Average Sale Price Of Tesla Model 3 Now At $59,000

AUG 22 2018 BY DOMENICK YONEY 103

Continues to increase in the short term

Famously, production of each new Tesla model begins with the most expensive version, then moves on to less expensive models as increased manufacturing brings down capital expense per car. This would mean we should expect to see the average selling price (ASP) decrease over time then, right? Well, not exactly. Now, the ASP for the Model 3 appears to be higher than ever at $59,000.

How could this be? Well, first things first: let’s talk about where we are getting these numbers. They aren’t official figures from the California automaker. Instead, we’ve found this particular tidbit in a tweet (embedded below) by @TroyTeslike, who published a graph using data pulled from a Google doc called the Model 3 Order Tracker. This site features the self-reported data of over 4,600 owners and future owners of the Tesla Model 3.

So, why is the average selling price up? It’s because the very first Model 3 production wasn’t actually the most expensive variant. Sure, they all have the Long Range battery and premium package with its top-spec seats and other goodies, but there are features that have arrived more recently that are pumping up the prices. Specifically, that would be the all-wheel-drive and Performance versions. Not only do these variants have the added cost of $5,000 for an extra motor, but the Performance version in particular also has a number of options not available on lesser versions of the Model 3 which tack on an additional $5,000 to the bottom line.

The ASP won’t stay this high, of course. When the much-touted $35,000 base version starts shipping early in 2019 we expect to see this number to move downward and then level off. For now, though, the increase in ASP is a great help to the company as it works to show a profit by the end of the 3rd quarter of the year.

Source: Twitter

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

103 Comments on "Average Sale Price Of Tesla Model 3 Now At $59,000"

newest oldest most voted
David Green

59K should be producing some good margin…

ModernMarvelFan

And the Gross Margin has been improving, but not enough for the $35K version yet.

$59K *80% is $47.2K, assuming 20% gross margin (close to what Tesla reported) on those versions right now.

$47.2K is $10K more than the $35K version. Despite the battery difference which is assumed to be about 25kWh at most. Even with $200/kWh at pack price, it is only $5K. There is NO way the other trims/options would cost $5K in difference.

Therefore, the $35K version is really questionable at this point. That is why Elon said that Tesla would die if they offer that version right now.

Doggydogworld

Good breakdown. Tesla guided to 15% gross margin this quarter, so their costs are currently even higher than 47.2k.

ModernMarvelFan

I thought it was 18%. Either way, 20% was just to buffer any selling price improvement. Even if we use the 30% gross margin which is on the high side, a $59K price means a cost of $41.3K. With $5K in battery saving, it would be $36.3K. The rest of the car doesn’t add much cost with those so called “options”. So, $35K Model 3 would be lucky to break even for Tesla.

But I imagine that is what Tesla wanted. Low base price to bring buyers in and milk them up the option ladder.

David Green

Botton line is Tesla is getting very close to real profitability on the Model 3, if you figure their OpEx at 25% of revenue which is less then it was in Q2. Its getting interesting for sure.

The 35K model 3 is the next hurdle, using Tesla quoted $100 per kWh cell cost, figure the cost reduction will be somewhere around 3K, but the net price reduction is 9K, This certainly will put some pressure on that margin, and I feel the people that have waited this long for the 35K car, most likely 35K is all they can afford, so they will have a lower take rate on the premium package, and EAP, which are the real margin makers.

Brian

The long range has much better performance than the short range and it might not be entirely due to battery size. With a 0-60 time around 6 seconds the short range model could have smaller brakes, softer suspension, smaller everything related driveline. Tesla does so much bundling with their options it’s really too early to tell. I’m holding out for a SR w/premium pke but if it’s a soft & spongy ride like a Camry I’ll look for a used Tesla instead.

David Green

Tesla is doing everything they can to reduce cost on the short range model, but coming up with 9K in cost reduction is going to be very tough (even half that tough), and then there is the reduction in revenue from EAP, and Prem package take rates, and the lack of the tax credit, the pressure is mounting for these buyers, and Tesla.

BenG

There is zero chance Tesla releases a Model 3 that is soft&spongy and rides like a Camry. Smaller and lighter battery, and I assume smaller and lighter rear electric motor will allow downsizing of other components, but be assured that Tesla will deliver a compelling entry level sport-sedan in the base level Model 3.

Dan F.

Many dreamed of getting the car for $27.5k plus delivery and tax (or $25k plus delivery and tax in California).

F150 Brian

How does Tesla get away with “low advertised price to attract and then offer higher price variant”?
California has an anti bait and switch law:

Bait and Switch: A seller offers an item at a very low price in order to lure in potential customers.
When the customers arrive, the low-priced item is not available, but another similar higher priced
item is available.

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-deceptive-trade-practices-laws.html

Tesla should stop mentioning a $35K car until they actually build it.

Vote me down if you want, it won’t hurt my feelings 😉

Acevolt

There is no $35K version on their website. If there was, that would be considered a deceptive practice. There are only Musk twitter comments that a $35K version will be available in the future.

Acevolt

This is on their website:
Standard Battery available in 5-8 months

ILikeToasters

Where do you see it advertised for $35,000?

Todd

There is not a mass market car made that isn’t advertised at its base price, when the majority sold are up-optioned. In this case, the 35k has only been announced, but never made available.

Unplugged

You have a basic misunderstanding of the law. Read it again. “A seller offers an item … the low-priced variant is not available,…”

The low-priced variant isn’t offered. Where is the $35K base version offered? The down votes aren’t for making the point. They are there for getting it wrong.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“The down votes aren’t for making the point. They are there for getting it wrong.”

Precisely.

pjwood1

Did you see a 35k Model 3 advertised in the “Sunday Paper”?

fotomoto

Tesla doesn’t advertise. 😉

Nix

The $35K version of the Model 3 has never been offered FOR SALE, only reservations for a future release date.

Tesla has always made it clear that you can reserve one, but their reservation is NOT a sales agreement. There is no bait.

If you go to a Tesla location, they will tell you the exact same thing, that reservations are not sales agreements. There is no switch.

Sadly, intentionally dishonest folks will try and continue to foster this false accusation of criminal action, so you will likely keep hearing this false meme over and over. But now you know better.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“When the customers arrive, the low-priced item is not available, but another similar higher priced
item is available.”

Yeah, that’s terrible how Tesla offers a $35k car to buyers to entice them into coming to the store, but when they arrive, high-pressure salesmen try to “steer” them into a more expensive model. 🙄

What? Doesn’t happen? Tesla isn’t actually claiming to have any $35k cars for sale, yet? And Tesla doesn’t use high-pressure sales tactics?

Well then, I guess you don’t have a point, do you?

I seem to remember you and others touting how the Bolt EV was overpriced because the Tesla Model 3 would be abailable first and with more range and a lower price point.

Now your statements above are a complete 180 from that.

Dante

There was never a time where the Bolt was coming after the Model 3.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Have you tried ginkgo or ginseng for your memory problem? 😉

Seriously, you’re correct to say that we Tesla fans were bragging about the Model 3 being less expensive than the Bolt EV. That turned out to be more than slightly wrong, as you rightly say. Elon predicted before the fact that the average selling price would be ~$42k, and obviously it’s rather north of that, at least so far. Perhaps he’ll be proven right in the long run, but if so that’s years in the future.

On the other hand, ClarksonCote, it’s rather strange for you to claim we thought the Model 3 would be coming out before the Bolt EV. I don’t remember ever seeing that claim from anyone who has both feet planted in the world I live in.

Also, as a reminder, what we are refuting is the claim above that Tesla pulled a “bait and switch” with the $35k MSRP for the Model 3. That is factually incorrect.

Terrible Tim

Where do you see Tesla offering a $35K Model 3?
No offer, no deception, no violation

pjwood1

If you listen to the call, Musk said he believed a 15% GM would be reached, even if ASPs fall to 40-45k this year. I took that as guidance. Boneheads were very well received, on this point. Musk also related how re-work “tooling” was a margin killer, and one of the first things they’re getting away from. I would take 59k ASPs as bullish, and treat margin talk as grossed up for the extra 25KWh, or from the 28k to low 30’s speculated cost.

Lastly, elasticity of demand was always intense for Model S, which is to say lower cost cars flew “off shelves”. If Tesla can poach Honda, at 55k, there’s a flood of demand waiting.

Indigoreefs

You are comparing the LR version with many options to the SR version with no options and you are assuming the options cost Tesla nothing. Whereas the bare SR version may not be profitable at this point it is likely profitable with the standard mix of options and even more profitable mandating the premium package. Many would rather spend $9k on AWD+EAP than on an extra 100 mile range.

ModernMarvelFan

I never assumed options cost nothing. In fact, my numbers explained that battery difference is about $5K at most. $5K remaining is for the rest of the options. Do you think it would cost Tesla $5K for the rest of the options? Autopilot hardware is built in for every version so the difference is just SW, thus no cost difference in gross margin. Options such as premium sound, nicer seats don’t add up to $5K in difference. If they did, then they aren’t profitable for Tesla at all with base version.

Chris O

Model 3 production cost was calculated to be as low as $28K provided serious production scale, like 500K/year. It’s all about economies of scale in the car business.

Rusty

$28k for the LR premium version they assessed at 10k/wk.
¤ 40% Battery
¤ 14% Electronics
¤ 11% Suspension
¤ 11% Interior
¤ 10% High voltage motor
¤ 8% Exterior
¤ 7% Chassis

Here is my math on this. Like you said, 59K at 20% GM is 47.2K COGS. A 59K Model 3 is basically a dual motor premium package LR vehicle. Ultimately, for the nominal range (NR) battery, the ASP will probably be around $42,000 (base plus basic AP, with some other mix of options). So Elon probably wont be targeting 35,000 for that GM, but rather around 40,000. I believe the overall ASP will probably be slightly under 50k. From what I’ve been reading about cars over the last 10 or so years (as long as I’ve been following EVs in depth), typically options have a 100% markup, that is the COGS is 50% of the price offered to the customer. So when Tesla offers a $5,000 “premium upgrades” interior the actual cost is probably around $2,500 as far as gross margin is concerned. $47,200 minus 2,500 for dual motor, 2,500 for premium interior, and 4,500 for LR battery is $37,700. Elon said that they’ve figured out a new module packaging format for the NR battery, at 50kWh it probably saves them $25/kWh, so that is only $1,250. Still at $36,450. Which would require an average selling price for the base… Read more »
Doggydogworld

The 28k is probably not COGS, but factory variable cost. That’s what teardown guys usually calculate.

David Green

Yes, and at 10K a week, which Tesla has barely hit half of, and the second half is much harder…

Nix

Actually, second half is easier. All of the one-time issues that come with bringing a new clean-sheet design to the market for the first time are resolved. The supply chain will have already been established and the pipeline proven. Supplier issues where individual parts need reworks will have been resolved. Getting to 7-8K units isn’t even going to require any line changes (source: Q2-18 quarterly call).

Adam H

I’d note that gross margin does not scale linearly with retail price. The gross margin is better on a $70,000 vehicle than a $50,000 vehicle or a $35,000 vehicle for that matter. In addition, as mentioned, volume contributes to improved margins by reducing fixed overhead and labor cost per vehicle. Depending on your interpretation of economics, there comes a volume level at which each marginal/incremental sale reflects only the cost of raw inputs, not labor or overhead, which are somewhat fixed in the larger picture. For example, a $5,000 dual motor option does not cost Tesla $4,000, I would bet it’s under $1,000.

The only question is at what volume the $35,000 Model 3 will become profitable, and only if the cost of materials is below $35,000.

I’d also add that Tesla will likely sell very few $35,000 Model 3 base/stripper examples as people like to add options and customize. It’s tough to find base model on dealer lots, why would Tesla be any different? The obvious counter argument is that the $35,000 Model 3 is well optioned.

Taylor Marks

The uptake for All Wheel Drive in Q3 seems suspiciously low to me.

Hasn’t the Model 3 VINs twitter account been consistently reporting over 50% of registered VINs before for AWD?

That would suggest that the ASP has maybe increased by even more than this person suggests.

Edit: Yeah, Model 3 VINs says ~70% of VINs have been for AWD ever since 6/28/18.

If you look at:
twitter(dot)com/Model3VINs/status/1032076802867384320

There’s an exchange between a few people. Estimates for ASP are between $61K and $62.5K. Comparable to this person’s estimate of $59K.

Doggydogworld

I agree AWD take rate is low. If it’s based on Q3 deliveries, though, it includes the 11k in-transits from Q2 which were almost all RWD. Also, I suspect reservation list members are more likely to self-report.

On the flip side, EAP take rate looks high. I’ll ask my local store people what they are seeing.

TroyTeslike

The chart only shows cars that are delivered so far in Q3.

Jason

Thought it was going in the $35K range…

bro1999

$35k Model 3? Anyone? Bueller?

Scott B.

Why would Tesla waste the battery cells (current limiting constraint) selling $35k cars, when they can use them to sell vehicles at nearly double that.

Taylor Marks

I think you have this backwards. If battery cells are the limiting factor, then they’d want to increase the number of standard range cars they’re making. Otherwise, they have an excessive supply of every other part of the car.

If they’ve got everything they need to build a long range car except they’re 25 kWh short for the battery, their options are to either sell 1 standard range car at $40K (remember the Premium Upgrade Package) or they can sell nothing and just sit on all the parts which they already spent ~$35K on.

This is exactly the scenario I expect Tesla to be in later this year, when most parts have ramped by 60% beyond where they are now, except Panasonic will only have ramped up battery cells by 30%.

Speculawyer

But you are assuming the $35K version is profitable. If it is not, you are MUCH better off making fewer large battery cars that do make a profit.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“I think you have this backwards. If battery cells are the limiting factor, then they’d want to increase the number of standard range cars they’re making. Otherwise, they have an excessive supply of every other part of the car.”

What? No. Just no.

If a product is supply constrained, then the manufacturer absolutely wants every unit sold to have the highest price the market will bear. If you can’t sell in quantity, then make up the shortfall, so far as possible, with a higher unit price.

Scott B. is correct in the hypothetical situation he described; but Tesla isn’t really supply constrained by Model 3 battery packs. They were for several months after Model 3 production started, but not any more. Panasonic may have logistics problems dealing with the way Model 3 production at the Fremont assembly plant has been fluctuating so wildly, but that doesn’t mean there is a bottleneck with battery supply. It’s just a logistics issue.

At least, that’s my reading of the situation. Hopefully I have an informed opinion, but I won’t claim everything I said here is established fact.

David Green

Next year, in limited quantity I would assume.

F150 Brian

According to the table in the article, there is no current plan for a $35K Model 3. The planned SR versions start at $40K plus mandatory D&D fee.

Tesla4theWin

WRONG the premium upgrade package will not be bundled in the standard range version, the table is not from Tesla just a speculator.

Shaun

Elon is just being kind to GM, so Bolt sales don’t go from almost nothing down to actual nothing.

Kbm3

Agree. This car is selling out at $50k minimum with no leasing or discounts, in limited markets.

What a runaway smash hit!

Sure blows away Bolt et. al.

Thanks for pointing it out.

David Green

Selling out? You driven by Lantrop (3 locations now) or Burbank?

Photos from this week… https://t.co/Svw2mmB3Xj

Kbm3

Yes. Selling out .

Surely you’re not falling for the lack of demand theory when Tesla has so many demand levers left to pull?

Are you reading shorts propaganda?

David Green

No, I am looking at pictures taken every few days… pictures/videos do not lie, or even exaggerate.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Dude, are you seriously trying to convince people that Tesla’s production has fallen to nothing just because they stopped using one parking lot or another for temporary storage?

Honestly, sometimes I wonder if you’re actually poking fun at the FÜDsters, because you take it so laughably over-the-top!
😆 😆 😆

The Tesla Model 3 is a roaring success! Not all the negative spin or FÜD in the world is gonna change that.

Tesla won. FÜDsters lost. Get over it.

David Green

No, Skabooska has been driving by the factory every day taking pictures of the parking lots and vehicle staging areas, it is very light compared with the previous weeks… Do you have an explanation for that?

Also the Lanthrop lots (3 of them now) had approx 3300 cars as of Monday, that is more then ever.

Yes, I think the demand has slowed, and Tesla has responded by slowing production… The only other possibility I can think of with the a=available information is that they are welding up and painting a bunch of car bodies to punch through final assembly next week a a 6K sprint…

Rebel44

How about Tesla just quickly moving cars from factory to parking lots like Lanthrop and overall improvements in logistics? That would make a lot more sense to me.

Speculawyer

Might not ever ship. Or just ship a few and then discontinue it. I just don’t know if they have costs down low enough for a $35K base model to be profitable.

I know that’s not a popular thing to say, but I like to be grounded in reality. I hope I am wrong. But when you want something to be true is when you need to be the most skeptical.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“Might not ever ship. Or just ship a few and then discontinue it.”

And a giant sink hole might open up and swallow the Fremont Assembly Plant.

Neither scenario seems likely.

Speculawyer

So let’s talk about that 40KWH Model S….

david cary

2013 is not 2019 would be my first response. Mostly because the purchasers are not the same. It took a leap in 2012/2013 to buy a car at $60k from a new company. The Model 3 is selling at over 10x the volume as 2012/2013 so the consumer is a totally different person.
Also 40kwh was somewhat limiting without superchargers and just being a little low on range. I remember as I was considering it. I could not justify the price for no supercharging (and none were near me yet). Wound up buying a 70 later.
A 210 mile car with supercharging vs a 160? without. Big difference.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“So let’s talk about that 40KWH Model S….”

What, again?!?!

For the 245th time (at least): Tesla cancelled the Model S40 because the pre-orders were only about 2% of the total orders. Let’s remember that the S40 was the smallest of three battery sizes… not just two, as with the Model 3. It wasn’t cost-effective for Tesla to put that version into production.

Tesla cancelling the short-range Model 3 is as unlikely as Tesla cancelling the S60 back when the S85 and the S60 were the only options. So this analogy FAILS.

BTW — It’s getting pretty tiresome pointing out this same thing over and over. It’s also getting pretty tiresome seeing people not exercising any critical thinking at all on this subject.
O_o

DEE

Great profits! $$$

Jeff

I imagine most people who put down deposits for the Tesla 3 were hoping to buy the $35k version. However, Tesla will try to make more of the $60k versions than the $35k versions for as long as they can, until the demand for the $60k versions have cooled down. After all, why would you make more low margin vehicles if the demand for high margin vehicles is still there, right?

I remember when my friend was considering buying a Model X, but with constant delays, the salesman was trying to get him to buy a Model S right then and there instead. I think this is what Tesla is trying to do: make the wait very long for the $35k car that people eventually give in and maybe order something in the $50k range that they can take delivery of sooner.

Todd

Your post is self-contradicting. You can’t simultaneously have most res holders hoping for 35k and continued demand for high margin configs. And your second paragraph does the same. Trying to move someone from an X to an S would result in a lower selling price, they were just telling your friend what was available now. Both of these situations are very simple: they are supply-constrained. No need to make a conspiracy theory out of it.

Jeff

Todd, you must have limited experience in retail. When you don’t have an item that someone wants, you try to sell them what you have. Time is the killer of all deals. If you make them wait indefinitely, they might go find something else.

Todd

What I said: ” Trying to move someone from an X to an S would result in a lower selling price, they were just telling your friend what was available now.”

What you responded: “Todd, you must have limited experience in retail. When you don’t have an item that someone wants, you try to sell them what you have.”

Do you even read?

Nix

Actually, very large sample sizes of reservation holders showed that the vast majority of reservation holders expected to purchase some options, and that only a small minority planned on buying the stripped down base model. (I’ve posted the source a ton of times).

This shouldn’t be surprising because this is exactly the same buying behavior as with BMW’s and Audi’s, and every other car maker. You are reading way too much into it.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Thank you.

I honestly can’t understand why anyone would believe that a large percentage of TM3 reservation holders want the absolute bottom-of-the-line, stripped down $35k version with absolutely no options at all. That doesn’t happen for other car models; why would it happen for the Model 3?

The idea that there is a vast pool of people just waiting to buy that version, and that version only, has always seemed to me like nothing more than just one more Tesla basher conspiracy theory… and not one of the more plausible ones, either.

Jeff

Nix, may I ask what sort of “options” a $60k Tesla Model 3 gets you? Would it be “some options” or “a lot of options” ? I don’t disagree, most people probably want some options, but a $60k Tesla Model 3 is close to double the base price, with extended range, sport pkg, etc. Sound like it’s being purchased by some early adopters, people who buy the 256GB iPhone X Plus instead of the 64GB iPhone X. Most people do probably want the base Tesla 3 with 1 option and 1 package like extended range or AWD as they deem necessary.

Todd

You know, you could just visit the Tesla site yourself and read the list of options instead of asking nix to copy/paste them here for you. Once you break down the PUP, there’s a list that would be pretty long to itemize here.

Vinay R

People will stretch budget to get Tesla model 3, ASP will stay high due to full $7500 federal credit available until end of the year, Once standard battery introduce , then people will start thinking may be All wheel drive and Autopilot are appealing option, so even next year ASP probably will be around 50 K

Nix

Overseas sales will also commence at roughly the same time as SR sales. So ASP will be based on both US and overseas sales.

Realdb2

Notably absent from this article is any mention of the fact Tesla has raised the price of certain options without explanation.

This could also be contributing to the increase in average sale price.

stimpacker

Most definitely.
Not happy with this lousy tactic.
They did that for the Model S. The rear facing child seat option kept going up.
Now paint and AWD just shot up.
Guess Wall Street pressure is working. Every $1000 increase translates to $100M profit over 100,000 cars.

Unplugged

@Real – What options have increased on the Model 3 are you referring to? There aren’t many – $35,000 base, $5000 premium package, $9000 battery upgrade, paint other than black increased $500, $5000 Autopilot, $3000 self-driving.

Other than the $500 paint increase, I don’t see any other options increased “without explanation.”

pjwood1

AWD was $4k, before going to 5k. The high take rate for AWD supposedly ate up front units enough that M3P front unit supply was prioritized.

stimpacker

Musk himself said in the past Model 3 AWD will be cheaper than Model S. That was true until recently when AWD demand shot up. Maybe he shouldn’t have said anything.

Nix

AWD was $5K. They cut the price for a while to $4k. Then the price went back to the original $5K price.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“Notably absent from this article is any mention of the fact Tesla has raised the price of certain options without explanation.”

I notice you aren’t complaining about the fact that Tesla has also lowered the price of certain options — also “without explanation”, as you chose to spin it.

throwback

Why would tesla make a 35K Model 3 when they are selling every one of the 49K+ cars they can make? My guess is the long range battery becomes the “standard” car with a base price of 44k or 45K. When sales slow, THEN they may make a cheaper model. This is basic retail economics, you don’t lower the price of a hot selling product.

leafowner

Exactly – my bet is they will begin shipping the higher priced ones oversea prior to selling the $35K one domestically.

pjwood1

…it’s as if Tesla had a put, on the falling ASP of its own car. One big cha..ching, all the way down. I feel those wanting a crack at 35k, and hope they follow through with at least “first to line up” orders, this year.

leafowner

If they move 45k cars in the 3Q – that is $2.6B in cashflow….not bad.

ModernMarvelFan

$2.65 Billion in Revenue, not cash flow…

*sigh*… financial ignorance among EV community is shockingly high!

trackdaze

Suggests demand for the LR RWD has flatlined
Cant be too much demand for AWD and P versions particularly at 60k+!!. Maybe another month or two at 10000+ sales.

Ordinarily, top spec versions represent about 20-25% of demand for any one model.

So either exports (beyond canada) of high spec vehicles are not too far off or base model is around the corner.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“Suggests demand for the LR RWD has flatlined”

No, it suggests Tesla’s Model 3 production has increased to the point that it can meet the domestic portion of the demand for that particular configuration of the TM3. This seems to be confirmed by people living in the U.S. now being able to order that configuration and finding almost no delay before being able to finalize their order.

Otherwise, I agree with your comments.

Speculawyer

Yikes. Good for Tesla….not good for the very widespread adoption of EVs. Hopefully this is just a blip from adding the dual motor & performance editions.

tftf

So that’s the mass-market car?

The Model 3 ASP should be half that price tag to deliver on Musk’s promises!

$30-35k ASP, not $60k.

People were fooled on $35k promises back in 2016. Fact.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“So that’s the mass-market car?”

We don’t care what you Usual Suspects call it. We Tesla supporters call it a roaring success for Tesla! And Tesla’s runaway success is what is really upsetting short-sellers like you — not which pigeonhole anyone tries to cram the Model 3 into.

Go Tesla!

tftf

Keep rambling.

The fact remains that other car companies now deliver EVs with a 60+ kWh battery (Hyundai, Kia, GM…) or very soon (Nissan, Renault…) at actual mass-market pricing.

Meanwhile Tesla kept promising a $35k car it can‘t deliver while their US tax credits are expiring.

On top of that Musk kept lying about „Funding secured“ without submitting proper documents to the SEC. Fact.

Speculawyer

The only other long range EV at a low price is the Chevy Bolt EV….and that reportedly loses several thousand per vehicle. It is not easy to build a cheap long-range EV. But is providing the best value right now.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“On top of that Musk kept lying…”

You complaining about someone else lying is about like a KKK member complaining about someone else being a bigot.

Speculawyer

It is a wide segment car. From the top of the line Performance Edition down to a base model. Very true that the base model is not shipping. Hopefully it will…maybe not. I hope they can at least ship a $40K version.

Pushmi-Pullyu

So does this mean that Tesla can put the base model $35k version of the Model 3 into production sooner? I hope so!

Go Tesla!

NL

You can get a really nice BMW 3 sedan for around $40K.

Cypress

But then you would be driving a POS ICE car.

Speculawyer

But why?

John

You must be new to this site, folks around here have a preference for electric.

Cypress

“Famously, production of each new Tesla model begins with the most expensive version, then moves on to less expensive models“

So we should first expect SR with Premium Upgrade Package first. Before we see the $35k base version.

Todd

That wouldn’t surprise me, mostly for production efficiency. PUP has a host of small changes.

Speculawyer

Probably. Although that seems like a bad consumer choice to me. I’d rather have the long-range battery without the premium upgrade pack than premium upgrade pack without LR battery.

BenG

I expect that the long-range without premium upgrade will be the next Model 3 to be released to the public, since it requires very little change to produce. Then I agree that the short-range will probably be released with premium upgrade only at first, to preserve margins as much as possible while they role out the short range version. short range AWD version availability next, then after those have been in mass production for a few months we will finally see the base model.