LEAF advisory group

[SilverLeaf]

I think we need to cut the LAB some slack. I believe we are much better served with the board than without. My whole professional career has been NDA based, and the result of the NDA in this case is understandable.

I believe the 2011/2012 owners are better served as a result of the LAB.

I have a 2 1/2 year old, Phoenix, AZ, 2011 LEAF with 14k miles and only 1 bar missing. However my highway range (60 mph) is only 60 miles. I can't and won't drive to near empty, so my effective range is 45-50 miles.

I am very interested in a battery replacement program in which I own the replacement. I think $5k-6k is reasonable within the next 2 - 2 1/2 years.

I would also pay more than that with additional range.

 

[mwalsh]

I believe the 2011/2012 owners are better served as a result of the LAB.

Where I firmly believe that the LAG is ALL about 2014, '15, '16...etc LEAF owners. And I challenge both the LAB and Nissan to prove me wrong.

 

[thankyouOB]

we shouldnt be fighting amongst each other. we should be mad at nissan, which owes an adequate fix for its failure to provide adequate supply of for-sale parts for a car it manufactured and sold in the United States.

It also owes us a fix for the bait-and-switch around the SYB program.

 

[mwalsh]

we shouldnt be fighting amongst each other. we should be mad at nissan, which owes an adequate fix for its failure to provide adequate supply of for-sale parts for a car it manufactured and sold in the United States.

It also owes us a fix for the bait-and-switch around the SYB program.

Yes it does. And I will sing kumbaya with all comers when we finally get an answer to the question we asked last winter - WHAT IS THE FUCKING BATTERY PRICE?

 

[KJD]

Yes it does. And I wil sing kumbaya with all comers when we finally get an answer to the question we asked last winter - WHAT IS THE FUCKING BATTERY PRICE?

Ya What he said. +1

 

[mwalsh]

Ya What he said. +1

Even if it's a number we don't want to hear or otherwise horrifies us!

 

[JPWhite]

I believe the 2011/2012 owners are better served as a result of the LAB.

Where I firmly believe that the LAG is ALL about 2014, '15, '16...etc LEAF owners. And I challenge both the LAB and Nissan to prove me wrong.

I hope they prove you wrong. But if they fail to do so BMW and VW will provide an alternative for the LEAF orphans.

JP

 

[gbarry42]

The NDA thing shows that the purpose of the Board is for Nissan to learn what they can, rather than to tell us anything new. But, I have a hard time figuring out how bringing nine (ten if you include yourself ) people to Japan is going to enlighten them after they have gathered scores of opinions from this forum!

The only clue I've found was in this statement:

I've at least seen cases of Nissan being far more forthcoming about some things - stuff not nearly ready for public consumption - in order to get better feedback early enough in the process to make a difference

If that is what it's all about, then I imagine this would make up most or all of the proceedings, and there would truly be "not much to tell".

= you left yourself off the list...

 

[cwerdna]

If they shared information with you, you should report it. Otherwise you would appear to be a stooge for Nissan and not a valid representative off Leaf owners

Ouch! Harsh! Have you ever worked in a job where you were required to sign an NDA?

Re the LAB and NDA's, I'd hoped we'd get away without them. But, I've at least seen cases of Nissan being far more forthcoming about some things - stuff not nearly ready for public consumption - in order to get better feedback early enough in the process to make a difference, rather than purely for the sake of just having an NDA. So, I don't agree that the NDA makes the LAB inherently less effective - in some cases the outcome may be better for the drivers because the group was able to have some influence along the way at a deeper level than can often happen in the more public events. But I understand that it's frustrating from the outside.

I think we need to cut the LAB some slack. I believe we are much better served with the board than without. My whole professional career has been NDA based, and the result of the NDA in this case is understandable.

I agree and have been in the same boat as SilverLeaf.

I've also been to Apple WWDC where there was (and still is) a developer NDA. Apple presenters were able to be a lot more forthcoming w/details and useful/insightful info when there is such an NDA.

I'd imagine that LAB had access to/ideas run by them for feedback that Nissan is considering. Also, I'm sure they had a lot of insight into the thinking/decision process at Nissan, including some future plans. Some of this stuff they wouldn't want competitors to know about.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

The NDA thing shows that the purpose of the Board is for Nissan to learn what they can, rather than to tell us anything new. But, I have a hard time figuring out how bringing nine (ten if you include yourself ) people to Japan is going to enlighten them after they have gathered scores of opinions from this forum!

The only clue I've found was in this statement:

I've at least seen cases of Nissan being far more forthcoming about some things - stuff not nearly ready for public consumption - in order to get better feedback early enough in the process to make a difference

If that is what it's all about, then I imagine this would make up most or all of the proceedings, and there would truly be "not much to tell".

= you left yourself off the list...

The title, "Advisory Board", says it all. And NDAs are understandable. This is the real value of the LAB, to give them outside feedback on stuff we don't discuss to death on the forum, because we don't know about it. The LAB is an opportunity to stop Nissan from screwing up, while encouraging them on the good stuff. The LAB has to be a "mini forum" trying to represent how real world EV drivers would respond to whatever Nissan's super secret plans are. It's a responsibility. I hope they do make a difference.

 

[KJD]

Topically, we covered the dealer experience (Nissan has been focusing on improving this, but we discussed what else could be done), infrastructure, marketing and communications w/r/t growing the EV market, potential options for the existing product, and a heavy dose of increasing support of and engagement with existing drivers.

OK fine, let's talk about infrastructure or better the lack there of. 2 years ago I bought a 2012 LEAF SL model in the hopes that some day I would see a QC network that I could use.

Now 2 years into the ownership experience there is not a QC station within 500 miles of my car. There are also zero plans to install any in the near future.

Nissan until you have multiple QC locations in all 50 states your QC network is a failure.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

Topically, we covered the dealer experience (Nissan has been focusing on improving this, but we discussed what else could be done), infrastructure, marketing and communications w/r/t growing the EV market, potential options for the existing product, and a heavy dose of increasing support of and engagement with existing drivers.

OK fine, let's talk about infrastructure or better the lack there of. 2 years ago I bought a 2012 LEAF SL model in the hopes that some day I would see a QC network that I could use.

Now 2 years into the ownership experience there is not a QC station within 500 miles of my car. There are also zero plans to install any in the near future.

Nissan until you have multiple QC locations in all 50 states your QC network is a failure.

Wicked +1

Selling a car with QC capacity, and then not making even a minimal effort to support that themselves, is amazingly counterproductive.

To sell a LEAF, a dealer has to invest in a certified tech and the diagnostic machine that goes "bing". (Leased from the operational account, so as not to impact the capital account.)

How can they justify not requiring a QC at every dealer?

IIHMW, only a sales rep who drove a LEAF could sell one, but I'd settle for a real commitment to infrastructure.

Just the other day, Carlos was bemoaning the lack of infrastructure. The hubris astounds me.

 

[JPWhite]

The NDA thing shows that the purpose of the Board is for Nissan to learn what they can, rather than to tell us anything new.

Yep. It's called the advisory board. i.e. they advise Nissan.

'bout sums it up.

 

[JPWhite]

How can they justify not requiring a QC at every dealer?

I've always wondered if a QC component in the LEAF failed for any reason, how would the dealer test they had successfully repaired the vehicle?

 

[derkraut]

How can they justify not requiring a QC at every dealer?

I've always wondered if a QC component in the LEAF failed for any reason, how would the dealer test they had successfully repaired the vehicle?

AHEM! Good question. With my type of driving, I really don't have a need for QC; so, in 2 yrs/5 months, I'd never used it. Well, thinking about my soon-to-expire warranty, I decided to stop @ my nearby Nissan dealer last week (luckily, they have a QC EVSE) to test it. It worked.

 

[evchels]

I believe the 2011/2012 owners are better served as a result of the LAB.

Where I firmly believe that the LAG is ALL about 2014, '15, '16...etc LEAF owners. And I challenge both the LAB and Nissan to prove me wrong.

Any "proof" to your various challenges can only come through Nissan's actions, so not sure how you expect the LAB to prove anything...

But for what my word is worth, much (if not most) of the conversation to date has been relevant to and in support of current drivers. Keeping in mind that today's LAB is made up of 2011/2012 drivers, they're very concerned with serving the existing group (both in customer service and longevity of fleet standpoints), even as they also want to see the overall EV market grow. They continue to push Nissan on the need to resolve the battery replacement issue- including a purchase price, core values for used packs, mileage and capacity options, etc. When new potential LEAF features are discussed, they immediately ask about backwards compatibility and long-term feature and technical support for original LEAFs, and they continue to ask for aftermarket options for current cars to enhance flexibility and usability without having to wait for future vehicles. Infrastructure remains a hot topic- both what Nissan should directly be installing (e.g. DC at dealers), but also how Nissan could support accessibility to independent networks, facilitate use of non-Nissan installed equipment, and encourage workplace and multi-family dwelling installations. And of course, better engagement and communication with the current community, as well as w/r/t representing the features and capabilities of the LEAF to new drivers. This list is not exhaustive, but the theme is common.

Many of these things will of course serve future buyers, in large part by making Nissan smarter about reaching them in the first place and supporting their owner experience. But the LAB has been insistent that any focus on growing the market not happen at the expense of the current users, and continues to underscore the value of current drivers as ambassadors to the next generation. Encouragingly, Nissan does seem to grok this, even as the company has struggled with implementation.

So really, the jury is still out on the true impact of the LAB; we won't know until Nissan starts revealing publicly how it's acted upon the group's feedback. And it's not been without bumps- there have been frustrating lags in activity, which is part of why you've not heard more about what's been going on. There was a point at which I advised them to back up the sincerity with more consistent engagement or get rid of the group. Internal team-shifting on Nissan's part seems to have helped with that, and we came out of this last trip more confident on that front....but we will see. Some items are longer term, but some "evidence" will come - or not - over the next several months.

 

[mwalsh]

Thank you for the thoughtful response, Chelsea. But you'll understand that without seeing anything of substance coming out of the effort, it all looks to be for nought. And you'll remember my patience with Nissan was already exhausted when we talked last November. My outlook has not improved much with an additional year of frustration under my belt!

You'll remember the promise I made last November? Well, that's a Volt in my driveway and not the Ford I threatened. But the takeaway should be the same...that it's not a new Nissan.

 

[RegGuheert]

As a MY2011 LEAF owner who is also a member of the LEAF Advisory Board, I will state that I am also frustrated with the lack of communication coming from Nissan. Truly we advisory board members do NOT have access to much more information concerning what is coming than any of you.

What we do have is some insight into what Nissan may be *thinking* about doing, on multiple different fronts. While we provide feedback on what we see, we typically do not know what is coming before you do. My sincere hope is that we can assist Nissan to avoid steps which would prove to be harmful to their goals in the EV area and to help Nissan to see additional steps to take which they had not previously thought of or seriously considered. We also confirm when we think Nissan is on the right track.

So will they heed our advice? No one knows. That is entirely up to Nissan.

You'd think Nissan would have dedicated social media reps and forum analysts, and maybe they do, but some human face time at corporate doesn't hurt.

+1

A common refrain this week was "Can you please repeat that so that everyone in the room can hear it?" My previous experience in business is that an employee (even a high-level one) making a statement often does not have as much sway as the same statement made by an earnest customer.

Our group isn't gentle with Nissan at all.

No, we aren't. At the same time, the relationship is one of respect and trust. Nissan trusts us to fairly represent other LEAF owners and to give them our honest assessment of what is needed (or should be avoided) and we trust them to proceed in a way that honors their customers in the best way they can, given the many constraints involved.

I will say that my opinion of Nissan's commitment to the EV market matches their public positioning: Nissan intends to continue to be a world leader in the EV market. As with all things, only time will tell.

As soon as my home internet connection starts behaving better, I will post some pictures which I took at the 2013 Tokyo Auto Show of Nissan vehicles as well as a couple of others and I will discuss MY opinions of what I saw. But because of the NDA I signed, I will not disclose details that I learned from Nissan about their vehicles.

 

[cwerdna]

You'd think Nissan would have dedicated social media reps and forum analysts, and maybe they do, but some human face time at corporate doesn't hurt.

+1

+1
I posted a little about the presence of other automakers at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=11401" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Over on Priuschat, the Prius product manager and her team have some presence. See Postings tab under http://priuschat.com/members/prius-team.44773/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. The previous Prius Product Manager was a he (Doug) and his former direct report (Erica) is now the Product Manager. Keep in mind that Product Managers (from what I can tell in the Toyota context) == marketing person. This is true at many (but not all) other companies.

http://priuschat.com/threads/prius-brake-recall-%C3%A2%E2%82%AC%E2%80%9C-a-little-more-information.76158/page-3#post-1064441" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; makes a reference to "consultants". (I have met both Doug and Erica before.)

My previous experience in business is that an employee (even a high-level one) making a statement often does not have as much sway as the same statement made by an earnest customer.

Same here. I've found this to be the case MANY times, esp. at my previous company.

I do software QA for a living, and sometimes, even though we in QA (or somewhere else in the company) found it, it might get blown off as unimportant or an edge/boundary case. If customers frequently hit the same issue, suddenly it becomes more important.

As soon as my home internet connection starts behaving better, I will post some pictures which I took at the 2013 Tokyo Auto Show of Nissan vehicles

Side note: As I've posted a bunch of times before, Tokyo Motor Show rocks. I've attended 3x, all out of my own pocket but it was coupled w/other sightseeing in Japan.

I posted http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6834" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; long ago. It ends on December 1st and I believe the next one will be around this time of year in 2015. If you plan on going to Japan in 2015 and like cars, you MUST go and dedicate at least 1 day, probably 2 and possibly 3, esp. if you like cars AND motorcycles.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

"The waaaaiiiting is the hardest part". -Tom Petty

Like everybody else, Nissan will make it's choices, and live with the consequences.

So, this week, we get this news:

"A common complaint about the all-electric Nissan LEAF has been its short range, officially 75 miles on a full charge according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. To address that challenge, Nissan could add options for consumers to purchase bigger battery packs to boost the LEAF’s all-electric range, Pierre Loing, vice president of product and advanced planning and strategy told PluginCars.com. “The packaging easiness (of the battery) makes it easier to put more batteries in the car, and you will see this,” Loing said during an interview this week at the 2013 Los Angeles Auto Show." - PluginCars.com

Loing acted, but with no details. The NDA prevents you from doing same, but what can you tell us? Think you any influence here?