May Deliveries! Or... May(be)?

[Beachcliffs]

I agree the queue order should be restored, but they should get those cars from the 900 that have not been VINned, or direct swap some of the VINned 600 for some among the just unloaded 900 (if I'm inferring the numbers right). So a VIN reassignment for later orders would be understandable if it's still within the 1500 and wouldn't affect previously estimated ship dates by much. It would be unfair, though, to pull assigned VINs and make those customers now wait for a future ship (back to pending). It would be just passing the screw down the line.

Of course the other complication is that all cars are not the same. Direct swapping is hard work! (To paraphrase a famous person. )

Excuse me, what exactly is "fair" about those of us that ordered in late Sept/early October not receiving VINs and impending delivery dates while at least 32 folks (such as yourself) who ordered three or four months later have?

So, if there are not enough cars to go around, it is " fair" that some people get delivery in 3 or 4 months while others wait 7, 8 or more depending on the impact the quake and subsequent tsunami? I don't think so.

 

[aleph5]

I didn't say that. I'm just saying if you have to be unfair to some in order to be less unfair to others, there's still unfairness, and now it extends to a wider group. Maybe not as egregious, but nonetheless. Besides, we're just speculating about what happened, why, and what Nissan can and is doing about it.

I know you're frustrated and you have a right to be. I would be too, in your shoes. But I was just pointing out that new acts of unfairness would not make everything equitable. Pulling VIN numbers and putting anyone back into limbo, no matter when they ordered, would just be churning unfairness. If Nissan is fixing the problem, that should not be the way to do it, but maybe if that's the only way to do it, well--maybe it would be warranted. Again, we don't know a lot. Peace.

 

[Beachcliffs]

I didn't say that. I'm just saying if you have to be unfair to some in order to be less unfair to others, there's still unfairness, and now it extends to a wider group. Maybe not as egregious, but nonetheless. Besides, we're just speculating about what happened, why, and what Nissan can and is doing about it.

I know you're frustrated and you have a right to be. I would be too, in your shoes. But I was just pointing out that new acts of unfairness would not make everything equitable. Pulling VIN numbers and putting anyone back into limbo, no matter when they ordered, would just be churning unfairness. If Nissan is fixing the problem, that should not be the way to do it, but maybe if that's the only way to do it, well--maybe it would be warranted. Again, we don't know a lot. Peace.

Yes, it is all speculation. And, yes, we all hope they can fulfill the early orders as well as the out of turn orders in the current batch of vehicles on our shores. If not, yes, it would be "unfair" to people who thought they were getting a vehicle in April to now be told that they might have to wait until "who knows when". And, yes, such people would have a right to not be happy about the situation.

Nissan has made their own bed, now they have to figure out how to sleep in it. But clearly, the greater inequity would be to not make it right by the people that reserved and ordered earlier in the process.

 

[stanley]

Beachcliffs, I believe the fairest thing to do is to get deliveries in the correct order. Especially for California. There are people that are depending on the State $5,000 rebate to make their purchase affordable. In my case I went from a April to May status to PENDING. I am in no mans land. Ecotality had already told me that they would be coming to install the Blink charger by mid April as the records they receive from Nissan showed that my delivery would occur during the end of April. I had a May 15 reservation date and January 7 order. People who ordered one day before me, and others that ordered more than a month after me have April deliveries. It appears to me that these inequities need to be fixed. Mark Perry has consistently told me that ones delivery date is based on your order date. Nissan needs to support its integrity by sticking to their word. Nissan`s integrity plays a huge part in my willingness to be an early adopter. If I can`t count on their word why should I believe they will stick behind the worthiness of the battery pack?

 

[Beachcliffs]

If I can`t count on their word why should I believe they will stick behind the worthiness of the battery pack?

Interesting you should mention the issue of Nissan's integrity as my wife (who will use the Leaf to commute during the week) has recently voiced a very similar concern.

 

[walterbays]

Order date was an arbitrary time set by Nissan, so order-to-delivery is near meaningless. Those so-called "September orders" haven't been waiting 7 months. They've been waiting almost 13 months since they reserved. And the so-called "January/February orders" haven't been waiting 2-3 months. Some have been waiting 6 months and some 12 months. Is it "fair" that someone got an order date 4 months later than someone else because he entered his reservation on 4/21/10 instead of 4/20/10? Is it "fair" that someone suffers a month or two delay because his reservation was delayed a few hours by bugs in Nissan's own web site? This is like a huge crowd of people around the doors of a store opening for a sale. When the doors open and the crowd surges forward, some are going to get in first and some much later, and it's never going to be completely fair. This was the biggest problem and Nissan never had the power to avert it. They've done pretty well under the circumstances - certainly better than the allocation by rapacious car dealers chosen by GM for the Volt.

It does appear that they (or their contractor) made some errors in assigning some later orders before some earlier ones, even when not warranted by other circumstances like city, dealer allocation, etc. At the time they surely thought it would make no practical difference because the flood of new production would quickly satisfy all customers anyway. Then after the tsunami it turns out that it may make a big difference. I really hate to say this, because I don't have a week or VIN assigned, but Nissan should not try to make good its broken promises to those September orders by breaking more promises to others. Rather it should do all it can to make good to the September orders by rearranging remaining allocations as best it can. That (sob) would hit hardest those later orders who have not received VINs - which I think is the great majority of later orders.

I still hope the hit won't be too hard and this may come out right in the end. This forum has a disproportionate percentage of the earliest adopters, and so the incidence of problems we see here is probably 10x greater than the incidence of problems overall. So it may not take all that much reshuffling to make good Nissan's commitments to their earliest customers.

Someone said, "calm down, it's just a car." Well that's the problem: it is not just a car. It's the car of the future and we all want to be a part. But after waiting 6 months or a year, a bit more isn't really that bad. In the worst case some of us miss out on the $5k CA rebate. Well then we'll just get the next year's $2.5k or $3k rebate instead, on a car that we could immediately sell on ebay for many thousands above list if we were willing to part with it. Sure losing $2k is a real loss, but there are worse losses in the world.

The biggest barrier to production at Oppama seems to be electricity supply. TEPCO plans to continue rolling blackouts through April, and expects rolling blackouts again in July when hot weather brings an air conditioning load. But by then they will bring their capacity from 36.5 MkW now up to 46.5 MkW by restoring operations of a geo-thermal plant damaged in the earthquake and be resuming operations of another geo-thermal plant that had previously been decommissioned. Add in some conservation and a communitarian willingness to turn A/C lower or off for the good of the whole, and they could be nearly back to normal.

 

[stanley]

Beachcliffs, I worked for a global company for a number of years that stressed integrity and trust as the cornerstone of their relationship with customers,suppliers and franchises. This trust relationship built for them a huge trust bank of support and goodwill resulting in healthy profitability

 

[Beachcliffs]

Walterbays - take a look at some of the reservation dates of the late January / early February orders, if I recall correctly, there are at least a few that did not reserve anywhere near 4/20. And, it was Nissan that indicated, at first, that "reservation date" would be primary, and then later to "order date". But, by either measure, some of us clearly put our hands in the air earlier than others (me, actually, with my local dealer much more than a year ago when Nissan first announced their intention to produce the Leaf).

 

[AndyH]

(me, actually, with my local dealer much more than a year ago when Nissan first announced their intention to produce the Leaf).

I don't recall seeing this as part of Nissan's Leaf process...

Most of the country doesn't have incentives - no sales tax breaks, no rebates, no reduced registration fees or carpool-lane stickers. There's no EVproject and no 'legacy' charge points much less J1772 units. For those they might have the Federal $7500 and that's it.

It's GREAT that California has great incentives and projects and moderate weather! But really - "We should get our cars first because our EV1s were taken and our extra $5000 state bonus might run out?"

Really?!

 

[Beachcliffs]

(me, actually, with my local dealer much more than a year ago when Nissan first announced their intention to produce the Leaf).

I don't recall seeing this as part of Nissan's Leaf process...

Most of the country doesn't have incentives - no sales tax breaks, no rebates, no reduced registration fees or carpool-lane stickers. There's no EVproject and no 'legacy' charge points much less J1772 units. For those they might have the Federal $7500 and that's it.

It's GREAT that California has great incentives and projects and moderate weather! But really - "We should get our cars first because our EV1s were taken and our extra $5000 state bonus might run out?"

Really?!

No - we should get our cars first because we were the first to reserve and order them. My point was that there are inconveniences no matter what side of the fence one is sitting on.

 

[ttweed]

But really - "We should get our cars first because our EV1s were taken and our extra $5000 state bonus might run out?"

Remember, Andy, CA is the land of fruits and nuts, with a little whine and cheese on the side. :lol:

TT

 

[Beachcliffs]

But really - "We should get our cars first because our EV1s were taken and our extra $5000 state bonus might run out?"

Remember, Andy, CA is the land of fruits and nuts, with a little whine and cheese on the side. :lol:

TT

Make that a nice Santa Barbara Pinot Noir paired with Comte, please.

 

[LEAFfan]

I agree the queue order should be restored, but they should get those cars from the 900 that have not been VINned, or direct swap some of the VINned 600 for some among the just unloaded 900 (if I'm inferring the numbers right). So a VIN reassignment for later orders would be understandable if it's still within the 1500 and wouldn't affect previously estimated ship dates by much. It would be unfair, though, to pull assigned VINs and make those customers now wait for a future ship (back to pending). It would be just passing the screw down the line.

Of course the other complication is that all cars are not the same. Direct swapping is hard work! (To paraphrase a famous person. )

Excuse me, what exactly is "fair" about those of us that ordered in late Sept/early October not receiving VINs and impending delivery dates while at least 32 folks (such as yourself) who ordered three or four months later have?

So, if there are not enough cars to go around, it is " fair" that some people get delivery in 3 or 4 months while others wait 7, 8 or more depending on the impact the quake and subsequent tsunami? I don't think so.

+1!

 

[garygid]

If I had been accidently assigned somebody else's car, I would hope that Nissan would NOT deliver it to me, but rather re-assign it to the proper owner's Order and deliver it to its "real" owner.

Yes, that WOULD be the right thing to do, and it would be fair!

And remember, it can be TERRIBLE karma for the car, to be driven by the "wrong" master!!

 

[BlueSL]

I agree the queue order should be restored, but they should get those cars from the 900 that have not been VINned, or direct swap some of the VINned 600 for some among the just unloaded 900 (if I'm inferring the numbers right).

Is aleph5 inferring the numbers right? I cannot recall the source evidence for the additional 900 cars (or for the supposition that the 600 that were the subject of the press release are the January/February order VIN cars). Indeed, if VINs are assigned to customers at the port, it does not make sense that the 600 would be the "VINned" cars.

Citation to the true existence of an additional 900 cars appreciated. Thanks.

 

[youngr3]

I emphatically agree with a previous post that even though I might be one that gets "screwed down the line" the cars should be delivered in line with the order dates. This is the ONLY really fair way. We could take a lesson from the English who queue up without any complaints or line jumping! :roll:

 

[downeykp]

As you can see from my different dates and expected delivery time, I am unfairly getting delivery before many who ordered way ahead of me. It is too bad that there is not a way for this to be rectified. It is only a car.
I can see how someone who ordered in April 2010 and isn't this far along would be pi**ed. I really am in no hurry and was hoping for an end of summer delivery. I am gone from June until August.
I have not gotten email from Nissan.

Vin# 1941
Res. 6-14-10
Ordered on: 01/25/2011
Confirmation number: 30931D86
Delivery week of April 29th Has not changed in 2 weeks

 

[thankyouOB]

I emphatically agree with a previous post that even though I might be one that gets "screwed down the line" the cars should be delivered in line with the order dates. This is the ONLY really fair way. We could take a lesson from the English who queue up without any complaints or line jumping! :roll:

as some point out, order date is not as independent of subjectivity or manipulation as reserve date.
on the other hand, my reserve date was purely a function of being out of work for 2+ years and knowing that with no place to commute to there was no reason to buy a car to commute in.

 

[AndyH]

I emphatically agree with a previous post that even though I might be one that gets "screwed down the line" the cars should be delivered in line with the order dates. This is the ONLY really fair way. We could take a lesson from the English who queue up without any complaints or line jumping! :roll:

I agree that quietly queuing is our best option. Nissan's in charge and it's their process to run as they wish. I may make different choices if I had control over how cars are delivered, but I don't so it doesn't matter.

 

[aleph5]

I agree the queue order should be restored, but they should get those cars from the 900 that have not been VINned, or direct swap some of the VINned 600 for some among the just unloaded 900 (if I'm inferring the numbers right).

Is aleph5 inferring the numbers right? I cannot recall the source evidence for the additional 900 cars (or for the supposition that the 600 that were the subject of the press release are the January/February order VIN cars). Indeed, if VINs are assigned to customers at the port, it does not make sense that the 600 would be the "VINned" cars.

Citation to the true existence of an additional 900 cars appreciated. Thanks.

There are several sources that stated there were 600 cars either here or on the way since the earthquake. Then Nissan announced that there was a total of 1500 cars that were safely between the factory and their U.S. deliveries and the two ships were subsequently tracked to port. If VINs are provided at or after port, as I understood they are, and since many of us were provided VINs before these two ships docked, I have inferred that 600 had already been here awaiting delivery and that that's where the newest VINs came from. That would leave 900 between the two Spirits, Andromeda and Luna. If this is a reasonable deduction, then we can expect a relative flood (900) of new VINs as these cars are just being logged in (or whatever they do to issue VINs).

I don't have any inside info. and if someone else does, I'm all ears to be informed or corrected.

As for the little controversy here, I was sent an email from Nissan (and not a third party, best I can tell) assuring me that my car was sent prior to the earthquake. If all of the earlier reservers with the same car configuration as mine can't get theirs among these 1500, it would probably be most fair that one of them gets my car. But realize that would mean that I would join the ranks of people with broken promises and axes to grind, however trivial in the greater sense, and even if it's "less unfair" than their broken promises, etc. What is fair anyway? Is it "fair" that some of us waiting live within a few minutes drive of the port of Long Beach, whereas others live across the country where it will take days or weeks longer for our cars to show up?

This is getting silly. If none of the pre-earthquake cars are slated to be delivered to the "forgotten," there's either a good explanation or a very big screwup, but please don't vent your anger on me. I didn't do it.

You'll have to pry my blue car from my cold, dead EVSE! :twisted: