Say Goodbye To The Long Range, Rear-Drive Tesla Model 3


Customers have about a week left to order

Tesla has made some dramatic changes to its Model 3 offerings. We had just learned that the California automaker will now sell a third battery size option, which will return 260 miles of range for $45,000. Then, CEO Elon Musk tweeted (embedded below) that the long-range, rear-wheel-drive version of the mid-size sedan will be departing the scene.

Rated at 310 miles of range and starting at $44,000 ($49,000 — the not-actually-optional premium package option tacks on an additional $5,000) may still be available to order for the next week or so, according to Musk’s tweet. We suggest that if this is the configuration you want, it’s time to order now.


Source: Twitter

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

98 Comments on "Say Goodbye To The Long Range, Rear-Drive Tesla Model 3"

newest oldest most voted

If this was your desired configuration, why didn’t you already order it?

Anyways, it’s what I have. It’s not exactly what I wanted (I wanted white interior and AWD, but couldn’t wait that long), but I do love it.

Maybe perhaps there are people out there that want to pay cash for this car and don’t want to go finance the deal. Maybe they are doing that old fashion, old school practice of actually saving up to buy something. Had that not crossed your mind? However, this week will likely change people’s minds about the concept of saving towards a Tesla because it is now clear that you can’t count on the prices and options they post on their website to actually be there when you’re ready. Apparently Elon can tweet at any moment and make options go away and prices change radically. Adds a sense of urgency and instability. So yeah, saving up to buy the Tesla of your dreams might be a really bad idea. Better take out a loan and get it now because it might not be there tomorrow. Honestly, a question for all the 110% Tesla supporters here, does this “on the fly” marketing and sales strategy inspire confidence in the company and it’s commitments? It seems like they move the goal posts whenever it suits them and then give super solid, easy to plan by dates like “…another week or so.”. It really… Read more »

Clearly you have confused Elon Musk with Dr. Evil.

There is no devious plan to frustrate people saving up to buy a Model 3, nor to frustrate those waiting — patiently or impatiently — for the Standard Range version to be offered and/or any version without the PUP “option” (since it’s mandatory, it’s not an option) to appear on the menu.

Clearly Tesla is trying to juggle various factors, to maintain a high level of demand for higher trim levels of TM3, without either offering leases or shipping units overseas.

I agree that Tesla’s abrupt changes to the ordering menu for the TM3 are confusing, but I think that is more a sign of Tesla’s growing pains than anything else.

comment image

One man’s “growing pains” is another man’s disorganization, poor planning and desperation.

I never said there was a devious plan. I said there was a crappy plan, or at best a half baked plan. Please explain why Tesla couldn’t commit to selling LR, RWD cars for an entire year like other car makers would have done. Please, why???

Because everyone is ordering the Dual Motor option.

So?! Why drop an OPTION just because nobody is ordering it today? What about tomorrow? Also, who nobody is ordering it? I’m sure some are.

“Some” is probably only a few, in which case can’t justify a separate version.

All LR models should have low orders now. If you seriously wanted one, why wouldn’t you have ordered in time to get the full tax credit? And before that, AWD dominated RWD. That’s why almost nobody is ordering a RWD right now.

Because Tesla, for better or worse, is not like other car makers. So far there has been enough sustained public enthusiasm to keep it growing. We’ll have to wait and see if there is enough sustained enthusiasm to make it profitable.

This isn’t rocket science.

The stupid way that the tax credit was formulated means everyone with a brain in the US who wanted a LR Model 3 already ordered it. The only people missing out are those who haven’t been planning on it, so no harm done.

US LR AWD orders will also drop like a rock now, but not as badly as LR RWD since Oct 15 (because the AWD is more popular). If there’s very few people ordering a configuration (for any car from any manufacturer), it makes plenty of sense to drop the model from the lineup if doing so helps keep the assembly lines streamlined.

The majority of US orders in Q1 2019 will be MR RWD. If it was still available, LR RWD would’ve been the least popular configuration by an order of magnitude. It was a logical decision.

Dave8or the hater once again shows his serial anti-Tesla/Musk biases.

Tesla is obviously repositioning the Model 3 variants within its lineup. Tesla makes hardware and software updates to their cars constantly instead of the laggard, legacy OEMs that are dragging their feet on making compelling EVs only do refreshes every several years and then you locked in unlike with Tesla’s constant OTA-basedsoftware improvements and diagnostics that make your Tesla better over time unlike the stale laggards.

Along with its cars and their technology, completely different non-pressure based sales model, servicing not aimed at making that a profit center, providing a refueling network to make it viable to drive virtually anywhere basically represents a paradigm shift with Tesla and I for one applaud them for their innovating in what had become a very static industry.

This is a public forum and not a Supreme People’s Assembly of N. Korea, where all speakers are expected to praise the Leader in unison, and to vote unanimously. Different forumers will have different opinions, which creates a lively discussion.

If you are seeking a 100% consensus in the subjects you are interested in, or/and you are not comfortable with other people’s opinions not aligned with yours, perhaps a discussion forum format is not the best for you to participate in.

“Honestly, a question for all the 110% Tesla supporters here, does this “on the fly” marketing and sales strategy inspire confidence in the company and it’s commitments? I”

As ian investor it inspires confidence. Obviously the’re working through the backlog of the $60,000 models faster than high end orders are coming in in the US and they need to increase production even more but aren’t at a point yet where they can profitably sell $35k models. This is an easy solution facilitating further price discrimination. It is works for buyers and business alike.

Nobody said anything about the fantasy $35,000 car. This was about the $50,000 LR RWD car. Why can a consumer now not have that car? I thought the genius of Model 3 was it’s modular construction so the consumer would have a choice of drive trains and battery sizes. I guess a Model 3 coming down the line with the big battery in it and NOT requiring the front motor to be installed causes a “bottleneck” somehow?? I can think of the real reason. The LR, RWD TM3 is too good, but doesn’t bring in the profit margin they want, so they need to make it crappier with a smaller battery so that consumers that really want, or need that 310 miles of range are forced to buy an expensive option they don’t really need or want, but Tesla makes more profit. It turns out that demand for the most expensive TM3s is strong, so Tesla feels confident that throwing some more value minded customers under the bus won’t really be a problem. Why not with an army of internet apologists marching lock step with Elon? To me this says they really didn’t think this stuff through with regards to… Read more »

Value minded consumers already ordered their LR Model 3 to get the full credit. The only people “thrown under the bus” are either rare with anomalous circumstances, idiots for missing out on the approaching deadline, or hypothetical customers that haven’t seriously considered buying one yet (and therefore have no reason to be pissed off). In other words, next to nobody.

Can you think of a realistic example of someone who rightfully should be pissed off at Tesla over this move?

Demand falls like a rock when your car product suddenly costs the customer $4k more. If Tesla only cared about profit, they’d lay off half their US retail workforce, not offer the MR, and ship almost everything to Europe and China. Instead, they offered the MR with a $4k lower price (even though battery cost is only reduced by $2k).

MR in lower margin than LR. So much for your theory.

Or maybe it’s simply a six-year old company that’s changing very rapidly as it advances with new products and deals with only probably a million different changing factors.

Tesla is 15 years old.

Actually I believe it’s about a ten year old company. What changes? What million different changing factors? The only thing changing is the corporate profits and apparently they aren’t changing fast enough.

So I guess you’re not a fan of Agile Development, either?

ROFL. Because orders haven’t opened yet.

That’s a bit US-oriented, don’t you think? This was the configuration I wanted and I really hope they bring it back for the EU expansion.

Given how fast Tesla changes configuration options, I have no idea what the menu will be when they start shipping cars to the EU. They may discontinue RWD entirely (as they did with S and X).

Maybe because cars are long term purchases and not everyone is in the car market at this exact moment in time. Or maybe people wanted to wait out this initial thrash and let Tesla work out all the kinks in the system (like production quality and repair logistics).

Now when I go to get a Model 3 in a year or two I’ll be incentivised to look harder at the used market…

Still no lease financing available.

I agree with you. More people will lease a Model 3 long range than buy one and they should keep this available. Most of the buyers of a Model 3 going forward, it will be their first EV. Leasing is a great way to get comfortable with an EV and at a lower commitment letter level.

Where’s my post??

Another Euro point of view

I did not down vote your post, the sad smile is because you get a down vote asking where is your post.

Leasing is a gigantic cash drain on Tesla, and even if a third party finances the lease, the GAAP accounting for it sucks bigtime as well.

If you really need a lease you can always get a third-party lease. Right now.

I can guarantee you that Tesla will not introduce leasing for Model 3 until the major accounting change which happens January 1st, which makes lease accounting look a *lot* better on the books.

They may not introduce leasing until even later than that, as leasing is still worse for Tesla’s cashflow than cash/loan sales.

New third party leases are now accounted as sales, even if they have RVG. This changed 1/1/18.

Direct leases are financed by a warehouse line, then later securitized. It’s not a material cash drain, but it doesn’t produce the instant cash inflow that a sale does.

I don’t understand the reasoning for this. Is the rear wheel drive long range that unpopular? I haven’t seen many dual motors on the road and I live in the Bay Area. Which you cannot throw a rock without hitting a model 3 now.

How do you know you haven’t seen any dual motors? They are still not adding the badge unless you specifically request it.

White interior, smaller wheels, no brembo breaks is a pretty good indicator.

However, you can get an AWD with a black interior and the bigger wheels, and lots of people do. All Teslas have Brembo brakes, so I don’t know what you’re talking about threre.

“I don’t understand the reasoning for this.”

I don’t think you’re going to find a simple answer. Tesla is trying to juggle reducing costs (by eliminating options) while at the same time trying to maintain or increase demand for higher trim levels of the Model 3, all without shipping any units overseas or offering leasing.

With this many factors at play, I think it’s difficult or impossible to point to a single cause for most of the changes Tesla makes to the menu of what’s available to order for a Model 3.

Sometimes the reason for a change is obvious. The price increase for the AWD version was obviously because demand for that option was much higher than Tesla expected. But I’d say that’s “the exception which proves the rule”. Most changes to the ordering menu are probably motivated by multiple reasons, not just one.

I think so, since AWD launched they’ve been the large majority of VIN registrations. Last week the Model 3 order page said that the LR RWD would be delivered “within 4 weeks,” so demand was drying up or Tesla was not making any more in anticipation of this mid-range option. Is Fremont capacity outpacing Gigafactory cell capacity? Maybe this move allows Tesla to sell more cars for a given battery production?

Interesting answers @pushmipullyu. If I was to take a random stab in the dark. I might say that they are trying to up the production numbers. Tesla has always been production gated by the number of packs they can produce. It seems like a kill 2 birds with one stone approach where Tesla might be trying to compromise temporarily in order to accommodate the backlog of people who want a lower range cheaper base price M3 before the tax credit runs out, and also boost the production numbers while reaping the most profit off of the long range all wheel drive models. Obviously this is a guess, I really have no idea.

We know that Tesla has shifted from being battery-pack-production limited to being car-factory-production limited to being delivery-rate limited and now to being battery-cell-production limited. Now that they’re cell limited it makes sense to build a shorter-range pack.

No it is popular but earns less money so they got rid of it.


Ron Swanson's Mustache

I had a rear wheel drive car years ago, and given how poorly it handled on wet roads or in snowy conditions I find it completely unsurprising that most people would opt for the dual motor variant.

Not enough batteries or demand for long range to end of year…not enough margin in low range?

First of all, there’s lots of reports that since AWD was introduced, it has been the much more popular choice.

Now put yourself in the shoes of someone in the US earlier this month who is very interested in buying a LR Model 3. Does it make any sense to take delivery in 2019 and get a $3750 tax credit in 2020? Take delivery sooner and you get a $7500 tax credit in 2019.

So even if you were thinking about taking delivery of a LR Model 3 early next year or even as late as June, you’d be thinking, “damn, I better order now!”

That means the only US demand remaining for the LR models are future spontaneous buyers not on the waiting list, and among this small group of buyers, most probably want AWD (judging by the recent past). The new MR will get plenty of interest from these buyers and those on the waiting list, and should dwarf any LR RWD orders that wouldv’e happened. So might as well eliminate the LR RWD option.

That’s the logic, IMO.

People who want “Long Range” should buy a Tesla Model S or a Tesla Model X.

Tesla wants to widen the range gap between the S+X and the 3.

That’s the reason why they have introduced the “Mid-Range” battery pack for the Tesla Model 3.

That doesn’t make any sense.

To be fair if you ignore the advertised mileage and look at actual EPA data, the Model 3 LR RWD with 18″ wheels is the longest range Tesla. Secret bargain for long distance travel.

What is most interesting to me is if 260 model retains same charging rate as LR model. If it is any slower I might hesitate on it as base Model will be slower charging than I would prefer.

Exactly. I bought the LR RWD with Aero Wheels because, ignoring the EPA ratings, it’s the highest range EV available. It’ll be interesting to see if the MR RWD gets 260 real-world, because the LR RWD easily exceeds 310 real-world. The real EPA rating for it was 330+.

LR-RWD is not just the range king, it also recharges fastest in terms of miles/minute. It’s by far the best BEV for long trips.

MR will charge slower. Pack voltage will be the same but max current both in and out will be lower.

I agree. They need to differentiate thier product lineup. It’s like the iPhone that’s coming out

“That’s the reason why they have introduced the ‘Mid-Range’ battery pack for the Tesla Model 3.”

You’re not even close. This is about maintaining a high level of demand for more expensive trim levels of the TM3, while at the same time neither shipping units overseas nor offering leases.

It has nothing to do with separating the markets for the Model S/X and the TM3. If anything, the elimination of the LR RWD version of the Model 3 just narrowed that gap.

I wish there was a little clarification. So, if the long range is going away, what options will there be? I guess there will be this new mid-range model they just announced and then the dual-motor performance option if you want the larger battery?

I am glad I got my RWD Long Range while I could. 300 miles was the minimum range for me to replace my Volt and I have no desire or need for AWD. 260 miles wouldn’t cut it for some of my road trips into areas with no charging infrastructure.

…where’s the $35k model?

Yeah, I think I’ll wait.

Next year, probably 2nd quarter, maybe 1st late 1st quarter.

Somewhere, over the rainbow…

Real soon now, just a couple of things will happen first:

– exhausting $7.5k tax credit
– scaling production to full factory capacity
– sorting out delivery hell
– waiting till the demand fizzles and the factory isn’t fully utilized producing more expensive variants
– starting overseas deliveries
– offering leasing
– offering an $40k model
– exhausting $3750 tax credit
– having higher-spec models in stock

Wait for 2019, dude.

After another delay, Tesla now says SR will be available Feb-Apr 2019. It will NOT be 35k, though as it will have oxymoronic “mandatory options” like all other Model 3 versions.

Tesla will never sell a 35k+paint Model 3 to the public, IMHO. I do believe they’ll sell a few to reservation list die-hards who refuse to upgrade to premium interior, etc.

I am absolutely furious that they pulling the Long range RWD model. I wanted this configuration next year.

It may come back if at any point it’s financially advantageous. This “mid-range” pack is obvious a bastard invention not planned by engineers — simply less cells are populated, but the same casing & TMS.
For everyone who always complained about sleazy dealer bundling practices, Tesla is acting exactly like that, only they’re the single dealer.

My bet is that it’s the same long range battery, just software-limited.

That wouldn’t really make sense to do. It would mean wasting money putting in an oversized pack which has to be pretty expensive. And why, just to sell for less money?

The change only makes sense if it’s really a smaller battery.

Tesla has confirmed that it’s not. They’ve actually confirmed that it’s fewer cells in the same pack. (An easy engineering change.)

Are you European? If you’re in the US, just order right now.

This is expected, but not so early.
How long before the mid range $45,000 version with 260 mile range also lose the RWD version and have only AWD.

If not for the trade war, Tesla will not be in such trouble. Even Ford & GM are facing big troubles.

If the main constraint to volume manufacture is currently cell production, this would make sense.
It could even be a precursor to the “35k” car.
In basic terms, every “260 mile” car produced would release 50 miles of “free” cells for use in the “cheaper” (200 mile) version.
The timing makes sense if they want to stock up with smaller packs before December.

I’m willing to bet this is the answer, they wanted to maximize profits on the available cells they can produce. So, they made a smaller pack that will enable them to sell more cars. I bet once the tax credit phases out the 310 mile pack will return.

But I thought thousands upon thousands of people were lining up to get the $49k+ Model 3. What happened to all those people? Guess there aren’t as many people willing to fork over $49k+ than Elon and the fanbois thought.

Ummm, about 100,000 people in the US alone did buy one, at an average selling price of $60k+. What other sedan with an average selling price at or above $60k has moved 100,000 units thus year?

Yea, something like for a small reduction in range, they can pump out %30 more cars or somesuch. Tesla does not make these kinds of changes without a cash reason.

The “cell constrained” theory doesn’t really hold water. Instead of 5000 LR/week they could build 2500 LR/3000 MR. But the 3000 MR have less margin ($4000 less revenue but only 12.5 kWh * $120/kWh = $1500 less cost).

Tesla guided 20% gross margin in Q4 based on LR only. That’s about $12k/car. MR would be $2500 less.

2500 cars/week * 12k/car = 30m gross margin/week
3000 cars/week * 9.5k/car = 28.5m gross margin/week

This doesn’t include the extra SG&A costs of managing and delivering the additional 500 cars/week. They’ve put a lot of emphasis on Q3/Q4 profitability and cash flow. No way they build lower margin MR cars if demand exists for 5000 LRs/week.

SR isn’t even an option for Tesla at this point, their costs are simply too high.

But, each MR Model 3 frees up enough 2170s for a $6700 Powerwall (plus $1100 in supporting hardware), and that extra powerwall may allow for a $30k expenditure on an 8kW Tesla PV array +powerwall installation.

I don’t understand… it makes no sense to remove an option… totally off the wall… if they don’t want to make any at the moment, then just change the expected delivery date!

The only way this makes sense is if they are discontinuing the LR version for good.

Actually… maybe they are just removing the RWD option from the LR? Maybe the biggest battery going forward will only be dual motor? That would make sense! They did a similar thing with the S and X a long time ago – they are only available in dual motor for both the 85 and 100.

Musk’s tweet specifies the LR, RWD will be available for another week. That makes much more sense! Yes, they are limiting the LR to dual motor configs only.

The annoying thing about it is dual motor is really unnecessary in some places. Like in SoCal, you really do not need AWD in a road car.

It is unnecessary, but (a) something like 2/3 of buyers seem to want it, and (b) the dual motor cars can keep running even if one motor fails (!!!) so Tesla service doesn’t have as many urgent “my car won’t move” phone calls. Given that service is horribly understaffed and underbuilt, I actually think (b) is significant.

What makes you think a failed motor is a common failure mode? AFAIK it’s extremely rare on every EV, and no reason the Model 3 would be different.

Is it really that unclear? Tesla is in a revenue crunch — they have a lot of loans due the next 9 months. If they delay, some people may be willing to wait. They don’t want them to — they want them to buy _now_. They’re hoping the combo of a cheaper option and the about-to-close tax credit will cause many of them to buy right now.
Tesla has shown they play around with the model offerings all the time. Nothing is ever predictable, let alone final — unlike all other carmakers that change things at most one a year. This isn’t a good thing — it’s very hard to make purchase decisions when the specs of a product keep changing, certainly a $50K product.
Note also that this new version still has the premium interior as a mandatory “option”.
Tesla is just as sleazy as traditional dealerships.

I think Elon and co realize that there is a very real chance they are gonna need to fork over the ~$900 they owe if the stock price is not <$360 next March, and are doing everything they can to make sure they have enough cash on hand to pay it. Plus another $200 mil or so of convertible debt will be due next month, as there is no way the stock is going to be $500 next month.

They can change the conversion price on the 920m due next March at will, so there’s no need to pay it in cash unless they want to.

They’ll pay the 230m due next month in cash, IMHO. It’s too small to mess around with.

Have you got a source for the fact that the conversion rate is negotiable? You’re the first person I’ve heard stating that it is. (except in the broadest everything-is-negotiable sense)

Nooo! Thats the one i wanted! But i can not order it yet since i live in europe

The long range RWD was my choice as well. Hopefully it’ll be available again when they start shipping to Australia. I’m counting on late 2019.

Me too.. also in Australia. $10000 USD extra for 40 miles extra is not worth it. I will not go for the long range awd . Dont want awd, dont want dual motor. So $35000 USD for Base is me. If it doesn’t come, I’ll keep driving the Volt and wait for a better value proposition. If no $3500 USD Base model comes, I will re-think my Tesla Loyalty. This could be the second time I ordered a Tesla and changed my mind! (The S came to Australia at a huge price) Way more than the $57000 USD. Am now thinking still no configurator for Australia, and this new model makes me think that a model 3 with long range might be slipping away out of sight financially. Time will tell. Plus now we are getting hammered in the USD – AUD Originally made a reservation April 2016 (2.5 years ago.) maybe , for brand loyalty, Tesla make a batch of Long Range RHD for those that had it in their minds to buy.. after all ,we have no option to order this week. We still cant order any 3 ‘s after 2.5 years of putting in a reservation!!

Australia? Look, by the time they get to Australia, the menu will have totally changed *again*. Don’t even try to guess what options you’ll have by then.

I believe in Europe less than 20% of the cars are AWD (probably more around 10%). I don’t think removing the long range RWD version will make model 3 more attractive for European costumers.

AWD really doesn’t represent much value. I have driven RWD cars all my life and can’t see why you would even spend $1000 more for AWD.

I am with you. I grew up in Canada and got around just fine on RWD. Now here is Austin TX I have even less need for it. I do on the other hand need all the range I can get so I am very happy to have grabbed my LR RWD model 3 when I could. It looks like this car may be the high water mark of model 3 highway range for a while.

Sometimes the choice isn’t RWD vs AWD, it’s FWD vs AWD (e.g. my Sienna). FWD is a no-go on our unplowed winter roads when you have to stop on an uphill slope. At least with RWD I’d have weight on the drive tires.

They are discontinuing my car??? WTF?

It’s not ‘your car’ unless you already own it. Or at least have ordered it.

The advertised 260 miles is still long range – it’s well over 200 miles. It’s a longer range than some Teslas have, and all the current production BEV’sI can think of.

Look at it from the positive side: the entry level price for a Model 3 just went down by $ 4k. Although in all likelyhood, few people will be able to really reap the benefits, since they will also lose half the $7.5k tax credit. Those two cancel each other out.

Personally, I don’t care. I make few long road trips and thanks to Tesla and Fastned, The Netherlands has abundant fast charging options. I am definitely going for the base model. But I understand that others are not too happy about this.

I wanted the 35K M3 Elon promised. But, I was willing to pay the extra money for 310 miles of range. I didn’t want the (not so optional) premium package. I didn’t want to pay $2,000 extra to get a car, wait for it…. in white. How stupid of me.

Historically model line changes like this at Tesla signify that there will be a price cut in the AWD version. And more than just the $1k cut. Likely the production volume price savings on the AWD is on track to push AWD LR margins above Tesla internal targets by the end of this year. The volume price savings will be passed on to customers as they are fully realized internally inside Tesla in 2019. Price cut for LR AWD PUP putting it just over 50K is likely at the beginning of 2019. Keep in mind that besides MR’s, all new orders for LR’s are for 2019 delivery as LR production numbers are spoken for through the end of the year. So when we are talking about AWD vs RWD, we are talking about 2019 deliveries, and this change will have NO IMPACT on Q4 or 2018 financial numbers. The pricing drop will happen in 2019. People with firm orders awaiting delivery when the price cut happens will get the price cuts, just like before when Tesla announced price cuts in the past. Buyers will be very happy to be getting AWD for a very small price premium over what they… Read more »
I purchased my LR RWD the first week in July and took delivery the first week of August. I am loving the car. If you offered me the choice today of a mid range RWD or a LR RWD for the $4K extra, I’d still purchase the LR model. But, I get that not everyone can afford the extra and for most the 260 mile range is sufficient. Does this mean that when the base $35K car is available the mid range will be gone? The mid range gets 260 miles on a charge or 50 less than the LR. The base $35K car was originally quoted at a 220 mile range. If the difference between the LR and MR is $4K and the miles of a base is only 40 miles less than the MR, I’m only guessing the base will have a totally different structure as far as what’s standard on the car compared to the MR and LR current models. Like, no premium audio, no all glass roof, no rear USB jacks, no premium fake leather seats (maybe cloth even), no heated seats in the rear, no power seats on both front seats (either driver side only… Read more »

I don’t own a Model 3, but discontinuing this apparently very popular version of the car seems to have ruffled many more feathers than usual, probably because the car Actually Exists….

I would conceivably have been interested in a 2wd ‘X’, but then before it was released, Musk ‘discontinued’ it and the only “X”‘s made have been 4wd models.

Fortunately as time goes on, if you don’t like what one automaker does, you now have the choice to spend your money where you want, as the typical EV buyer nowadays can no longer be considered a ‘captive audience’.

I wasn’t happy with the move especially considering europeans never had the option to order it.
Here you can help bringing back that configuration: