Musk Provides New Timeline For Arrival Of $35,000 Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

MAY 21 2018 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 182

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has finally elaborated a bit on when we should expect to see the base, $35,000 version of the Tesla Model 3 finally arrive.

Over the weekend, news of the Performance and Dual-Motor versions of the Tesla Model 3 made headlines, but with price tags of up to $86,000 loaded, the vast majority of the world can’t afford such a car.

What we are waiting on, and we suspect a large chunk of the rest of the potential Model 3 buyers, is that long-promised base version of the Model 3. You know, the one that supposedly costs only $35,000.

Related – Tesla Model 3 Arrives: 215 Miles Of Range, $35,000 – Full Details

Well, it seems we now have some idea as to when the base Model 3 will arrive. Of course, it’s much, much later than first promised by Tesla, but better late than never, right?

According to Musk, on reveal night of the Model 3:

“You will not be able to buy a better car for $35,000, even with no options.”

So, when’s that car coming? Via Tweet, Musk lays out its arrival like this:

While the original timeline for producing 5,000 Model 3s per week is way behind us now (December 2017 was first promised), the new targeted month is June, so if we’re to believe the words in the Tweet above, then the $35,000 Model 3 will start shipping as early as September of this year or as late as December/January.

When do you think the first $35,000 Model 3 will be delivered?

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

182 Comments on "Musk Provides New Timeline For Arrival Of $35,000 Tesla Model 3"

newest oldest most voted
bro1999

Elon loves the “3-6 months” timeline. He’s used that timeline….twice, for the arrival of Full Self Driving (still no FSD btw).
At least this time he’s left himself some wiggle room by not giving an actual date. Though if we hold him to his “5k/week” claims, that would mean base Model 3’s should start being produced 4th quarter of this year (ha!).

He also just admitted they never had an intention of producing base Model 3’s in 2017 (and likely none this year either), since Tesla would “die” if they did. If he had mentioned that fact when he had that grand Model 3 reveal in 2016 when deposits started being taken, there likely would have been much fewer takers.

Viking79

Nothing has changed, 3-6 month delay would have been Mar to Jun, now it is pushed back due to Model 3 ramp being pushed back. He planned to release it in 2017.

Elon has implied all along that the $35k model was contingent on getting production smoothly running by saying they would focus on well optioned models first. Some people chose to hear otherwise.

wavelet

“All along”? I’d like to see a single quote in that vein anytime before July 2017.

Mint

Come on, Tesla always released top spec Signature models first. Before the launch Tesla said S/X owners first, California first. At the launch, Elon made it clear he wasn’t confident about deliveries beginning at the end of 2017. If you thought the $35k would be available in early 2018, you weren’t paying attention.

Mr Bonehead

What does this quote from your Messiah on April 1, 2016, infer to you?

“Model 3 orders at 180,000 in 24 hours. Selling price w avg option mix prob $42k, so ~$7.5B in a day. Future of electric cars looking bright!”

That infers a $35k car with “avg options” or a base car at $35k, yes it infers one could buy a $35k base car. Nothing more, nothing less!

EVERY article in 2016 spoke of a $35k Model 3 and NO ONE from Tesla corrected this assertion….come on man!

Nix

What part of average do you not understand? “average” implies a data set collected over time. Now that timeline is being clarified.

Terawatt

It’s very hard to achieve an average that’s lower than the lowest price at which the product is available. Clearly the $42k average implies a significant volume at a price well below that average. But the cheapest Model 3 so far made was $48k, or is it $49k?

arne-nl

The timeline which Musk implied has not finished yet. Many of those first-day reservationists are holding out for the base model.

Bill Howland

Sounds like the old Abbott and Costello Joke of “You don’t want that Girl – she’s too old for you. ”

“What do you mean? I’m 40 and she’s 20”.

“Well she’s half your age right now. But in 20 years she’ll be 2/3rds your age. In 40 years she’ll be 3/4 of yours.”

“Oh I see what you mean, after a while she’ll shoot right by me!”.

So after a LOOOOONNNNGGGG time the $48,000, $76,000 and $86,000 cars will fade into the average. Ok, got it!

Bill Howland

Also in EVERY ARTICLE about the upcoming Chevy Bolt ev, which was advertised as being $30,000 after federal tax credit, this price was laughed at since the MODEL 3 was CERTAIN to be $27,500 after federal tax credit since Musk said the ‘3’ was going to be $35,000. So it was a commonly held view at the time that the ‘3’ was going to be so much cheaper than the Bolt ev, and therefore much too expensive since you could get a Tesla for much cheaper and who wouldn’t want that?

At least the Chevy statement was correct: The place where I bought my BOLT EV has a ZERO OPTIONED 2017 brand new for $22,500 after fed tax credit. NY State gives an additional $2000 off, so that’s $20,500.

$20,500 for a brand new, 238 mile ev. Definitely more expensive than a Model 3.

Roey

May I ask where in New York you found that deal? I’ve seen it in Massachusetts, but I’d like to recommend it to people in New York.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“It’s very hard to achieve an average that’s lower than the lowest price at which the product is available.”

What part of “average price over time” do you not understand?

That’s like claiming in 1985 that it would be very hard for the worldwide average price of a cell phone to be less than $5000! At that time, it was certainly true. Today, not so much.

Steven Loveday

+1

Get Real

That is why he is named–Mr. BoneHead!

arne-nl

Mr. Bonehead, did you miss the point where only 20 k or so of those >400k reservations have been fulfilled as of now? Of the other 380k still waiting for their delivery, many will have to be fulfilled next year when the $35 k base model becomes available.

You’re judgement is way too early.

Roy D Olson

And non of the low priced ones will get the full $7500 tax credit if they go to next year.

arne-nl

I’m afraid so. However that is not the point here.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Probably true. But Tesla never, ever included the tax rebate in the price they quoted. Some journalists did, but that’s not Tesla’s fault.

EVShopper

And yet, immediately after the reveal, when I made predictions that the $35k version would be produced and delivered last after other higher end configurations, I got called a hater and troll. I’m not, just a realist. Now those Tesla faithful that are blind to reality and that have convenient amnesia, are defending the move as the right thing to do for Tesla. (Which was my argument long ago).

arne-nl

If I just simply search around a bit, I find for example this article: https://altfuelautos.com/tesla-all-electric-model-3-a-reality-impending-production-hell/ stating that initial deliveries will be the long-range, premium interior versions. Implying that the base model would come later.

So it was common knowledge by then and everybody knew how Tesla performs production ramps. Being called a hater and a troll for stating the obvious/well known is hard to believe for me.

Sil

1. The article you linked mentioned deliveries of 35k M3 around November 2017.
2. It was written end of July 2017 anyways so it doesn’t prove at all that in march 2016 people who preordered knew it would take ta least 14 months after first M3 produced to get a 35k M3 – and don’t worry, 35k M3 in September won’t happen anyway unless Musk really wants to bankrupt Tesla.

arne-nl

My bad, misinterpreted the ‘reveal’ event.

Get Real

Um, anyone who has any sense of history regarding Tesla knew, or should have known, that higher margined and optioned cars would come first.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Judging the average Tesla fan by the comments posted by a few LMJs* doesn’t exactly show good judgement on your part. What it does show is bias.

*Loud-Mouthed Jackarses

Get Real

Here, let me fix that for you:
Some TROLLS chose to hear otherwise.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Exactly. This is nothing but more Tesla bashing from FUDsters apparently suffering from selective memory loss — or more accurately, pretending to. Just because one can find a few ignorant comments from people who know nothing about Tesla’s history, doesn’t mean the average Tesla fan was claiming the $35k version would be available for early buyers. The clueless can unfortunately be found posting on any and every subject, including both Tesla fans and Tesla haters.

TeslaPlease

‘Elon has implied all along that the $35k model was contingent on getting production smoothly ‘

You Lied!!!

You sit on several EV blogs each and very day and now you make up lies.

Elon marketed a Base $35K vehicle and noted the available incentives knowing he could not deliver under the best conditions. in 2018, he still is promising to honor the price he quoted and is now dancing around the misrepresentations.

Serves him right for being shown as a con-artist. I hope a class-action lawsuit makes him have to honor that $35K price for those who placed their reservations.

Get Real

Serves you right for being a con-man FUDster hoping for a lawsuit to do what your whiney, repetitive serial anti-Tesla trolling can’t accomplish you loser!

Pushmi-Pullyu

“You Lied!!!”

A serial Tesla basher and troll calling someone else a liar.

Almost like hypocrisy. 🙄

Dave

If Tesla releases the 35K model by January 2019 thats 18 months after Model 3 production started. Imagine if real auto companies were this slow to get the base model out…

tester

It took GM a full year to get the Bolt for sale nationwide.

Dave

Do they have the Bolt nationwide now?

Tim Miser

But you could get the base model Bolt on day one.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Not likely. In the early weeks and months of the Bolt EV’s troubled rollout, it was difficult or nearly impossible for anyone to buy a Bolt EV who had not pre-ordered one.

Lots of selective memory loss seems to be on display in comments here, and very little of it is coming from Tesla fans!

Mint

If “real auto companies” had 400k refundable deposits for a car, they do the same thing. It’d be sheer stupidity to do anything else. Why delay the higher margin sales to a time when they could change their mind?

Let’s say 5000 of the Model 3s produced so far were the base version instead. Those who want the long range now have to wait longer. One person waits less, the other waits more. How is that so much better for the world?

Pushmi-Pullyu

Yup. Before long it will be the “real auto companies” who will be imitating Tesla’s sales strategies, not vice versa!

Phil

Instead, legacy car companies release new electric vehicles and limit production numbers on them because they lose money on each vehicle sold.

Prad Bitt

It’s the other way around, they lose money ( not even sure of that with such high price tags) BECAUSE they limit production, preventing the normal obvious economy of scales to kick in.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Now here is someone who has been paying attention.

Get Real

Really?
How about:
Imagine if the laggard, legacy OEMs would even start delivering compelling long-range BEVs that would be superior to their LICE models and start eroding that LICE market share???
I say this because it hasn’t happened yet and their is exactly ONE non-Tesla long-range (200 mile range) BEV on the market in the sold in compliance numbers Bolt.

Get Real

LMAO, serial anti-Tesla troll and shill for GM stealerships Mental MadBro is getting nervous as Tesla is only a few months away now from delivering a Model 3 at very large quantities and at a better price then the Bolt.

And BTW, nothing is stopping GM except itself from making more then the 25,000/year or so Bolts that Musk correctly identified that GM would make for largely compliance reasons so why don’t you advocate to GM corporate to get off their asses and compete rather then carpet-bombing and trolling the Tesla threads here with your whiney, repetitive FUD????

And, are you getting your resume out MadBro?

Kdawg

Makes me glad I didn’t wait. One of my concerns was missing the full $7,500 tax credit and it appears those getting the $35K version will.

Viking79

Elon never once referred to the $35k Model 3 with incentives. This to me was a clear sign they knew that incentives might not be available for it when they released it. It makes sense to sell the more expensive version when incentives are still going.

Terawatt

The only thing any reservation holder who’s not yet ordered has lost is interest minus the tax on that interest. In my case, I’ve lost 200 NOK of interest, but payed 54 NOK less taxes (27% on capital income in Norway). If I were to pull out and have my money back I will have suffered a financial loss over the two years of slightly more than a Burger King menu. And I don’t need those calories 😉

pjwood1

Tesla took the better part of a year to offer a cheaper 5-seat Model X. To get profitable at 35k, things like a manually adjustable steering column and the other deletions needs to happen, in Model 3.

I bet unless we see a $40k small-battery (Prem Int) version, first, we won’t actually hit 35k until deep into Q1, or possibly even Q2 2019. -My speculation.

IOW, I think you played it right Kdawg.

When do we call it official, that 200k mark happens in Q3? I bet Mr. Loveday has an idea how many Model 3’s could stack up before July 1?

Pushmi-Pullyu

So far as I know, WadeTyhon is still predicting the 200,000 mark will be passed this quarter — Q2. He seems to have better sources of info regarding production than those predicting it will happen in Q3.

Or at least, that’s my opinion and my conclusion.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

I’ve always been a 2020 buyer. I have to pay off my now car first. My expectation has always been I wouldn’t get the rebate.

Darth

If Tesla dies, no one gets a $35,000 M3. Better late than never.

dan

The math about the model 3’s or any other electric car’s viability at current battery prices hasn’t really changed in years. It’s the same reason why most other car makers did not plan on entering volume production till 2020 or 2021. The difference with Tesla is that they claimed to be selling a $35k car in 100s of k per year at a time when only the true faithful (who didn’t care about the math) believed them. If they manage to satisfy those 400k deposit holders who believed they could get their car st 35k (already a stretch for many of their finances with the 7500 incentive), then Tesla would have pulled off a marketing coup. The flip side is equally likely – a lot of disgruntled deposit holders waiting in line as people cut in front and buy their 80k car.
People like me who knew what our budgets would look like in 2019, didn’t wait and bought more appropriate and cheaper cars that fit our lives.

pjwood1

But Tesla (and China) is setting the pace battery prices move. We know it isn’t the rest of the auto-industry. They are the ones achieving in-house economies, and buyers know the appropriate way to make a decision isn’t when other manufacturers are handed the results of scale (that early adopters & gov’t are effectively subsidizing), but instead when their own budgets or preferences for better function point to an EV.

Much of the auto industry just decided you want a truck.

dan

Actually, most buyers don’t care that company A died for the cause and company B makes cheaper electric cars as a result. If that were the case, we would all still be using blackberries. Apple and Samsung benefited from the market that blackberry defined and painstakingly created. Many of us who swore by blackberries in the corporate setting (we were called crackberries!) simply ditched it for an iphone when the market turned.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Yes, but I’ll argue that the iPhone was an exception. Buyers were confident of the Apple brand, because it had been around for decades in the computer market. Apple wasn’t likely to vanish quickly even uf the iPhone turned out to be a flop.

Buyers of automobiles are even more likely to be concerned about the long-term survivability of the auto maker; most need to feel confident that they will be able to get parts and service for 7-15 years (or in some cases even longer) after they buy the car. Much as I’m a fan of Tesla, the long-term survival of the company is still in question.

Get Real

BS, the math on battery costs keeps changing all the time because they are declining in cost/gaining in capability all the time and that is what Tesla is lining up to make the base Model 3 profitable for them:
comment image

dan

You’re only proving my point. The model 3 “will become” profitable at some point in the future. At that time, most of the other automakers will also jump in because the business case makes sense. At the moment, there is no way that Tesla can undertake large scale manufacture at 35k and survive without massive infusions of stupid-capital.

Get Real

LMAO, I proved my point, not yours.

BTW, APPLE as the company synonymous with high-end cell phones and support systems is where the Tesla brand is going with its first mover advantage so graciously given it by the laggard OEMs scared to death of killing their own LICE sales by making a superior product in a compelling BEV.

Tesla has by a substantial margin, the lowest battery costs in the industry and when they get to a certain scale in about 6 months and its pricing advantage by that scale then they will release a profitable base Model 3.

Meanwhile. the laggard, legacy OEMs continue to flounder since they have not built up the supply and scale to compete with Tesla in mass producing compelling long-range BEVs.

Instead they have been literally dragged kicking and screaming by Tesla to the very beginnings of starting to line up battery supplies at a scale that might make them competitive, compelling EV makers in the future.

Advantage-Tesla.

Dave

One thing I think you miss in your math is that Tesla buys its battery cells from Panasonic, and Panasonic is profitable making batteries, so that means Tesla is giving away some of the system profit to Panasonic. What about when Toyota parters with Panasonic, or as I expect is in the works right now acquires Panasonic? I think this has been in process for some time and that is the real reason VW went hog wild locking up battery supply contracts with CATL, LG, and Samsung. When you look at Toyota’s history they typically purchase their major suppliers, like Denso, and Aisin-Seki.

Pushmi-Pullyu
I gotta give credit to the anti-Tesla FUDsters: Their ability to create an endless stream of conspiracy theories to justify their ongoing predictions that Tesla is going to collapse, indicates a great deal of creativity on their part! Too bad they can’t use that creativity for something positive. 🙁 If Panasonic was in the market for selling out its battery division to any auto maker, it would have been VW, which so far is the only legacy auto maker to commit to spending significant amounts of money on building out new factory capacity for making kWh of batteries. It certainly wouldn’t be selling out to Toyota, which is still loudly predicting that there is no market for BEVs using current battery tech. Toyota is trying to peddle ridiculous fool cell cars, and claiming some nebulous solid state battery tech which is still in the early R&D stage, which they own, is gonna make BEVs profitable maybe a decade or two from now. In other words, Toyota simply is not interested in building compelling BEVs in large numbers. I don’t think it makes any sense for any auto maker, larger or small, to buy out a battery maker. What makes sense… Read more »
Spider-Dan

Apple is a bad example of a “first mover,” but a great example of a hype train. Apple wasn’t the first in the touchscreen smartphone market – Windows Mobile predated iPhone by years – but Apple was better at manufacturing hype.

And Apple hasn’t been a tech innovator in smartphones for a long time; they have been belatedly copying Samsung featuresets ever since Steve “Users don’t want big phones” Jobs died. Android absolutely crushes iOS in marketshare and Galaxy phones have had better tech than iPhone since early in Obama’s second term… but Apple is still selling sizzle over steak.

And that’s fine for Apple. They have a big enough war chest that they can continue to ride on brand cachet and me-too features. But Tesla doesn’t have those kind of luxuries. Tesla is one bad launch away from ceasing to exist.

JoeInthe UK

All mostly true but missing a couple of key facts.
Apple makes at least 90% of all the profit in the smartphone market. There have even been years when Apple made more than 100% of the profit to be made in the smartphone market.
Whilst WM pre-dated iOS, what was revolutionary about the iPhone wasn’t the OS features, it was the absence of a physical keyboard.

So, getting back on track, assuming Tesla get M3 production sorted above 5k*, Tesla will be one of the few manufacturers actually making profit on their EVs. GM might if they ramped up production of the Bolt they could spread the cost over a large number and get into profit. If manufacturer produce in compliance quantities then profit wont be there almost by definition.

* and that surely has to be on 2 shifts, i dont see how 3 shift working is long term sustainable

Prad Bitt

Take the Mercedes AMG C 63 S Coupe, for example. A fully-loaded version of the car costs just slightly over $106,000. A fully-loaded BMW M3? $91,759. As for the Audi RS5, a fully-loaded version will set back owners $93,325. With this in mind, the Model 3 Performance’s $78,000 price is actually a pretty good steal.

Pushmi-Pullyu

The math about the model 3’s or any other electric car’s viability at current battery prices hasn’t really changed in years. It’s the same reason why most other car makers did not plan on entering volume production till 2020 or 2021.

Yes, but only because they refused — and still refuse — to commit to volume production. They know quite well the advantage of the economy of scale in lowering the per-unit price of a car. Tesla is betting on a lower unit price using volume production, and has built the Gigafactory One to produce enough kWh of batteries to supply that volume of production.

In general, the other auto makers (other than BYD) have not. It looks like VW has made a serious commitment to move in that direction — at least, I hope that is true and not more of BW’s EV vaporware. But it’s going to be at least two years until VW can see volume battery cell production, and even longer for other legacy auto makers who still are not making serious plans for ensuring high volume battery production.

Dave

Good Point…

Terawatt

That’s certainly true. And also not relevant to the charge of dishonesty. It’s beyond don’t that Tesla consciously use hype to it’s advantage, it in other words is just like any other corporation in terms of moral fibre (it has none).

Andreas Hopf

Like Tesla’s “battery swap station network” or “the Model S paying for the Model X paying for the Model 3” the “affordable mass-market $35,000 Model 3” remains a vapourcar over two years since the March 2016 launch.

It was only announced to garner interest-free $1,000 loans and media attention, as with most things Elon Musk – just another swindle in an incessant string of swindles.

The company needs to sell these price-wise “mini Model S” with a high ASP to fabricate the Q3 profitability story; it needs good ZEV, GHG and CAFE credit sales for that end, too.

bro1999

It seems obvious that even if/when the $35k ($36k with the $1k delivery fee) arrives, it will live a very short life since it is a money loser, as Elon just stated. The “new” base Model 3 will start at $40k+ as Tesla will make one of the pricey upgrades (AP/PUP/AWD) standard. Mark my words.

ffbj

It loses money when the number produced is below 5k/week, and then it makes money after that, is what he implied.
There will a 35k version, next year, January-March, though it will actually comes in at 36k with destination charges.

Djoni

It could, but that will just add to your frustration of not having one.
I sympatize with you having to compromise for a lesser and boring car.

Cheer!

bro1999

No frustration here. In my world, real cars trump vaporware. 😀 Only frustration is likely from the people that waited in line on 31 March 2016 that got duped into thinking they could get a $35k Model 3 in 2017…or at least before the fed credit started getting phased out.
Luckily some of them wised up and converted their deposits and Bolted (or bought other vehicles).

Leeper

Hehe, “bolted”, I see what you did there

Nix

bro8008 — Your decked out Bolt delivered to your state cost you as much as a Tesla Model 3 Long Range in black with stock wheels and no luxury package. I definitely understand your rage.

But nobody had heard anything from Tesla indicating they would get any car on any firm timeline when they put down their reservation in March 2016. In fact Tesla went out of their way NOT to even hint at a firm timeline and making sure everybody understood they were providing NO dates for delivery to even the first customers, much less people down the line.

Nix

But thanks for reminding us that the biggest loudest whiners regarding Tesla time frames are maroons who never put down a reservation, would never buy a Tesla, and are not at all personally impacted by any Tesla production timeline.

Derp

This whiner personally would have bought a Tesla if they could deliver something sub-$40,000 this year. It’s clear that won’t happen but now I have even less to whine about – in fact I am thanking Elon, among others, for pushing the market forward enough so folks like Chevy would come and try to compete, or at least dip their toes in. When I was convinced I wanted to go electric, I got to go do a test drive and also buy the Bolt I wanted right out of dealer inventory, part of that is Tesla’s doing.

Get Real

Right, in your world of sleazy Stealerships, a sale is a sale is a sale and the high maintenance revenue for problematic LICE vehicles is even more profitable then new car sales.

To bad for you that Tesla is destroying that antiquated and monopolistic business model.

stimpacker

bro1999
As a manufacturer, I won’t be concerned if there are some “Bolters” if I had a huge order backlog.
As a customer, I am happy and wish for more “Bolters”.

As an EV advocate, I’ll say if you can’t wait, then yes, get a Bolt or Leaf today but don’t kick yourself when a $35K (or even $42K) TM3 pulls up next to you a year later. You may get a good deal on a Bolt/Leaf plus rebate, Teslas have no discounts so no need to kick yourself too hard. I’ll go further to say that there is nothing wrong in keeping your Bolt/Leaf and getting a TM3 later.

Win-win for all EV’s.

Pushmi-Pullyu

bro1999 said:

“No frustration here.”

Maybe it’s not frustration and jealousy of Tesla car owners; maybe it’s the sheer terror of your near-certainty that Tesla is going to drive GM out of business and you are gonna lose your job!

Why else would a claimed GM fanboy like you spend so much more time bashing and posting FUD about Tesla than you do in talking about GM’s cars? Why else would you, MadBro, make so many off-topic comments about Tesla in response to InsideEVs articles having nothing whatsoever to do with Tesla?

carcus

“…at $40k+ as Tesla will make one of the pricey upgrades …”

That could happen — Some version of the AP that will allow ACC and LKAS, would be my guess at the most likely “mandatory-non-mandatory” upgrade. (and it’ll be $39,890, before the destination charge)

/Honda and other OEM’s used to offer a few “lead-loss” vehicles that looked like a good deal until you sat down for a test drive and realized … “where’s the cruise control”?
//having said that, .. if you’ve waited this long for an affordable model 3, .. might as well wait another 6 or 9 months and see what happens, imo.

Alonso Perez

It will have a long life because the federal credit will be gone. Few people will buy one though. I expect the most popular model will be the base plus a couple of options, like the premium package and a paint color. In effect this will be a 41k car at the low end, and at full production rate should make money at that price.

Get Real

Winner here!
And this is why Musk said they anticipate the average Model 3 to cost about $42,000 which is remarkably close to what the average 3 series vehicle costs but Musk knows that the Model 3 is a far better vehicle then those 3 series, Audie a class and MB C class LICE garbage.

Rafael Sabatini

Audi doesn’t build an “A” class. All their sedans and coupes’ base configuration is denoted “A_”

Mint

That’s not much of a prediction. By the time current reservations are filled, it will be 3 years from the time of product announcement, and inflation will increase price. Non-black + delivery is $37k, add inflation, and you’re almost at $40k.

The $35k being a long term money loser would also be a strong statement about Tesla’s future profitability and addressable market, and thus would make their stock tank. I don’t see it happening.

Get Real

The only LOSER here is yourself and your fellow trolls since little tiny upstart Tesla has successfully disrupted the stagnant, non-innovative laggard auto OEMs into starting to take compelling BEVs seriously and the real world will thank them for this in good time.

Get Real

Sorry Mint, my comment was NOT aimed at you but rather aimed at MadBro.

Someone out there

A company that can’t even pay its bills is disrupting no one but itself. Tesla will be gone at the latest in 2019.

SansIce

keep shorting troll – you must be a glutton for punishment

arne-nl

This was the plan from the beginning. First the higher specc’ed versions, then the base version. Tesla did the same with the Model S and X. Every single one of those paying the $ 1000 deposit knew this. No one got swindled.

Wadda ya tellin’ me there? They run their business with the goal to make a profit? Unacceptable! Call your congressman!

Duh, of course they need to sell those higher priced versions first. Doing it any other way would be stupid. They’re a friggin’ business, not a charity.

Mr Bonehead

arne-nl And yet this “business plan” wasn’t disclosed to the great unwashed disciples of Tesla when the plunked down their $1k deposits for the $35k car Elon promised for 2017 or early 2018…nothing to see here folks, move along as we need to clean up the wreckage!

Nix

There was never a promise of any date at all when they opened up deposits. In fact Tesla went out of their way to state that they DID NOT have firm dates.

arne-nl

Which part of “Tesla never made a promise to any customer about when his or her preferred Model 3 configuration would be available” is so hard for you to understand?

Oh, and another thing, those ‘poor’ reservation holders can cancel their reservations any time they want and get a full refund. That would cost them maybe 10 bucks in lost interest. Wow, swindle of the century.

Pushmi-Pullyu

There were, sadly, a lot of Tesla fans who had convinced themselves that Tesla was actually going to offer the base $35k model from day 1, and offered various arguments to support that wishful thinking in comments posted to IEVs, despite Tesla’s clear history of starting production by offering only higher trim levels, or even only the highest “Founders’ Series” trim level. Tesla didn’t produce a “Founders’ Series” for the Model 3. Perhaps they should have, to drive the point home!

But to confuse that wishful thinking with a “promise” from Tesla is a rather extreme example of selective memory loss! 🙄

Get Real

Looks like BonerHead is just the latest anti-Tesla troll new username who can’t do math.

I wonder which existing hater he is with a new re-registered username?

pjwood1

Mr. Bonehead’s boring comment doesn’t seem to understand Teslas capital paradigm, where the line between customer and financier gets blurred. Where car owners and shareholders both reach to get what they’re paying for, and are often the same individual. Maybe less for Model 3, but there the investment is patience.

Mister G

Tesla’s business plan is no secret and has been available from the very beginning of Tesla. CONNECT THE DOTS ON CLEAN AIR WAKE UP

theflew

The question is does a $35k model 3 make a profit for them regardless when it’s produced.

bro1999

Doubtful. The only way they offer the “$35k base 3” in any significant number is if the ratio of $78k+ Performance 3’s is high enough. Those sales will be needed to offset the loses from the base 3. If the take rate of PM3s doesn’t meet expectations, expect the extinction of the “$35k base 3”. Replaced with a $40k+ base model.
Tesla has done the same exact thing with the S and X (now defunct S40 and remember the X60?)

Mint

The loss of the S40 and X60 didn’t stop Tesla from reaching 100k S+X per year. The “low demand” reason is not only believable due to this, but also sensible, as I don’t see many people wanting such an expensive car with so little range. It would also really dilute the premium image of the S/X.

The loss of a sub-$40k Model 3, however, will probably stop Tesla from sustaining 10k/wk in sales. They can only reach such numbers by converting ICE buyers.

EVShopper

UBS estimated $42k was the break even point for the Model 3.

Pushmi-Pullyu

bro1999 said:

“…expect the extinction of the “$35k base 3”. Replaced with a $40k+ base model. Tesla has done the same exact thing with the S and X…”

Tesla recognizes the difference in expectations between people buying $70k-$100k cars and those buying $35k-$45k cars. Tesla understands that buyers of higher priced cars are relatively indifferent to a raise in price of a few thousand dollars, and that those buying less expensive cars are not.

It’s only serial anti-Tesla FUDsters like you, MadBro, who pretend not to understand the difference.

Nix

He just answered that question. The answer is in 3-6 months after 5k/week they will.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“The question is does a $35k model 3 make a profit for them regardless when it’s produced.”

No, the question is why anyone should care. Does any auto maker make a unit profit on a base “stripper” unit of any car model? My understanding is they don’t. They also make rather few of the “stripper” units. I seriously doubt that a large percentage of TM3 buyers will choose the absolute rock-bottom price, so why should we care if Tesla loses as much on the “stripper” units as other auto makers do?

This is just one more example of how anti-Tesla FUDsters try to paint normal auto industry practices by Tesla as if they are “strange” or “wrong” or “bad”.
🙁

Someone out there

Tesla can’t make a profit selling a $55k car. How are they going to make money selling it at $35k? It’s not going to happen.

Pushmi-Pullyu

It’s amazing that despite having it explained to you dozens if not hundreds of times, you still can’t understand the difference between “not making a profit” and “investing more money on growing the company than is being made in profits”.

Mr Bonehead

When the comparative marketing bible is written aka “The Book of Elon” in 35 languages, names like Jim Jones, Joseph Smith, PT Barnum,Alan Stanford and of course Bernie Madoff will be intertwined into various chapters with The Book. A true marketer YES, a genius is debatable!

SansIce

you are an idiot

Mister G

Is this Aaron the racist new York lawyer?

Pushmi-Pullyu

@ “Mr Bonehead”

You have chosen an accurate screen name.

Get Real

LMAO, you mean that “incessant swindle” that is kicking the ass of the formerly dominant German Luxury OEMs in the large luxury sedan segment and soon to be the mid-size luxury sedan segment.

At least the German OEMs are smarter then you since they are slowly starting to do something about it.

J P DeCaen

Whether you want to admit it or not, Tesla has changed the auto world for the better. Musk is not the perfect hero, but if you try to paint him as a villain, you won’t have many sympathizers. The reservation holders are unlikely to commit suicide over this.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Andreas Hopf said:

“…the ‘affordable mass-market $35,000 Model 3’ remains a vapourcar over two years since the March 2016 launch.

“It was only announced to garner interest-free $1,000 loans and media attention, as with most things Elon Musk – just another swindle in an incessant string of swindles.”

Another day, another laughably ridiculous Tesla bashing FUD post or three, eh?

Gosh, how terrible that Tesla is selling all those highly popular, superbly rated cars as nothing but window dressing for stock swindles! Since Tesla continues year after year to get the highest customer satisfaction rating among car owners, according to Consumer Reports‘ annual surveys, it appears that Tesla has been highly successful at “fooling” a lot of car buyers!
😆 😆 😆

Lamata

I think if they run out of the Big Orders, the 1st Base Model 3 will be delivered on February 31st. 2019….

ffbj

..and the 2nd one on March 31st, etc…
I kid, I kid…

wavelet

It currently looks to me like it’ll be March-Jun 2019. If they don’t end up making one of the upgrades mandatory.

Benz

The Tesla Model 3 should never have had the $35,000 price tag attached to it.

It would have been more appropriate to just name it “less expensive than the Model S”.

Price range of inbetween $40,000 – $90,000.

That would have been more fair.

Someone out there

It wouldn’t have attracted the huge amount of pre-orders though. The vast majority of people expected to buy a cheap Tesla for $35k. Now suddenly it costs $80k+. Add to it that Tesla tried to upsell the model S to people waiting for the high end model 3 in the beginning. I doubt there are very many people stupid enough to pay $80k for this death trap.

EJCT

I agree, after cancelling my M3 order I regularly receive emails from Tesla inviting me to view the model S and X. Some people just need a new car at some point, can’t wait forever and have limited budgets. M3 at the much higher prices will sell well initially in 2018-19, but then sales will tank when only few base models will be made available and the tax incentive expires.

ffbj

I sometimes thing think the Model 3 is actually hurting sales of evs, and that is due to the fact that so many want one, but can’t get it. Those buyers, and they are buyers, don’t want anything, even an ev, that is a lesser vehicle. Where it’s, the Model 3, is not available or many years before you can get one, people may decide to lease or buy an ev where incentives are high, or hang onto the old rust bucket a few more years.
So it’s a sort of ev logjam, that will slowly be cleared as Tesla ramps up and newer more enticing ev models, like the 2019 LR Leaf, come out, and entries from Kia, Hyundai, VW, GM, and others, are built and start showing up.
Eventually the logjam will clear and things will flow more smoothly and quickly.

Mr Bonehead

In other news, the Disciples of Tesla remain happy to provide $1k deposits as a loan to keep Tesla in business! As for the $35k Model 3, look over there its a squirrel!!

Nix

Heck, you just figured out how stuff like Kickstarter, gofundme, rockethub, indiegogo, etc works. Future buyers put their money where their mouth is when it comes to products they want built. In exchange, they get the product they want at some point in the future.

Thank you Professor Obvious.

Only in the world of a Troll who has no intention of every owning a Tesla would this be something bad.

SansIce

go away troll

Mark W

I would love to know if Tesla ever really thought they would deliver a $35,000 Model 3. I guess we will never know. In any case, it worked brilliantly for them. Get everyone fired up about a sexy car that would be $27,500 after the federal rebate. $27,500 is a great price for that special car. It got hundreds of thousands signed up and following them. As we can see now, that will never happen. Instead, they have sold many at the $50,000 level, and now are talking about making $70,000 Model 3s. Why make $35,000 Model 3s when you can sell them at $50,000 or $60,000?

Marketing the Model 3 as a $35,000 car has worked very well so far.

Viking79

Elon has said from the beginning that the Model 3 base model would be $35,000 with no incentives. What do you think that means? The issue was not Elon, it was bloggers immediately stating it would be $27,500. What it actually means is that Elon would introduce the Model 3 when incentives weren’t around.

Mr Bonehead

Surely you don’t really believe the posts you put up here?

Nix

Actually, that was a notable item that was reported right here on Insideev’s, that unlike prior products that Tesla had advertised on their website with price after rebates, the Model 3 price was listed as $35K. Go look into the archives.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Mr Bonehead said:

“Surely you don’t really believe the posts you put up here?”

Since you obviously post B.S. you know isn’t true, it’s understandable that you would like to believe that those pointing out your mendacity do that, too. Fortunately, we Tesla fans don’t need to lie. We’ll leave that to greedy and/or jealous Tesla/Elon bashers like you.

Will

Here included. With putting in SR M3 in cost comparison with other EVs with tax incentives

Mark W

I am a person that is more knowledgeable about EVs than the average potential Tesla buyer. I don’t know what Elon personally said about this, and most others don’t either. When the Model 3 was announced, if the average person did their math, based on predictions of when the car would be rolled out, they would have reasonably thought that many many people would get $35,000 Model 3s before the tax credits were gone.

Bryan Whitton

I don’t know about that. When I reserved, I stood in line before the reveal and reserved two. I knew I wouldn’t get the credit. When I did the math and looked at the volume of already sold Model s and x cars already sold and how fast they were selling them I assumed that the credit would be gone.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“…if the average person did their math, based on predictions of when the car would be rolled out, they would have reasonably thought that many many people would get $35,000 Model 3s before the tax credits were gone.”

I completely disagree. Those best informed on the subject — pardon my hubris for including myself in that category — said from the start that it was rather iffy if even the earliest reservationists would get the full $7500 tax credit.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“Get everyone fired up about a sexy car that would be $27,500 after the federal rebate. $27,500 is a great price for that special car.”

Tesla never, ever cited the price for the Model 3 with any reduction from rebates. Not ever.

It shows a distinct lack of critical thinking, not to mention judgement, to blame Elon or Tesla for what reporters infer or extrapolate in articles about Tesla. Contrary to what all too many who are hyper-jealous of Elon Musk seem to think, Elon does not consider himself a god, and has no ability to make the media stop printing uninformed comments about Tesla Inc. and its cars.

William

The much anticipated Tesla Base Model 3 ($35k + $1k) is coming soon, to a theater near you!

I sure hope, for the sake of Tesla, that Freemont can spit out 100k+ Base Model 3s per year, after the first one rolls out of the door, early (Q1 2019) next year!

Pushmi-Pullyu

“I sure hope, for the sake of Tesla, that Freemont can spit out 100k+ Base Model 3s per year…”

Perhaps 100k+ Standard Range (short range) Model 3’s per year, but there’s no reason to expect 100k of the lowest possible trim level. Very few car buyers want a car with no options at all!

WadeTyhon

I’m glad to see he addressed the base model since I’ve been waiting very patiently for it! 🙂

But in the past, “3-6 months” to Elon seems to be code for “It’s coming fairly soon, but not in the immediate future.” I’m thinking Late November/December is likely the earliest we will see it, but Q1 is most likely.

Steven Loveday

Yes agreed, Wade. Or even in Elon-speak, worst case scenario based on past practice would be to double or even triple those estimates. So, people may have to wait 12-18 months or more for delivery of such cars. Like you said, Nov or Dec is promising and likely the earliest, but it may be middle of next year or later until they’re outwardly profitable and can make it happen.

HVACman

from Elon’s tweet: “Need 3-6 months after 5k/week to ship $35K and Tesla and live”

5K/week for 6 months is 135,000 units.

Elon made a big assumption in this tweet – that Tesla will actually be able to SELL another 135,000 $55K -$78K Model 3’s by year’s end. Production is one thing, sales are another. Whether there is a global market that big for a small semi-luxury EV sedan in that price range is anything but certain.

Lou Grinzo

Tesla: Producer of electric vehicles and snark wars on this site.

No matter which side of the $35k issue you fall on, I think one has to admit that Musk doesn’t run a car business even remotely like the legacy car companies do. You could have a healthy debate about whether that’s a good thing. I think it’s mixed; the company-owned stores threatening the franchise model I consider very positive, but this bare knuckle fist fight over did he or didn’t he promise a $35k car by date Z and how many will they deliver isn’t doing Tesla or the rEVolution any favors.

Kind a Wierd

When the Porsche comes to market, we’ll see which method of building and selling cars is better, one based on lessons learned over 100 years, or one based on an arrogant cult of personality where everything is over-promised and under delivered.

dathomir

Not sure why you received so many down votes, but it is a reality that Tesla will be facing, not just from Porsche, but Audi, MBZ, BMW, Jag, Volvo.

There will be some fierce competition arriving in the coming months, it will be interesting to see how Tesla deals with it.

Bill Howland

Its only distantly a Tesla Issue, but all the big companies (especially GM’s Barra) want the $7500 credit extended.

Obviously, selling the ‘$35,000’ M3 would be easier if it was $27,500. Or if a “loaded M3” at $86,000 was $78,500.

I’m curious to see how much politicking will be done here – since I can’t IMAGINE the situation where GM, Ford, and Tesla don’t have any credits, whereas foreign manufacturers VW, Toyota, and Honda sell products with a full $7500 credit.

Rafael Sabatini

VW, Toyota and Honda all have huge US manufacturing presence. It’s harder to make the case that a GM Bolt (with a lot of Korean content) is any more deserving of the credits than a Honda built in Ohio or a Toyota built in Kentucky.

Anymore this industry is very worldwide, so it’s harder to make the distinction.

Pushmi-Pullyu

“…It’s harder to make the case that a GM Bolt (with a lot of Korean content) is any more deserving of the credits than a Honda built in Ohio or a Toyota built in Kentucky.”

What you say is quite logical. But when has logic ever won a political argument? Especially in these days of hyper-partisan politics in America.

Rafael Sabatini

Although I don’t have a problem with the strategy, I still wonder how much of the “reservation mix” wants a $78,000 TM3 versus the $35,000 car discussed at the intro. Most of the excitement “feels” like it was generated for a car in the Accord-Avalon price range. At $78-85K they are well into Model S territory and for that money I’d think the full on Model S is the car most people would want.

Maybe they’ll have 6 months or so of fulfilling that part of the order mix before the entry level base model drops. Just seems like the bulk of demand is in the lower price echelon

Terawatt

To try and answer your question: my guess is Q2, 2019. But only in quite limited numbers.

What I want to know is can I have the smaller battery pack and dual motor, and when can I get that in Norway (first day reservation holder) and how much will it cost? Alas I fear the answer is “never”. Since dual motors improve range it makes no sense to tie it to the bigger battery, but since there’s no direct competition who can tell what’s more profitable..? What’s certain is that they’ll do whatever they think is most profitable.

Jim stack

I think the $35k version will be available about December 2018. Maybe even a month earlier. We will see. Their production number are rising very steadily. The quality is also very good.

tftf

Consumer Report does not agree with you:

JUST IN: Consumer Reports magazine says Tesla Model 3 falls short of a CR recommendation $TSLA

https://twitter.com/reutersbiz/status/998606023047942144?s=21

Rafael Sabatini

Check out the Edmunds long term update. Hoo boy.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Someone needs to review Consumer Reports‘ conflicting ratings of Tesla cars, and give them a “Not Recommended” recommendation for the way they keep flip-flopping on recommending Tesla’s cars, or not.

We can be confident that within another few months, CR will issue an update which will move the Tesla Model 3 to the “Recommended” column, to generate more magazine sales for CR.

arne-nl

It’s really funny how those haters and shorters shift the goal posts.

First they were proclaiming the that the $35 k would never become available. And they were really really sure about that.

Now that it turns out they were flat-out wrong, they are attacking Tesla/Musk on their own made-up fantasy timelines. A timeline of which Tesla never made any promise.

Mark W

I’m neither a Tesla hater or fanboy. I’m hoping all EV automakers succeed and drive EV prices down. How can you say that the people who were saying that a $35,000 would never be available were proven wrong? Elon just said they would become available 4-8 months from now. That proves nothing.

arne-nl

Come on. Until now Tesla has proven that when it comes to certain things, they deliver. Timelines may slip, but the few specs they tout prominently (range, acceleration and price), they deliver upon *). That has now been reconfirmed that they plan on holding up their promise.

Another thing rarely mentioned is the Supercharger network. Roll out of that has progressed steadily and according to plan. People buying a Tesla, counting on Superchargers to become available on certain routes, have not been disappointed.
_________________________________
*) Only exception was the price of the Roadster. Given the very, very start-up nature of the company back then, that can be forgiven imho.

agzand

So you think a $35k model 3 is guaranteed. Then where is the $50k Model S, or the $55k Model X? Tesla said these will be available. Did you believe them then, and how do you feel now that they start $30k higher than that?
I don’t see a way for Tesla to sell a $35k Model 3 in significant numbers for a sustained time frame, period. If they do that, it is an economic suicide.

arne-nl

The 50k (after incentives) Model S was available, and the few people that opted for it, have gotten their cars at the promised price.

It was discontinued later due to low demand (4% iirc).

And yes, I think a $35k Model 3 is guaranteed (standard ‘act of God’ disclaimer applies).

will

Model S 40 WAS never available. They decide they was no demand because they never brought it out in the first place

arne-nl

You’re lying. Many have gotten their 40 kWh Model S. They got a sweet deal: a software-limited 60 kWh. So the performance of the 60 kWh, the charging speed of the 60 kWh and an easy upgrade to 60 kWh might the need arise.

See here for example: https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/telsa-model-s-40kwh-model-lots-of-options-sold.23951/

Because so few people wanted a 40 kWh, it was discontinued.

Pushmi-Pullyu
You can reasonably argue both sides of that question. It’s true that Tesla never actually made a Model S with a 40 kWh battery pack. The few “S40” units which were produced, were made using a 60 kWh battery pack electronically limited to 40 kWh, to satisfy those few pre-orders which remained after Tesla cancelled production of the S40 and after Tesla tried to persuade/entice the relatively few who had ordered the S40 to upgrade to an S60. But it’s pretty stupid to use the S40 –> S60 example to argue that Tesla will cancel the “Standard Range” Model 3. For the Model S, Tesla wound up canceling the smallest of three battery sizes originally offered (S85, S60, S40). Tesla cancelling the Standard Range Model 3 would not be equivalent to cancelling the S40. Canceling the Standard Range Model 3 would be the equivalent of Tesla cancelling the Model S60 before it was produced, to produce only the S85! Not gonna happen, period. It’s hard to believe that any of the serial Tesla bashers here honestly believe Tesla would be stupid enough to kill off so much of its potential market. No, they know it’s B.S., but they think it’s… Read more »
Pushmi-Pullyu

“I don’t see a way for Tesla to sell a $35k Model 3 in significant numbers for a sustained time frame, period.”

I don’t, either. And so what? All auto makers cite a “MSRP” base price for a car, and they all make very few of that “stripper” trim level of any model.

Yes, it’s almost certain that Tesla will sell the $35,000 trim level Model 3 at a loss, just as other auto makers sell the few MSRP units they make at a loss. And so what? Only a tiny percentage of TM3 buyers are going to order the absolute rock-bottom Model 3 with no options whatsoever.

agzand

My guess is never. Simply because it is a stupid thing to do. It is analogous to Apple selling iPhone X for $350. There is demand for more expensive Model 3s, so there is no justification for selling it at a lower price.

stimpacker

That is exactly my concern!
I know tons of people willing to buy a $35K TM3 but have not made any reservation. There will be great demand if/when the base TM3 pops up. Even without rebate, folks are willing to get the TM3 over a high-optioned Accord/Camry or entry level luxury. This is what Tesla was hoping for.

What could happen is that if demand is so high for the $49K TM3 to the point that the factory can’t keep up, then there is no business justification to sell a $35K TM3. I hope the “EV is the future” thinkers in Tesla win over the “We must generate max profits for shareholder value” thinkers.

Saying this invokes the haters, jumping in with allegations of FUD. Say what you will, it is the right business decision if one only looked at $$$. I do hope this won’t happen. Am planning to get one $50K TM3 and one $35K TM3. Gonna sell the MS when warranty is up. Getting little issues here and there.

Pushmi-Pullyu
“What could happen is that if demand is so high for the $49K TM3 to the point that the factory can’t keep up, then there is no business justification to sell a $35K TM3.” You’re just expressing worry that you won’t be able to get what you want. There’s no logic behind your worry, only irrational fear. If demand for a $49k Model S proves to be high enough to satisfy maximum factory production of the Model 3, then you might logically argue that Tesla might delay production of lower trim levels until a second Tesla auto assembly plant enters production. But why in the world would Tesla voluntarily kill off so much of its potential market by actually cancelling the lowest trim levels? $35,000 is the MSRP which the TM3 was designed for, and producing the car at the volume of demand that trim level will generate is the only way Tesla can create the economy of scale which will justify the lower price for the car. If Tesla raises the bottom price, then that will automatically and very predictably lower demand, which will result in a lower ceiling for production, which will increase the unit price of the… Read more »
lj3252

Green Car Repots recent poll on what version of Model 3 would you order shows only 17% want a configuration that does not include longer range battery with RWD or AWD or the new high performance version. If 450,000 reservations, this means only 76,500 want the basic model. Tesla is doing the right thing by building most expensive/most wanted versions first to meet the highest demand while also gaining the most financial benefit to help pay for capital cost.

Rafael Sabatini

I think the point is that people WANT long range for $35K. At $70K+ you are well into Model S territory .

Basically on the Tesla site right now, you can take your pick of a huge array of 20K-35K miles Model S used cars. With AWD, a bigger battery and …
Free Supercharging! For that same money, and with full warranty.

I just don’t know why you’d buy a $70-80K Model 3 when you can get a lightly used, but much better , Model S for the same money. And never have to pay for SuperCharger usage.

Someone out there

What you want and what you are willing to pay for are two very different things

will

its a poll of 50 thats not scientific just like the poll that said Hilirary was going to win

EVShopper

Consumer Reports dings Model 3 for poor braking performance:

https://www.consumerreports.org/hybrids-evs/tesla-model-3-review-falls-short-of-consumer-reports-recommendation/

Tesla response was they can fix things over OTA. How do you fix braking problems with software? From some track tests, it’s clear the standard brake pads are not up to the task of repeated hard braking. Could be a supplier quality issue?

SansIce

and you think they will just roll and let this stand? We are in the first year of production. After market upgrades are in place and they will increase the specs on the brakes before next year- you are dreaming if you think they will let this car brake longer than a Ford pick up

Kind a Wierd

Better than an M3 lol

Hauer

Funny discussions.
IIRC ALL the car companies start with top of the line versions first.
Base model come later on.

EVShopper

Ummm, no.

dathomir

You have that backwards! All other manufacturers launch with a base, mid-tier, and then a fully optioned model. Depending on make/model, a “performance oriented” model may launch a year or more later.

Someone out there

“3-6 months” is Elon-speak for “never”

Rightofthepeople

In one of the other articles last week, a commenter coined the term EST or Elon Standard Time. Love this. I’m a huge tesla and Elon fan, and Model 3 reservation holder, but no way does a single $35k M3 ship this year. I would say July 2019 at the earliest. That’s my PDOOMA number.

EVShopper
Hard to tell. The key is “after 5k/wk”. The target for that is end of June? But based on past performance, more likely July/August? Then, do you add 3months to the 3-6mo timeline to account for EST (Elon Standard Time)? That would get you to July 2019. We haven’t even seen a prototype yet, which should have the cloth seats and metal roof. And not sure what the center console and dash will look like. The premium package list power adjustable seats, so does that mean the base would have manual seats like the Bolt? =============+==+===+ Premium Upgrades: Premium heated seating and cabin materials throughout, including open pore wood décor and two rear USBs 12-way, power adjustable front seats, steering column and side mirrors, with custom driver profiles Premium audio system with more power, tweeters, surround speakers and subwoofer Tinted glass roof with ultraviolet and infrared protection Auto dimming, power folding, heated side mirrors LED fog lamps Center console with covered storage and docking for two smartphones ====================== I think we will see a few trickle off the line by the end of the year, but only going to employees. Q1 2019 will see some going to previous owners that… Read more »
Pushmi-Pullyu

“The premium package list power adjustable seats, so does that mean the base would have manual seats like the Bolt?”

That certainly appears to imply it, so that would be my expectation, yes.

Ian

When? Never. It’s not in Tesla’s best interest. Sell high and apologize. People will be annoyed but will still buy.

Kind a Wierd

It’s never a straight answer with this guy, which is typical of hucksters. I’ll give him credit, though – he’s elevated scamming to an absolute art form. I wonder when he’ll start selling Martian real estate? “$10k deposit, delivering in the 20-uh-30’s!”

Benz

The Tesla Model 3 should have been a $60,000 EV (from the beginning).

And many options should have been standerd on the $60,000 Base Model (Dual Motor – All Wheel Drive, Autopilot, Paint, Wheels, Leather Interior).

And there should not have been two battery choices (from the beginning). Only the Long-Range battery should have been standerd (at least for the first 100,000).

Pushmi-Pullyu

You are advocating a very poor business strategy on Tesla’s part. The Model S, even ignoring the cancelled-before-production S40, was offered with two battery pack sizes: S60 and S85. It’s pretty absurd to suggest Tesla should throw away a large part of its potential market for the Model 3 by offering only a single battery pack size.

Murrysville EV

Here’s the real date: the 12th of Never.

Brian

Specs are where this could be a Porsche E competitor. This will be very interesting.

CarGuy

Did the math. November will be the 1 st month of base production.

Will

BMW i performance ad in nba playoffs

Michael

No other manufacturer has ever done what Tesla did by taking 400K orders for a car that was not available, with a $1,000 refundable deposit. Tesla is always breaking new ground.

The Tesla fans will not cancel their orders and will most likely upgrade their order, even if they are not forced to. Hey, I put down a $6,000 deposit and waited 4 years for the Model S. Wow it was worth it!
The non Tesla fans will take their refund and buy a Bolt, Leaf, Ioniq or Kona. But they won’t come with any type of charging network covering the whole of the US allowing long range trips. And those vehicles will not live up to the Model 3.

CCIE

Nice to see an admission of the fact that they’d lose money at $35k. One less thing to argue about.

I still believe they will never ship more than a few token units. Those will be for marketing purposes.

EJCT

Remember, Musk affirmed a release date for the base M3 for 2017. I am glad I cancelled my M3 reservation in the Fall of 2017 when I had to get a new car. Happily driving a Volt since then with almost 10,000 electric miles by now. Not a single problem so far, and I received the full tax rebate.