Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[LTLFTcomposite]

One thing I can almost guarantee.. They say it will cost $35,000. But you can bet that is after the $7,500 tax credit. And you can also bet that is a base model with very little equipment. Which means the Leaf will still be around $10,000 cheaper.

At a minimum. They may throw another $2500 state rebate into that calculation. Sticker on this car will be north of 50 for all practical purposes.

 

[Zythryn]

One thing I can almost guarantee.. They say it will cost $35,000. But you can bet that is after the $7,500 tax credit. And you can also bet that is a base model with very little equipment. Which means the Leaf will still be around $10,000 cheaper.

Well, at least you said "almost".

Tesla does not expect the rebate to be around when the Model 3 comes out. It may still be around for the first few, but not for long.
I would be shocked if the Leaf still gets the federal rebate by the time 2017 comes around. Aren't they already closing in one 100,000 US sales? I expect in 2015, 2016 and the beginning of 2017 they will easily reach the 200,000 number.

I have never heard of any car business, when referring to the price of a new model, to use anything but the base model price.
I do not find it surprising that Tesla does the same.

 

[EVDRIVER]

One thing I can almost guarantee.. They say it will cost $35,000. But you can bet that is after the $7,500 tax credit. And you can also bet that is a base model with very little equipment. Which means the Leaf will still be around $10,000 cheaper.

Well, at least you said "almost".

Tesla does not expect the rebate to be around when the Model 3 comes out. It may still be around for the first few, but not for long.
I would be shocked if the Leaf still gets the federal rebate by the time 2017 comes around. Aren't they already closing in one 100,000 US sales? I expect in 2015, 2016 and the beginning of 2017 they will easily reach the 200,000 number.

More like about 50K in the USA since 2011, about 16K a year.


.

 

[adric22]

I have never heard of any car business, when referring to the price of a new model, to use anything but the base model price.
I do not find it surprising that Tesla does the same.

I make this statement based on how they are currently marketing the Model S. In fact, if you go to their website right now you'll see an advertisement of the Model S for $408 per month. That sounds very cheap.. until you start digging into that number and realize how many gimmicks they are putting in that number.

 

[TomT]

And I am sure the III will be worth every penny of that 10 grand, just in range alone!

One thing I can almost guarantee.. They say it will cost $35,000. But you can bet that is after the $7,500 tax credit. And you can also bet that is a base model with very little equipment. Which means the Leaf will still be around $10,000 cheaper.

 

[Zythryn]

I have never heard of any car business, when referring to the price of a new model, to use anything but the base model price.
I do not find it surprising that Tesla does the same.

I make this statement based on how they are currently marketing the Model S. In fact, if you go to their website right now you'll see an advertisement of the Model S for $408 per month. That sounds very cheap.. until you start digging into that number and realize how many gimmicks they are putting in that number.

Understood. So just how should a company advertise their product when it is available in a range of prices?

Perhaps the highest possible price?
Or the middle price?
Perhaps the average purchase price last year, last week, overall?

And when will other car companies stop using 'base' price and start doing the same.

As a sample, I went to the Product page at Nissan for the Leaf.
The headline price for it is $21,480.

As for TPO, I would like to start seeing more car companies use it. However, it is tricky as it varies depending upon what someone is currently driving.
A great example is how many people compared their Leaf lease plus electricity cost to their former cars gas bill alone and found it was very minimal.

To do this, it is critical that the numbers are all laid out, which I think Tesla does fairly well.

 

[adric22]

Understood. So just how should a company advertise their product when it is available in a range of prices?

Perhaps the highest possible price?
Or the middle price?
Perhaps the average purchase price last year, last week, overall?

I wasn't attempting to suggest whether Tesla's way of marketing the price was right or wrong. I was just using it to prove my point about how they will likely market the Model-III. Essentially proving evidence to back up my statement that the Model-III will most likely be a lot more expensive than $35,000.

 

[dgpcolorado]

One thing I can almost guarantee.. They say it will cost $35,000. But you can bet that is after the $7,500 tax credit.

From what I've seen of Musk's statements he was NOT referring to the after tax credit price. Whether Tesla can actually pull it off is another issue entirely. I have my doubts.

And you can also bet that is a base model with very little equipment.

Very likely. But Musk seems determined that even this base model will have a 200 mile range AND be Supercharger capable (but, will it?)...

Which means the Leaf will still be around $10,000 cheaper.

...Even so, I'd much rather have the Model III than a LEAF even if it did cost $10,000 more. With a Tesla I could go to one car, no ICE. And that's a huge advance in EV utility for me. Very much the "Holy Grail". And I rather think that I'm not alone in that view.

It remains to be seen if Tesla can pull it off. I'm rooting for them!

 

[qwk]

Expect the answer to "how fast" to be "a lot less". You can have a higher volume/lower margin car chewing up gears every 10,000 miles; that's a fast track to bankruptcy.

You have been listening to Jack too much. He doesn't know his a-hole from a hole in the ground.

 

[Nubo]

It seems to me that Tesla and Nissan are destined to duke it out, with Tesla aiming for a more reasonably priced EV, and Nissan aiming at a more capable EV. Both could use a little competition. It should be a good contest! Let the compliance weenies mope on the sidelines, like Mr. "Don't buy my car" Marchionne :roll:

 

[evnow]

Even so, I'd much rather have the Model III than a LEAF even if it did cost $10,000 more. With a Tesla I could go to one car, no ICE. And that's a huge advance in EV utility for me. Very much the "Holy Grail". And I rather think that I'm not alone in that view.

It remains to be seen if Tesla can pull it off. I'm rooting for them!

What if Leaf has a 150 mile range - and base Model 3 doesn't get supercharger access (that is $2k+ more).

 

[apvbguy]

competition spawns innovation! let the games begin

 

[cwerdna]

competition spawns innovation! let the games begin

Yep. That's the big upside I see from this. If Tesla succeeds in delivering what they claim (I'm guessing that $35K is after $7500 Federal tax credit and will be raised due to inflation or some other excuse, similar to http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false or something close to it, that'll spur improvements from others.

I kinda do wonder if they'll pull something like they did w/the 40 kWh Model S (http://www.teslamotors.com/about/press/releases/tesla-model-s-sales-exceed-target" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, saying low demand, "nobody wants it", etc.

Remember the Model S was originally just under "$50K" (after $7500 Federal tax credit) but then got the two above things. Now its starting price is $78,570 after destination charge, before tax and before tax credit.

 

[dhanson865]

competition spawns innovation! let the games begin

Yep. That's the big upside I see from this. If Tesla succeeds in delivering what they claim (I'm guessing that $35K is after $7500 Federal tax credit and will be raised due to inflation or some other excuse, similar to http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false or something close to it, that'll spur improvements from others.

I kinda do wonder if they'll pull something like they did w/the 40 kWh Model S (http://www.teslamotors.com/about/press/releases/tesla-model-s-sales-exceed-target" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, saying low demand, "nobody wants it", etc.

Remember the Model S was originally just under "$50K" (after $7500 Federal tax credit) but then got the two above things. Now its starting price is $78,570 after destination charge, before tax and before tax credit.

The 40KW model got killed because they wanted a substantial deposit for preorder and there was an insane wait time for the car to be released (they shoved the 85KW and 60KW orders out ahead of the paying 40KW customers). The longer people waited the more impatient they got and they ended up getting a significant amount of upsales from prior 40KW preorders.

Since the goal of Model E is volume I'm thinking any trim the offer is going to sell like hotcakes. Sure they can put the low KW battery on the back burner for a few months and slow it's sales but every new lower price point will pull in so many new customers I doubt they'll do the kill it with intentional delays dance this time.

Honestly I'm more concerned about the color of the paint and the tire/rim options (for efficiency not looks). I'm fine with the lowest capacity battery so long as it has a 10KW charger + supercharger capability or if they cheap out on lower KW chargers they offer a dual charger option that gets me to 10K+.

 

[cwerdna]

competition spawns innovation! let the games begin

Yep. That's the big upside I see from this. If Tesla succeeds in delivering what they claim (I'm guessing that $35K is after $7500 Federal tax credit and will be raised due to inflation or some other excuse, similar to http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/2013-model-s-price-increase" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false or something close to it, that'll spur improvements from others.

I kinda do wonder if they'll pull something like they did w/the 40 kWh Model S (http://www.teslamotors.com/about/press/releases/tesla-model-s-sales-exceed-target" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, saying low demand, "nobody wants it", etc.

Remember the Model S was originally just under "$50K" (after $7500 Federal tax credit) but then got the two above things. Now its starting price is $78,570 after destination charge, before tax and before tax credit.

The 40KW model got killed because they wanted a substantial deposit for preorder and there was an insane wait time for the car to be released (they shoved the 85KW and 60KW orders out ahead of the paying 40KW customers). The longer people waited the more impatient they got and they ended up getting a significant amount of upsales from prior 40KW preorders.

Since the goal of Model E is volume I'm thinking any trim the offer is going to sell like hotcakes. Sure they can put the low KW battery on the back burner for a few months and slow it's sales but every new lower price point will pull in so many new customers I doubt they'll do the kill it with intentional delays dance this time.
...

I'm fine with the lowest capacity battery so long as it has a 10KW charger + supercharger capability or if they cheap out on lower KW chargers they offer a dual charger option that gets me to 10K+.

Right, they produced in sequence where essentially the 85 kWh model was first then the 60 then the 40... and err.. we saw what happened to the 40. I recall it also essentially the highest/special trims that came first and/or there were some forced features in order to get yours earlier (e.g. air suspension).

All of the models required a substantial deposit.

I recall the 40 kWh Model didn't include Supercharger access nor hardware. The 60 kWh models weren't originally supposed to include the hardware either. From http://www.teslamotors.com/about/press/releases/tesla-model-s-sales-exceed-target" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tesla is also revealing a small Easter egg today: all 60 kWh cars have been and will be built with Supercharger hardware included. Tesla is taking a slight cost risk that ultimately all customers will want to buy the Supercharger upgrade and receive unlimited, free long distance travel for life. Even for those that never drive long distances, this will improve the resale value of their car to people that do.

I don't recall what the original price for adding Supercharging hardware (w/access) was. Now they charge $2K for Supercharger access on the 60 kWh model.

 

[evnow]

The 40KW model got killed because they wanted a substantial deposit for preorder and there was an insane wait time for the car to be released (they shoved the 85KW and 60KW orders out ahead of the paying 40KW customers). The longer people waited the more impatient they got and they ended up getting a significant amount of upsales from prior 40KW preorders.

The 40 kWh (not KW) option was killed because of supercharger implications. They would have to build one every 100 miles, instead of 150 or 200 so they do now. That is the reason they decided not to let the 40 kWh model have QC capability - and that effectively killed it.

This is also the reason, even the base gen 3 model will have 200 mile range - that makes supercharger infrastructure easier to develop.

BTW, for all those saying 35k is after tax credit - Musk has specifically stated it will be before tax credit.

So, we'll be looking at 3 options by 2018.

$30k 150 mile Leaf
$35k 200 mile Infiniti
$35k 200 mile Model III

I expect Leaf, Infiniti to be costlier in 2016 - and the price will be adjusted downwards depending on Model III price and availability.

 

[dgpcolorado]

What if Leaf has a 150 mile range - and base Model 3 doesn't get supercharger access (that is $2k+ more).

I presume that the base Model 3 won't have supercharger access and that it will be an extra cost option, in which case I would pay the extra charge.

A 150 mile LEAF that can't use Superchargers isn't of sufficient increased utility to justify the large cost of upgrading from my current LEAF, which I own, not lease. It still won't take me to Denver or to Portland, Oregon. Or even to Moab and back, which is right "next door" (145 miles one way) by my standards. So, what's the point of the 150 mile LEAF?

So, yes, $10,000 more for Supercharger capable Model 3 is of more interest than a 150 mile LEAF (and I presume that the longer range LEAF would be something like $5000 more than the current models).


It also remains to be seen whether Nissan will use up the 200,000 federal tax credits before Tesla. That seems to be is the current trend (but you're the expert in sales figures). The first Model 3s figure to get it. Will the 2018 model LEAF still qualify?

 

[dgpcolorado]

...BTW, for all those saying 35k is after tax credit - Musk has specifically stated it will be before tax credit...

Yes, that's the way I heard it also. Whether Tesla can achieve that price target remains to be seen — I am skeptical.

 

[evnow]

A 150 mile LEAF that can't use Superchargers isn't of sufficient increased utility to justify the large cost of upgrading from my current LEAF, which I own, not lease. It still won't take me to Denver or to Portland, Oregon. Or even to Moab and back, which is right "next door" (145 miles one way) by my standards. So, what's the point of the 150 mile LEAF?

$30k Leaf with 150 mile EPA range will still have CHAdeMO - which you would need to use 1/2 the times as you would do now to do that 150 mile trip (which a lot of folks do with the current Leaf).

As I noted, Nissan will price 150 mile range atleast $5k lower than Model III - but Infiniti will probably be priced the same (perhaps with a little bit more range ?).

I'd find it difficult to pick between Infiniti & Model III. If they have the same range - but Infiniti can use CHAdeMO that is everywhere (but less reliable) compared to superchargers that are in far fewer places but are more reliable.

 

[kubel]

The reality of a $35,000 Model III:

• It will almost certainly not arrive in 2017.
• The car is entirely dependent on success of gigafactory (not just being built, but running at sufficient production to see battery prices fall).
• It won't have the capability to DC fast charge.
• It won't have 20kW charging capability.
• It will probably have competition.
• Hatchbacks > Sedans.