Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[SageBrush]

After owning my Model 3 for 3 weeks and having taken 3 road trips that would be impossible in any other EV, I can safely say I would not consider any other vehicle if I had to replace my Model 3 due to a total loss collision or similar circumstance. In those 3 weeks my car has new and better features than it had when I purchased it. It is the best vehicle I've ever owned, it's the best vehicle I've ever driven (although I did like the X a lot.) The Tesla haters here simply are jealous, as near as I can tell.

Stop, demand is down, the SR model is not profitable, don't you read this? All other EVs are outselling the 3. Cars are burning in junk yards and your 3 looks like a Chevy Malibu! You will likely burn up in your car from the heat of the glass roof. Are you insane? You should have bought a used Forester! I sold my Tesla after reading this thread and you should too. Tesla is even trying to up sell customers, have you ever heard of any such practice EVER?

:lol: :lol:

 

[lpickup]

Despite all the noise about now available $35K Model 3, Tesla did not deliver a single one and folks who ordered have neither VIN assigned nor any information when it would be delivered at all. So it looks like $35K Model 3 is still a fairy-tell.

Echoes of August/September 2017 when everyone was saying that Model 3's were only being delivered to insiders/employees and the Model 3 would never be delivered to actual customers.

Do you really think that the $35K Model 3 will never be shipped? Care to bet a beer on that? I think the most likely explanation is that they are prioritizing higher margin vehicles for 1Q to overcome a particularly difficult quarter that saw the start of overseas deliveries (and the shipping delays and logistics issues that go along with it), as well as their $920M debt repayment. Once we hit the new quarter I bet they start to flow.

 

[Leaf15]

Do you really think that the $35K Model 3 will never be shipped? Care to bet a beer on that? I think the most likely explanation is that they are prioritizing higher margin vehicles for 1Q to overcome a particularly difficult quarter that saw the start of overseas deliveries (and the shipping delays and logistics issues that go along with it), as well as their $920M debt repayment. Once we hit the new quarter I bet they start to flow.

I do believe it would become available at some point, but not now or a few months. Most likely by 2020 $35 SR Model 3 would become $30K as rebates would be gone.

 

[cwerdna]

Do you really think that the $35K Model 3 will never be shipped? Care to bet a beer on that? I think the most likely explanation is that they are prioritizing higher margin vehicles for 1Q to overcome a particularly difficult quarter that saw the start of overseas deliveries (and the shipping delays and logistics issues that go along with it), as well as their $920M debt repayment. Once we hit the new quarter I bet they start to flow.

I do believe it would become available at some point, but not now or a few months. Most likely by 2020 $35 SR Model 3 would become $30K as rebates would be gone.

It's not a rebate. It's a tax credit.

I doubt it'll become $30K. Tesla's pattern has been to raise prices, besides selling the the most/more expensive variants first.

If you hadn't tracked before, https://web.archive.org/web/20130105035307/http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase has the prices for the Model S originally. The S originally started out at "under $50K" after $7500 Federal tax credit. Now it starts at $85K before delivery and documentation fee and before $3750 tax credit.

 

[SageBrush]

If you hadn't tracked before, https://web.archive.org/web/20130105035307/http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase has the prices for the Model S originally. The S originally started out at "under $50K" after $7500 Federal tax credit. Now it starts at $85K before delivery and documentation fee and before $3750 tax credit.

And has 2.5x more battery capacity, amongst other improvements.

Stop trolling.

 

[Triggerhappy007]

I do believe it would become available at some point, but not now or a few months. Most likely by 2020 $35 SR Model 3 would become $30K as rebates would be gone.

I doubt they will lower the price below $35k for the model 3 even after the tax credit expires. Unless they come out with a ~35 kWh model.

 

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

Pushing deliveries back a few months is either a sign of demand for the short-range, or a sign that the short-range battery production line isn't going at full speed yet. It's too early to know, nor does it matter, since those customers will eventually get their cars.

Your guess, have another? Your guessing tends to obfuscate the real issue, that a $35K M3 is basically not profitable
now. Remember just a few months ago Elon stated that the M3 cost was $38K. Even with all the overhead cost reductions,
e.g. sales operations, a $35K M3 has still resulted in being basically unprofitable in Q1 of 2019. Again as usual, it's all about
generating more reservations:

1. announce availability of the M3 at $35K in Q1 of 2019 and re-build interest
2. announce deliveries in a few weeks
3. start taking another round of reservations
4. wait a few weeks for reservations to accumulate
5. move $35K deliveries to future quarters, or don't even re-schedule
6. attempt to convert $35K reservations to higher priced M3s

Have many totally forgotten what happen just three years ago?

My "guess" at least isn't self contradictory. And Elon's statement was for the employees, worded as, "depending on how you count it": https://electrek.co/2018/11/30/tesla-model-3-production-rate-1000-day-maintain-reduce-costs/

Which means marginal costs plus factory underutilization during a recession, plus zero LR/performance take rates, etc. Basically worst-case scenario type stuff.

Elon had already stated during their conference call that they needed to ensure the survival of Tesla, even during a recession.

Note that even Sandy Munro has claimed the short-range model 3 to be profitable.

The rest of your "issues" stem from your misunderstanding of who claimed what.

Stop reading other people's interpretations and get your info from the source.

 

[cwerdna]

If you hadn't tracked before, https://web.archive.org/web/20130105035307/http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase has the prices for the Model S originally. The S originally started out at "under $50K" after $7500 Federal tax credit. Now it starts at $85K before delivery and documentation fee and before $3750 tax credit.

And has 2.5x more battery capacity, amongst other improvements.

Stop trolling.

:roll:

Tesla has played with Model S pricing countless times but for the longest time, the starting price became at least $70K on an S. Battery prices per kWh have come way down, in the meantime.

Let's look at a counterexample. 2011 Leaf SV began at $32,780 and SL at $33,720 per https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1048819_2011-nissan-leaf-orders-commence-fast-charge-option-700 and its EPA range rating was 73 miles on a full charge (https://insideevs.com/2013-nissan-leaf-rated-at-75-miles-but-84-miles-using-the-old-system/). The price even went up significantly w/model year 2012 ($35,200 and $37,250, respectively): https://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/19/2012-nissan-leaf-higher-price-tag-standard-equipment/.

Fast forward to model year 2018 (see Prices tab of https://nissannews.com/en-US/nissan/usa/presskits/us-2018-nissan-leaf-press-kit) and now there's a cheaper S trim at $29,990 and the SV and SL start at $32,490 and $36,200 but have a bit over double the range at 151 miles (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=30979&id=39860) and TONS of improvements.

 

[SageBrush]

Let's look at a counterexample. 2011 Leaf SV began at $32,780 and SL at $33,720 per https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1048819_2011-nissan-leaf-orders-commence-fast-charge-option-700 and its EPA range rating was 73 miles on a full charge (https://insideevs.com/2013-nissan-leaf-rated-at-75-miles-but-84-miles-using-the-old-system/). The price even went up significantly w/model year 2012 ($35,200 and $37,250, respectively): https://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/19/2012-nissan-leaf-higher-price-tag-standard-equipment/.

Fast forward to model year 2018 (see Prices tab of https://nissannews.com/en-US/nissan/usa/presskits/us-2018-nissan-leaf-press-kit) and now there's a cheaper S trim at $29,990 and the SV and SL start at $32,490 and $36,200 but have a bit over double the range at 151 miles (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=30979&id=39860) and TONS of improvements.

Continue the Arithmetic. I'll use the SL example:
(36.2/33.7) * (74/151) = 0.526x. You get rapid-gate and the shittiest customer support ever for free :roll:
--
Now the Tesla Model S:
(85/57) * (139/335) = 0.618x

Of course Tesla has made the Model 3 in the meantime, which is where the company has shined. Compare the first Model S with current LR Model 3:

Model S 40 kWh (2012):
$50k
139 mile range
6.5 seconds (0-60)
No Nav
No Supercharging

Model 3 LR (2019)
$44.5K
325 mile range
5.1 seconds (0-60)
Too many features to count
Cheap Supercharging at up to 250 kW

(44.5/50) * ( 139/325) = 0.380x.

Your original statement is obviously BS, and in fact Tesla soundly trounces Nissan in adding value to the consumer over time.

 

[LeftieBiker]

It's extremely problematic assigning relative values to a car with several large unknown values (short and long term reliability) compared to a car with known values (short term known, long term extrapolated from the previous version of the same basic car with larger battery). When you also take into consideration different valuing by drivers (ride comfort vs handling prowess, acceleration vs interior comfort, practicality and accessibility) it becomes more like oranges to grapefruit than apples to apples. At this point all that we know for sure is that the Tesla will be faster and handle better, and that the Leaf will be fairly reliable, more flexible in use, and likely will have a relatively fast-degrading battery.

 

[lorenfb]

Pushing deliveries back a few months is either a sign of demand for the short-range, or a sign that the short-range battery production line isn't going at full speed yet. It's too early to know, nor does it matter, since those customers will eventually get their cars.

Your guess, have another? Your guessing tends to obfuscate the real issue, that a $35K M3 is basically not profitable
now. Remember just a few months ago Elon stated that the M3 cost was $38K. Even with all the overhead cost reductions,
e.g. sales operations, a $35K M3 has still resulted in being basically unprofitable in Q1 of 2019. Again as usual, it's all about
generating more reservations:

1. announce availability of the M3 at $35K in Q1 of 2019 and re-build interest
2. announce deliveries in a few weeks
3. start taking another round of reservations
4. wait a few weeks for reservations to accumulate
5. move $35K deliveries to future quarters, or don't even re-schedule
6. attempt to convert $35K reservations to higher priced M3s

Have many totally forgotten what happen just three years ago?

My "guess" at least isn't self contradictory. And Elon's statement was for the employees, worded as, "depending on how you count it": https://electrek.co/2018/11/30/tesla-model-3-production-rate-1000-day-maintain-reduce-costs/

Which means marginal costs plus factory underutilization during a recession, plus zero LR/performance take rates, etc. Basically worst-case scenario type stuff.

Elon had already stated during their conference call that they needed to ensure the survival of Tesla, even during a recession.

Note that even Sandy Munro has claimed the short-range model 3 to be profitable.

The rest of your "issues" stem from your misunderstanding of who claimed what.

Stop reading other people's interpretations and get your info from the source.

More hyperbole in an attempt to refute the typical Tesla marketing scam!

"Note that even Sandy Munro has claimed the short-range model 3 to be profitable."

Munro's comment relates to the M3's possible direct costs and not Tesla's M3 cost when burdened with overhead, i.e. sales, R%D,
administrative costs, & CAPEX.

 

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

Your guess, have another? Your guessing tends to obfuscate the real issue, that a $35K M3 is basically not profitable
now. Remember just a few months ago Elon stated that the M3 cost was $38K. Even with all the overhead cost reductions,
e.g. sales operations, a $35K M3 has still resulted in being basically unprofitable in Q1 of 2019. Again as usual, it's all about
generating more reservations:

1. announce availability of the M3 at $35K in Q1 of 2019 and re-build interest
2. announce deliveries in a few weeks
3. start taking another round of reservations
4. wait a few weeks for reservations to accumulate
5. move $35K deliveries to future quarters, or don't even re-schedule
6. attempt to convert $35K reservations to higher priced M3s

Have many totally forgotten what happen just three years ago?

My "guess" at least isn't self contradictory. And Elon's statement was for the employees, worded as, "depending on how you count it": https://electrek.co/2018/11/30/tesla-model-3-production-rate-1000-day-maintain-reduce-costs/

Which means marginal costs plus factory underutilization during a recession, plus zero LR/performance take rates, etc. Basically worst-case scenario type stuff.

Elon had already stated during their conference call that they needed to ensure the survival of Tesla, even during a recession.

Note that even Sandy Munro has claimed the short-range model 3 to be profitable.

The rest of your "issues" stem from your misunderstanding of who claimed what.

Stop reading other people's interpretations and get your info from the source.

More hyperbole in an attempt to refute the typical Tesla marketing scam!

"Note that even Sandy Munro has claimed the short-range model 3 to be profitable."

Munro's comment relates to the M3's possible direct costs and not Tesla's M3 cost when burdened with overhead, i.e. sales, R%D,
administrative costs, & CAPEX.

Remember this post/repost back and forth between us and GRA? http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=18016&p=548212#p548186

I said back then that demand wasn't an issue, and that all the "concerns" out there were based on bad interpretations. Q1 results will be out soon, and we all know domestic deliveries have picked back up. Do you want to go on the record that it's all SR plus models, so that you can stay consistent with your limited demand thesis?

 

[lorenfb]

Q1 results will be out soon, and we all know domestic deliveries have picked back up.

Remember, the M3 shipments to Europe/China (~ 20-25K) in the early part of Q1 will probably distort the March actual
demand. Insideevs should indicate just the March U.S. M3 number, though. Tesla this week should report the total sales for
all three vehicles worldwide. Here's a CNN report late today;

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/01/business/tesla-sales-first-quarter-2019/index.html

 

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

Q1 results will be out soon, and we all know domestic deliveries have picked back up.

Remember, the M3 shipments to Europe/China (~ 20-25K) in the early part of Q1 will probably distort the March actual
demand. Insideevs should indicate just the March U.S. M3 number, though. Tesla this week should report the total sales for
all three vehicles worldwide. Here's a CNN report late today;

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/01/business/tesla-sales-first-quarter-2019/index.html

So not strong enough in your convictions to finish that claim about all those sales being SR plus huh?

 

[sparky]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Some Model 3 demand has been raised every quarter for the last year. Tesla, in Q1 2018 had about 29k deliveries. Does anyone expect Q1 2019 to be less than double that in spite of Tesla guiding for as many as 10k in transit? 100% growth YOY is very pretty.
The important details come in May when we see how FCF and OCF looks and the margins. The rest of this car counting is a fun exercise but not that important IMO. They'll ship few to Norway in April and we'll read about the "Norwegian demand cliff".
Batteries are all spoken for, every quarter.

 

[lorenfb]

Some Model 3 demand has been raised every quarter for the last year.

Sounds like the typical naive sales forecast, i.e. just do a linear regression on historical sales to forecast future sales, right?

 

[TomT]

Meanwhile, those of us that actually have Teslas just enjoy driving them and don't worry about it...

Some Model 3 demand has been raised every quarter for the last year.

Sounds like the typical naive sales forecast, i.e. just do a linear regression on historical sales to forecast future sales, right?

 

[Valdemar]

Meanwhile, those of us that actually have Teslas just enjoy driving them and don't worry about it...

Might end up being a back-loaded ride, but one can argue it is a part of the experience...

 

[jlv]

Meanwhile, those of us that actually have Teslas just enjoy driving them and don't worry about it...

We've now got almost 30 3's at work. About once a week or so I pick up a PM that's fallen off a drive unit and shove into one of the panel gaps. :lol:

 

[Valdemar]

At least rain is a relatively rare phenomenon here in Cali where Teslas sell particularly well.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCv_Ha0oWjE[/youtube]