000-$15,000,000= $51,550,000.

Now we have lifetime electricity cost to account for. In the most recent blog post Tesla reveled that the superchargers have enabled 24,700,000 miles. Divided by 3 (3 miles per kWh) equals 8,300,000 (rounded up). The price for electricity is the biggest variable, but at $0.25 per kWh it is $2,075,000. So Tesla still has close to $50,000,000 to continue to fund the electric costs, or to fund the solar installs, which would then turn the superchargers into a profit generator. There is also the battery buffering that maybe going on currently which could potentially be generating income, or at least offsetting expense.

Benz | 26 décembre 2014

"Free, forever, on pure sunlight."

That pre-paid option will be available for all future Tesla EV models (Model S, Model X, Model 3, etc.).

Gen3Joe | 26 décembre 2014

Elon has already stated that supercharging will be free for life for all future Tesla vehicles including Model 3. It will either be built into all M3 variants or offered as an option at purchase of the vehicle. There will almost certainly never be a pay as you go model.

TeslaLABlue | 26 décembre 2014


Grinnin'.VA | 26 décembre 2014

@ Gen3Joe | December 26, 2014

Elon has already stated that supercharging will be free for life for all future Tesla vehicles including Model 3. ... There will almost certainly never be a pay as you go model.

This requires about $2000 per car prepayment, either explicitly for MS60s or implicitly in the price of the MS85s. This is working well for MS buyers. However, far fewer M3 buyers can easily afford to pay for SC service for the life of the car when they buy the car.

IMO, SC usage per car will increase as the number of SC sites increases. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of the SC system increases to roughly $3000 per car over the next decade. Assuming that all G3s automatically 'given' SC service, that's a significant addition to the price or reduction to Tesla's profit margin.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news: There is no free lunch.
Somehow if M3 buyers get SC service, they will need to pay for it one way or another. BTW, pay-as-you-go is the most-convenient and least-painful way for most G3 buyers to pay for SC service -- unless Tesla continues to refuse to offer this payment method.

Go Tesla!

DallasTeslan | 26 décembre 2014

@Grinnin' I certainly agree. The truth is most Model S owners will take many years to justify spending $2K on having access to Superchargers. The economics of it don't make much sense for the buyer, most of us didn't buy the MS based on a rational cost conscious decision. I think Model 3 buyers will be different. Tesla could charge a reasonable fee and still make a very nice profit. 30 cents/kWh would allow Tesla to turn a nice profit and still be cheap enough to make buyers happy if they had a "pay per use" option.

With enough growth I can envision Tesla having their own service stations. Sell Tesla gear inside, have a few snacks and drink options, lounge area for those waiting on their vehicle to charge, etc. All run on solar of course provided by Solar City. Have a few battery swap stations available as well.

vgarbutt | 26 décembre 2014

The increased volume of model 3 cars to be sold will more than make up for the reduced cost per car of supercharger payment. The higher volume will allow a substantial reduction in the per car cost for building out the SC networks.

Brian H | 26 décembre 2014

Not happening. Use CHAdeMO if you want to pay per use.

Red Sage ca us | 26 décembre 2014

TeslaLABlue theorized, "If model 3 is going to be mass produced, It will probably be tough to offer free charging for life to so many vehicles."

No. It won't. At all.

Most people rarely use a Supercharger at all. That is because they are now and will be in the future primarily distributed to enable road trips. That amounts to 5% of annual driving.

In other words, at any given moment, only 1 of every 20 cars is on a road trip. That ratio will hold true even when there are ten times as many Model ≡ on the road as Model S and Model X combined. People want to be able to go on the road -- that doesn't mean they will actually do it.

The Supercharger network is simple and ingenious. By the time Model ≡ is released, Tesla Motors will have raised hundreds of millions of dollars just from the built in, included amount for each Model S and Model X. That will continue to support the network. But Tesla also has the revenue generated from the sale of ZEV Credits, also numbering in the hundreds of millions.

Using only $1,000 per vehicle sold, Tesla Motors can build a Supercharger location for every 150 vehicles on the road worldwide. Another $1,000 per vehicle pays for administration, maintenance, and energizing costs.

Since you get paid the money in advance with the sale of the vehicle, there is no need to garner revenue on the back end.

Electricity is cheap. If someone wanted to fill 90% of an 85 kWh battery pack, it might cost $10.33 at residential rates in the US. I'm pretty sure Tesla Motors could negotiate a better deal than that. But of the $110,000,000 raised in 2013 and 2014, enough money was raised to build 367 Supercharger stations... Last I checked, there are 324 operational today. With the $55,000,000 left over, you can charge 5,325,587 of the 85 kWh vehicles to 90%.

That's around 97 times per car on the road today. Way more capacity than is likely to be necessary for the Model S alone. Plenty left over to handle the Model ≡.

Red Sage ca us | 26 décembre 2014

With the Tesla Model S, the $2,000 amount per car for the Supercharger network comes to less than 10% of the approximate $22,500 profit per car.

If Tesla Motors achieves a 15% margin on a $34,900 Model ≡, that comes to $5,235. 10% of that is $523.50, so we'll round that up to $525 per car, as an included s mount contributing to the Supercharger network. Oh, but the Model ≡ is destined to be manufactured at a 10:1 ratio as compared to Model S.

So while 2,000 is raised from the one Model S, there is $5,250 raised from those ten Model ≡. Not as an additional charge, but included. More than enough to cover the 1 of 20 Model ≡ that will be on a road trip at any given moment.

Tesla Motors does not need a subscription program or pay at the pump option to support Model ≡ Supercharger access... for life!

Brian H | 27 décembre 2014

Yeah, and an SC is the gift that keeps on giving. As higher and higher density is achieved, the need for more declines, though added stalls may be required with volume.

Grinnin'.VA | 27 décembre 2014

@ Red Sage ca us | December 26, 2014

So while 2,000 is raised from the one Model S, there is $5,250 raised from those ten Model ≡. Not as an additional charge, but included. More than enough to cover the 1 of 20 Model ≡ that will be on a road trip at any given moment.


Are you confident that $525 per M3 will be enough to pay for its share of SC capacity expansion and lifetime SC usage?

Do you think you think M3s will use SCs only about 1/4 as much as MSs?

IMO, as the numbers of SC sites increase, more Tesla owners will find it convenient to use SCs more often than they do now. Do you agree or disagree? Please explain your thinking.

Go Tesla!

Grinnin'.VA | 27 décembre 2014

Question for ALL:

Will SCs be built in cities conveniently located for use by Tesla owners who lack home-charging circuits?

Brian H | 27 décembre 2014

Yes, Elon has stated so specifically. SCs are graduating from road conveniences to universal expediters of owner satisfaction with the EV experience.

Red Sage ca us | 28 décembre 2014

I already explained my reasoning.

The majority of Superchargers are installed to enable road trips. Road trips represent only 5% of the annual use of a vehicle. Thus, on average, only once out of every twenty times a car is used will it travel a distance of 150 miles or more without stopping. Whether a Model S, Model X, Model ≡, or Buick Regal... Only 1 of 20 vehicles produced will be engaged in a road trip at any given moment.

95% of driving is within a daily closed loop of well under 60 miles.

Cars are parked, and thereby not being driven at all, 90% of the time. Since they are parked anyway, they can charge while you are at work, school, shopping, or at home. Somewhere other than at a Supercharger.

During road trips it is highly unlikely that every Tesla owner is going to the same destination. Moneys from 150 Model S/Model X owners, plus another 1,500 Model ≡ owners funds the cost of filling the 1 of 20 total Supercharger capable cars that will be on the road at any given time.

Thus, Supercharger access can remain 'Free for LIFE!'

Red Sage ca us | 28 décembre 2014

Generation II: 1 Supercharger location per 150 cars... $2,000 per car... $300,000 per Supercharger.

Generation III: 1 Supercharger location for every 1,500
cars... $525 per car... $787,500 per Supercharger.

Combined $1,087,500 budget per Supercharger location.

If $150,000 is used for leasing, permitting, and installation costs... Set aside $15,000 for administration and customer service... Put away $30,000 for mantenance and repair... That comes to $195,000.

Leaving $892,500 to pay for energizing costs per Supercharger. Enough for:
54,923 charges at $0.25 per kWh...
101,709 charges at $0.135 per kWh...
196,154 charges at $0.07 per kWh...
457,692 charges at $0.03 per kWh...

I am rather confident that Tesla Motors would be able to sell another 150 of Model S/Model X, and 1,500 Model ≡ before 54,923 people charged up at any one Supercharger.

Brian H | 28 décembre 2014

The 5% figure is for # of trips. By road miles, more like 30%. Likely higher for MS owners.

3seeker | 29 décembre 2014


Sounds as lousy of an idea as FasTrak or E-ZPass.

Red Sage ca us | 29 décembre 2014

Grinnin' Ron inquired, "Will SCs be built in cities conveniently located for use by Tesla owners who lack home-charging circuits?"

Yes. This is already being done in particularly dense population areas. Locations in China, Japan, Hong Kong, Britain, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Atlanta, Chicago... Urban locations will be covered for the sake of convenience. But the majority of Supercharger locations will remain in wide open spaces to facilitate long distance travel between large population centers and remote destinations. At least, for the near future.

Tesla Motors employs very smart people who analyze usage patterns along with current and projected buying habits combined with the demographics of target areas. They use that data to determine a course of action and modify their plans as necessary. Some cities will be ringed with Superchargers, located at or along major routes to and from those towns. Some cities will feature Superchargers within their sprawling interior at points of common interest. Some metropolitan areas will see a combination of the two methods.

Grinnin'.VA | 29 décembre 2014

@ Red Sage ca us | December 28, 2014

95% of driving is within a daily closed loop of well under 60 miles.
Moneys from 150 Model S/Model X owners, plus another 1,500 Model ≡ owners funds the cost of filling the 1 of 20 total Supercharger capable cars that will be on the road at any given time.

Thus, Supercharger access can remain 'Free for LIFE!'

Generation II: 1 Supercharger location per 150 cars...

Generation III: 1 Supercharger location for every 1,500

I agree with your conclusion if your assumptions turn out to be accurate. However, IMO your assumptions seem rather optimistic.

1. As more SCs are built in places that are convenient for routine (non road trip) charging by substantial numbers of Tesla owners I expect increased usage of SCs per car.

2. I think it's unreasonable to expect G3 usage SCs to be low enough to be compatible with a $525 per car cost to pay for their SC usage. I expect G3s to use SCs roughly as much as MSs do.

Go Tesla!

BrassGuy | 29 décembre 2014

Everybody's doing calculations assuming certain variables are constants. I fear that far more SC enabled G3 buyers will try to use SCs for their primary charging. Let's face it, if we can afford a MS or MX then we can probably afford our electric bill. As the cost of the vehicle goes down, the likelihood of routine SC use may go up. If that is the case, we will see lines at the SCs. All the above calculations (5%) go out the window.

I do not think a pay-per-use system by Tesla is likely, especially given the caveat proposed regarding SC use by other manufacturers.

We (in MA) had a 37% increase in electricity prices last month. My effective rate is now about 23.5 cents/kWh. The last statistic I saw (admittedly a while ago) was the national average at 9 cents. (Ironically, gasoline has dropped by a higher percentage, but clearly off topic.) I'd be visiting a SC pretty often if there were one closer to me. Not worth 40+ miles each way + charge time. Not yet anyway.

Red Sage ca us | 29 décembre 2014

Grinnin' Ron: Cool, thanks! I've said all along that I just wanted to communicate why I think the 'Free for LIFE!' concept will work. Thank you for following along. And I do value your concerns.

My position in debates will always be for the optimistic side of what I hope Tesla Motors will accomplish. Though really, I'm still being far more cautious, and practically conservative, as compared to where my heart leads in this regard. These exercises just allow my head to catch up to my heart somewhat.

• 1) Yes, I expect that is true. Urban Superchargers, along with other popular ones, are already on top of the leader board shown in the lobby at Hawthorne. I expect that trend to continue. But I also believe those locations will be expanded, or supplemented, as needed. Thus the expansions at Hawthorne and Barstow, along with supplemental locations in Culver City, Rancho Cucamonga, and Primm.

•• 2) As Brian H indicated, Model ≡ owners may use Superchargers more often on road trips. Free is better than the cost of plane tickets if you have the time, or children to transport. I have felt all along that The Great American Roadtrip© would be resurrected thanks to Tesla Motors. The ability to pick a direction and just go, without concerns about fuel costs, will be very liberating for some young families. But the majority of people just want to have the ability to go far, just in case of disaster or emergency, but would never venture onto the highway 'just for fun' even if gasoline were free.

Yes, I know... Counting on future sales to support expansion and continued operation of Superchargers has a slight ring of a house of cards, or even a Ponzi scheme, destined for eventual failure. That strikes you as marketing mumbo-jumbo, and it should. What I am saying is that this can be managed long enough to make sure installation of solar panels and battery backup is taken care of wherever possible. Perception is the key. It isn't necessary for this business model to be eternal, so much as it is for it to be maintained long enough to seem as such.

carlgo | 29 décembre 2014

Model 3 owners are going to run their batteries down because the range is not going to be great and people just will not charge up every 100 miles. Depleted batteries will result in longer charge times. This means that when there are hundreds of thousands of Model 3s that not only will there be a need for lots of Supercharger locations, but each one will require lots of chargers as the line will not move fast.

The look of Supercharger stations will change. A few chargers off behind a parking lot is not going to cut it. Tesla will have to buy large tracts of land, often in expensive areas, maybe even multi-level in some urban areas to house dozens or even hundreds of chargers per location.

I still think swappers make more sense and so does a for-profit model. I realize it is unlikely to happen. My fear is that some larger company will make that choice and Tesla will suffer because of it.

MaybeTesla will come up with fast charging technology so that the lines move faster and smaller Supercharging facilities will suffice.

As for people searching out and tethering up to Level 2 chargers....that is hobby-class thinking, not appropriate for a big-boy car company.

Red Sage ca us | 29 décembre 2014

BrassGuy wrote, "Everybody's doing calculations assuming certain variables are constants. I fear that far more SC enabled G3 buyers will try to use SCs for their primary charging."

I believe all Tesla Generation III vehicles will have Supercharger access included as part of the purchase price. Yes, a lower percentage of Model ≡ owners will be able to charge at home, in their own garage. For a good while charging will not be readily available at brownstones, walkups, or other apartment complexes, especially where only curbside parking is available. Tesla Motors will have them covered.

A rollout of urban Superchargers for those cities where the majority of the populace rents or leases apartments and lofts is pivotal. They will be needed to handle both local traffic as well as those who are passing through. They must accommodate both current owners as well as those who are projected to become owners in coming years.

Those will be supplemented by the propagation of HPWCs in public places. Restaurants, movie theatres, bowling alleys, shopping malls, libraries, museums... Any place where someone might be expected to park for at least a couple of hours at a time.

Once again, in the short term, Model ≡ will be vastly outnumbered by cars from many other brands. It won't be necessary to have a Supercharger 'on every corner' at all. But it might be a good idea to make sure there is an HPWC available, perhaps on a 10:1 or 25:1 ratio, for every urban Supercharger stall in a major city.

BrassGuy wrote, "My effective rate is now about 23.5 cents/kWh."

The most recent US national average I saw noted 13.5 cents per kWh. Is there no better, EV rate, for overnight use, in your area? The ENRON situation struck California just as it seemed the EV1 might stand a chance. I do not doubt that electrical utilities will use any excuse to raise rates.

Some utilities claim that as more of their Customers abandon the grid for solar power, they must spread their costs over a smaller user base. That in turn causes more people to switch to solar. I'm not sure if I buy that. I think a utility in Arizona even claimed the energy generated by solar was 'too much' for the grid to accept, and they wanted to assess fees, at a higher rate than was paid for grid connected solar to people who had solar enabled homes. Another lobby felt that the 'loss' of 0.2% of their customer base to solar was 'unbearable', so they asked that solar powered homes be taxed to pay 'their fair share' of grid upkeep, similar to road taxes, 'for the good of all'.

Red Sage ca us | 29 décembre 2014

carlgo wrote, "Model 3 owners are going to run their batteries down because the range is not going to be great and people just will not charge up every 100 miles."

Waitasec... What do you expect the range of a Tesla Model ≡ will be? Elon Musk said 200 miles, minimum. Most people in urban areas drive less than 40 miles per day. Thus, a 200+ mile range should last Monday through Friday in regular use.

BrassGuy | 29 décembre 2014

In MA, time of use metering is only available to residential customers whose average usage exceeds 2500kWh/month.

carlgo | 29 décembre 2014

RSage: yes, 200 miles runs it all the way down. To get that 20 min top-off quick charge 3 owners will have to charge at 100 or less. And if they are lazy like me, they will wait until 150 or so miles are ticked off and therefore spend more than 20 minutes at chargers.

And 3 owners are less likely to have home chargers and will have to use Superchargers as their only charging option.

On trips they will have to stop at nearly every Supercharger along the route, and probably will have to again charge a battery that is more than half empty and therefore need to spend a goodly amount of time at each stop.

It seem that there will indeed have to be not only a lot of Superchargers but a large number of chargers at each location, and a lot of land to accommodate all this.

carlgo | 29 décembre 2014

At what point will the local utilities choke and require major infrastructure upgrades. It is one thing to charge up a few cars at today's little Supercharger locations and another to have dozens of charges underway at any given time at the required Megachargers. And this brings up another point: what about some future very fast chargers really dumping juice in at maybe twice the rate of today's chargers? This might also increase the load on the locals to the point where it is a problem.

The reason this might be important is that it seems hard enough to get permits now.

Maybe this isn't a problem, just wondering...

Red Sage ca us | 29 décembre 2014

carlgo:. I believe in Tesla Motors. The scenarios you describe are quite contrary to what Tesla wants to accomplish. They want charging to be safe, easy, and convenient. You make it seem as if there is no way for that to happen.

The only people who will run empty in an EV are the same type that run out of gas. With the availability of Superchargers and HPWCs that should not be an issue, even among those who cannot charge at home. If you can just spend a couple of hours plugged into a HPWC every three days you should be fine. This doesn't have to be inconvenient, all it takes is the slightest modicum of attentiveness.

Maybe Tesla Motors shouldn't sell their cars to anyone with an IQ less than an order of magnitude above their sneaker size for a couple of decades...

Red Sage ca us | 30 décembre 2014

carlgo asked, "At what point will the local utilities choke and require major infrastructure upgrades."

The utilities won't have to worry about it, because Tesla Motors will take care of it on their end. Installation of solar panels and stationary battery packs will allow for load leveling. Thus, there will be no direct strain on the grid, even at the busiest locations. Even when solar panels are not an option, drawing power from the grid overnight, and storing in in the batteries for peak use during the day will still help a lot.

I think it is important to both understand and accept that Tesla Motors cars will not be subjected to either the incredibly long charging times of other EVs, or the lengthy queue of vehicles seen at high traffic gas stations in urban areas. Once people realize that all they need on a daily basis is 'enough' charge, they'll budget their time at HPWCs and Superchargers to manage two or three days worth of driving at a time. And those with very high capacity battery packs will only charge publicly perhaps twice per month. I expect most people will just plug in for a quick charge in increments of 15, 20, or 30 minutes at a time, wherever they happen to be.

carlgo | 30 décembre 2014

That's a fair amount of planning, time, involvement. Maybe even driving some distance to get to where a charger is. We here are enthusiasts. I just wonder if most people will want charging to be a big deal or will just say screw it, I'll buy a hybrid or an eco gas/diesel vehicle.

I wasn't really thinking of the national grid, but rather the wires on the road where the MegaCharger facilities might be placed. I would think, but don't know, if local capacity is normally up to the task or if the local utility would have to string more wires, substations, things on the poles....That is what I meant about permits and all that.

Red Sage ca us | 30 décembre 2014

Without doubt 'most people' will buy hybrids for the next couple of decades. The people who realize they would prefer to drive electric will grow nontheless. And those people will understand that for a time, owning and operating an electric car will be more engaging, require more attentiveness, and involve a modicum of planning.

There is nothing particularly special about the cables, wiring, or electrical level of power delivery at Superchargers. They tap into the same resources that power a common feed to a commercial or industrial area. That's why areas are zoned for a particular use, to make sure those businesses can be properly supplied by existing infrastructure. So if there is enough power for a bowling alley, or a coin operated laundry, there is enough for a Supercharger.

Grinnin'.VA | 30 décembre 2014

@ Red Sage ca us | December 30, 2014

Without doubt 'most people' will buy hybrids for the next couple of decades.

I sure hope it will not take that long for most people to prefer BEVs.

As I see it, no later than 2024, battery densities and ranges will eliminate range anxiety for most people. And SCs etc. will be scattered across the landscape where they drive with HPWCs almost everywhere people want to charge. And BEV drive trains will match their ICE competitors' drive train costs.

I expect BEVs sales to grow at least 50% per year during the coming decade. Suppose 75,000 BEVs are sold in 2015. Then annual sales of BEVs will reach 2,880,000 for 2024. And if that 50% growth per year continues, annual BEV sales would reach 166 million by 2034. That would be utter domination by BEVs, which I don't expect to happen. My magic crystal ball tells me that BEV sales should match ICE car sales in 2032. Of course, we all know how reliable my magic crystal ball is. (Or isn't!)

Go Tesla!

Red Sage ca us | 30 décembre 2014

Grinnin' Ron: Even my capacity for optimism has some boundaries. ;-)

I compare the transition from hybrids to BEV to the migration from pushrod carbureted engines to multicam electronic fuel injection. People generally take a long time to change their minds. Usually, they don't actually change their minds, so much as the world changes around them, leaving them no choice in the matter.

There are people who swore that the old way of doing things, four barrel carburetor, four hundred cubic inches, four on the floor and dual exhaust while running leaded gasoline has never been surpassed for power, efficiency, reliability, and affordability. They really want to go back to that. Some part of their frontal lobe may be moderately aware of the benefit of driving a safer car, but that tiny lizard brain portion still holds sway on their emotions.

Much the same attitude will prevent people from moving to BEV. Gas is everywhere... I get awesome gas mileage... Gas isn't so bad... Don't those things catch on fire... Those aren't ready for prime time... They are just toys for the rich... They just want to take away all our freedoms with these fake green subsidy scams... I'm agin' it...

You'll hear all that, and more, from a lot of people, for a very long time, and well after a Tesla product priced at 75% of the national average new car sales price can be had with a 900 mile range.

People just don't want to know what they don't know... Until it's too late to matter.

3seeker | 31 décembre 2014

Maybe the millennial generation will be more accepting of BEVs than their parents. They've quickly adapted to incorporating the internet, smartphones & social media as part of their lifestyle. Plus they're known to rely less on such influences as politics or even their elders, and more on their peers & social media.

I'm thinking they could be easily swayed.

If the marketing could convince them via Facebook or Pinterest that BEVs have that wow factor then the transition could be much quicker.

jonlivesay | 31 décembre 2014

Free for life after initial payment. More cars= more superchargers. More superchargers means more cash to company. All good for me.

Brian H | 31 décembre 2014

Millennials et al are already very hip to Tesla and Elon. Just ask one.

THRΞΞ | 31 décembre 2014

I asked one today... my barber. He's heard the basics about Tesla & the Google Car, and although he proclaimed himself to be a 'car guy' he was not up to date on the news. Maybe he was too busy cutting hair.

I'm guessing that Social Media is likely responsible for getting the word out. But still many are, for the most part, clueless of the big changes that are going on right now in the automotive industry.

It's as if many perceive Tesla & Elon as being hip, but not sure exactly why.

grega | 31 décembre 2014

Doesn't matter if it's only 5% of trips that use superchargers - if double the cars are using them then it's still double the use.

I don't think we should count on superchargers being used for common/weekly suburban charging either. It significantly increases pressure on supercharger and required volumes - PLUS a full charge takes too long. Instead it needs either a very-super charge system (paid) - but better would be a medium charging for 8 hours at parking stations while at work.

Charging stations have a cost. Either it's paid out of the car price or done some other way. If it's the same fee paid by every tesla buyer then some people overpay (since they rarely use it) while others get a brilliant deal (as they use it frequently). I prefer a cheaper car, and I prefer paying for what I use - so that sounds like a good combination to me. :)

grega | 31 décembre 2014

Would you really go to a supercharger (for a full charge once a week?) if it was only 5 miles away, rather than plug in and forget overnight?

milesbb | 1 janvier 2015

(Will SCs be built in cities conveniently located for use by Tesla owners who lack home-charging circuits?)

If Tesla start providing this service in cities they now have a class of customer that are using SC for 100 % of their charging instead of the 5% that the SC model is based on. Cost of parking in cities can be very expensive, I saw where a single parking space in New York City just sold for a million dollars. Supercharger sites are provided for peak usage so they sit empty most of the time, not an efficient use of a million dollar parking spot. Super charging is done when the customer wants the service, not when electric rates are low, sometimes when rates are super expensive, (think brown out periods). In general people that drive EV's should be getting their charging where they sleep, or where they work. Charge where you park your car most of the time. I do not see mall or movie theater charging being a convenient solution for many EV drivers. Local bar or golf course may work out beter. The bulk of EV charging should be done slowly at night using low cost off peek rates.

Tesla is providing a reliable and convenient charging system for travel and other extended range driving. Expanding the program to cover a significant customer base that will use SC for 100% of their charging will kill the program.

Grinnin'.VA | 1 janvier 2015

@ milesbb | January 1, 2015

(Will SCs be built in cities conveniently located for use by Tesla owners who lack home-charging circuits?)

Expanding the program to cover a significant customer base that will use SC for 100% of their charging will kill the program.

1. Tesla has not indicated that they intend any restriction on SC use by SC-equipped cars.

2. Tesla could build plenty of SC capacity for owners who "use SC for 100% of their charging" simply by charging for SC use, with the cars linked to pre-authorized credit/debit/Paypal/etc. accounts with monthly billing. After all we have a few million people who routinely rely on such billing arrangements for other transactions.

The problem is that Elon has said repeatedly and emphatically that SC use will be "FREE FOREVER, powered by the sun". I suspect that Tesla will 'discover' that this doesn't work well for many potential M3 owners. Possibly that will happen magically shortly after Elon resigns as Tesla CEO and heads off to Mars.

Note: For those who truly believe the "FREE FOREVER, powered by the sun" story, please explain your reasoning. If you think St. Musk can work such a miracle, that's OK. Just don't expect everyone to believe that as a matter of religious conviction. The last I knew, Tesla doesn't require prospective MS buyers to swear allegiance to this article of faith.

Red Sage ca us | 1 janvier 2015

grega put forth the theorem, "Doesn't matter if it's only 5% of trips that use superchargers - if double the cars are using them then it's still double the use."

If double the people are using them, then double the number are not, so it is still 5% usage.

grega concluded, "I prefer a cheaper car, and I prefer paying for what I use - so that sounds like a good combination to me."

You have the option of buying a Nissan Leaf in 2017, which will certainly cost less than Model ≡, and will not have Supercharger access, so you won't have to worry about paying for it. Sorted.

You will not have the option of purchasing a Model ≡ that 'costs less' because it doesn't include either Supercharger access or the hardware to use them.

I'm pretty sure that I've explained exactly how Supercharger access, free of additional cost, for the life of the car, can work. Is it really necessary for anyone else to do so? Mayhap you could express precisely how it will not work instead. I admit, it is far easier to prove a positive, than a negative result.

Grinnin'.VA | 1 janvier 2015

@ Red Sage ca us | January 1, 2015

I'm pretty sure that I've explained exactly how Supercharger access, free of additional cost, for the life of the car, can work.

Yes, indeed you've done this.
Relying on assumptions that I regard as far from realistic.
I'm sorry to tell you that, IMO, you haven't made a convincing case at all. Hint: Please address the reservations that I posted earlier.

Go Tesla!

BrassGuy | 1 janvier 2015

I do hope Tesla will be able to expand existing sites or continue to add sites as the gen. 3 cars hit the road. I certainly think it's possible. I am concerned that here in MA there seems to be a problem with locating suitable sites and getting them turned on. Sagamore took forever, and Sturbridge turned into Auburn. On the idea of expanding existing sites, how many bays can one of those transformers feed?

grega - Yes, if a SC were only 5 miles away, I'd stop by probably a few times a week for 15-20 mins. Only while there is no waiting of course. I just did a quick calculation. With gas below 2.10/gal and electricity over .23/kWh, I am now paying more for electricity for my MS than I would be for gas for the car I was driving before.

THRΞΞ | 1 janvier 2015

@BrassGuy have you considered installing solar panels or wind turbines in your residence in order to offset the electrical cost? Obviously, the initial investment may be high but it might payoff in the long term.

Brian H | 2 janvier 2015

Low gas prices lead to economic booms, too, with different mechanisms. The value proposition for Tesla may need to emphasize the driving experience, maintenance costs, and service quality for a while. Meanwhile more people will be able to afford the cars. Making compelling products that people want to buy is a bullet-proof branding formula.

grega | 2 janvier 2015

@red sage.
Not sure why you're rephrasing what I'm saying

Sure double the cars, at 5% usage...., is still 5% usage, of double the cars.

You're saying there'll be 10 times the model ≡ volume, with a $500 fee incorporated into every model ≡ sale instead of $2000, but that the ten times volume will pay for the superchargers. So 1/4 the funding but 10 times volume.

Your logic only follows if the supercharger network can handle that 10 times volume with 2.5 times the funds. Perhaps it can - I imagine more charger in one location will be cheaper than extra locations, but I think tesla would like to build more locations anyway.

Lastly I find your suggestion a little insulting that your way of charging customers is right, and others should go buy a different car. As I said, I prefer the model of paying for what I use - you may be against that, and want to average it across everyone, that's fine and it is the S85 method. But if tesla is doing everything to meet a certain price point with the model ≡ , then I'd rather see Tesla meet their target price with a slightly larger battery pack (or some other feature) than prepay for free charging. It's valid to try to make the best car they can for their target price.

Red Sage ca us | 2 janvier 2015

"Relying on assumptions that I regard as far from realistic."

Yes. You've said that already. Please express, point for point, what makes my assumptions unrealistic. Or, post what you believe are more realistic assumptions.

"I'm sorry to tell you that, IMO, you haven't made a convincing case at all."

Fine. Give me the opportunity to critique your position the same way. All you have said is that the 'free' model cannot be sustained. You never present evidence to support the notion. Until now, I haven't asked for it, because I had my own to present. So here is your opportunity. Convince me either that I am wrong, or you are correct.

I'll wait...

Red Sage ca us | 2 janvier 2015

grega: What insult? I am arguing a point, not insulting anyone. I shouldn't have to specify 'in my opinion' on everything I write here. If I write something, then it is from my point of view, my understanding, and my opinion. And that opinion, based upon all that Tesla Motors has done with Super chargers, and what has been stated by officers of the company repeatedly, and my own calculations of the funds they will have going forward to support the endeavor, is that no matter how much you beg for it, Tesla Motors will NEVER offer a subscription plan, or pay at the pump, or separate prepaid option for ANY customers for Super charger access and use -- especially Model ≡. That option will not be offered EVER. That is not an insult, it is, in my opinion, a statement of demonstrable fact.

Should Tesla Motors decide to make you and others happy by allowing you to swipe cards, enter PIN numbers, join a membership club, or any other form of paid service that is not permanently included with the purchase of a vehicle, I will be sorely disappointed in them and will express that sentiment with palpable vehemence. I will also admit that I was wrong on the point. For now, I am completely satisfied and comfortably confident that I will never have do a mea culpa on the subject.

And you will have the option of buying something else.