Tesla Shakes Up Model 3 Lineup

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27400/tesla-shakes-up-model-3-lineup-killing-35000-base-price

by Pharmakon • 7 years ago

95 180 7 years ago

nrjames• 7 years ago

Here's the actual Tesla announcement:

https://www.tesla.com/blog/update-our-vehicle-lineup

"Given the popularity of the Standard Plus relative to the Standard, we have made the decision to simplify our production operations to better optimize cost, minimize complexity and streamline operations. As a result, Model 3 Standard will now be a software-limited version of the Standard Plus, and we are taking it off the online ordering menu, which just means that to get it, customers will need to call us or visit any one of the several hundred Tesla stores. Deliveries of Model 3 Standard will begin this weekend."

dv_dt2• 7 years ago

The next paragraph is interesting too:

"Its range will be limited by 10%, and several features will be disabled via software (including our onboard music streaming service, navigation with live traffic visualization, and heated seats). Similar to other software-limited vehicles produced in the past, Standard customers will have the option to upgrade to a Standard Plus at any time. Similarly, anyone who has already bought Standard Plus and wants to convert to Standard is welcome to do so, and we will provide a refund for the difference in cost."

It's pretty confident to offer both upgrade and downgrade options between the two.

rplnt• 7 years ago

The downgrade offer is only for those who had already ordered. Not that you can downgrade at any time. It makes sense to offer this as your choice might have been influenced by the "permanency" of the decision.

crazysim• 7 years ago

Software disabled heated seats?

jak923• 7 years ago

I don't understand. Will they be selling the standard then ? The quote and headline don't seem to match. And no, I haven't read the link.

edit: I did read the link and I still don't understand.

Finch2192• 7 years ago

Confusing indeed. Are they just trying to make it harder to buy the cheapest model? That's the only thing that makes sense to me.

mereel• 7 years ago

I thought they were saying they're going to stop selling the current standard one, and the new "standard" will be the software limited plus, and that it will only be available at a store and not online.

stetrain3• 7 years ago

They were originally going to sell a physically different Standard Range model. Manually adjusting cloth seats, fewer speakers, a more basic center console, etc.

The update is that they won't be making a physically distinct Standard Range model, it will be physically the same as the $39k model with software limitations.

speeq• 7 years ago

Sounds familiar: https://techcrunch.com/2013/04/01/tesla-kills-the-entry-leve...

dangerfang• 7 years ago

Well it has been a few weeks since the last shakeup.

ms512• 7 years ago

Prior HN post that included some discussion on this point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12748863

minikites2• 7 years ago

And just look at what you get for your money: https://twitter.com/Arronwu23/status/1116691772300599296

abc_lisper2• 7 years ago

Man. That is Damning!

abc_lisper2• 7 years ago

Why downmod? Why so sensitive.

joenathanone• 7 years ago

It must be that Tesla is losing money on the base model.

empath75• 7 years ago

The couldn’t be as they haven’t produced a single one.

coldtea• 7 years ago

Still could be, as long as their calculated build costs were higher than the advertised price, even if they haven't built one...

mtgx2• 7 years ago

Maybe they figured out they would be losing money, which is why they kept delaying manufacturing it?

This whole "Standard Plus model is so much more popular anyway" is a sick joke.

richardknop• 7 years ago

Which is probably why they haven't built any. They did the math and knew they can't make profit on it so they "announced" 35k model is available but tried to upsell all people who ordered it to more expensive models, and now they quietly cancelled the 35k model without delivering a single one. So they can say "hey we released 35k Model 3 as promised" to save face. But I don't think they can make profit from it so they are forced to sell more expensive models.

tibbon• 7 years ago

I've been considering a Tesla. Buying the base model with zero options just never really crossed my mind. Seems that's the case for a lot of Tesla buyers.

For me it's like buying a base laptop. For my personal one, I'll always max the SSD and memory.

jak923• 7 years ago

For me, the base model is all I've considered. Mainly because I want a electric car without any bells and whistles.

mixmastamyk2• 7 years ago

Would love one with computers minimized and privacy as a first-class concern, just like Adama did in the newer Battlestar Galactica, haha.

(I do like the feature where the car slows/stops when it encounters an obstacle directly ahead. As far as I know it shouldn't require machine-learning/privacy invasion, but it is harder and harder to get one without the other.)

metalliqaz5• 7 years ago

I want a electric car without any bells and whistles

Then you may want to check out the Nissan Leaf instead. Also Ford and Chevy have options. But bells and whistles is kinda Tesla's thing.

Someone12342• 7 years ago

The Model 3 doesn't even have mechanical door handles, it seems like the polar opposite of "without any bells and whistles."

kurtisc• 7 years ago

Seeing the feature lists of used cars with base trim is just sad. I once had a 2009 car without electric windows or central locking.

aurailious2• 7 years ago

You can still buy a new wrangler like that.

mtgx2• 7 years ago

Maybe if they hadn't included $5,000+ worth of (fake) "full self-driving" hardware by default into all Model 3s, they wouldn't have needed to do this, and maybe they would've been able to make the base Model 3 a little cheaper, too, which I'm sure would've positively impacted its popularity (I think a $29,900 base Model 3 would be far more popular than Standard Plus).

I could understand all the other carmakers being lured by the bells and whistles of "self-driving" marketing blitz over turning their cars into EVs, but I expected more from Tesla.

Making great EVs that are also affordable should have always remained Tesla's #1 priority. Last I checked, Musk said he wanted the world to switch to EVs and the way to do that is through them making cheaper EVs with each generation. The priority shouldn't be to keep adding gimmicks to those Teslas and keeping them more expensive than they need to be. Has he forgotten that?

mikeash• 7 years ago

That hardware is necessary for safety features included in every car, and I seriously doubt it costs anywhere near that much money.

gibybo6• 7 years ago

The hardware is like $1-2k, the $5k is just what they charge for the feature.

dyarosla• 7 years ago

I don't know if the cost is ~$5K to Tesla, but I for one am sold on their EV business and less so the 'self-driving capabilities'.

I think all these self-driving options are being bundled into it because other car companies already add various forms of adaptive cruise/lane-keep to their base models so Tesla wants to have these things to stay competitive (prob adding the 'advanced functionality' to seem like they have a competitive edge).

I wish that Tesla did have a non-smart car option. On the flip side, that makes me sound like one of the tech late-adopters who didn't "need" a smartphone, where a regular phone could have sufficed. In 5 years time, there may not be non-AI (not necessarily full self-driving) cars.

stetrain3• 7 years ago

Many cars in this class have radar adaptive cruise and 360 cameras. I don't think the hardware here is really that expensive compared to other cars.

Domenic_S3• 7 years ago

Maybe if they hadn't included $5,000+ worth of (fake) "full self-driving" hardware by default into all Model 3s

FSD hardware is known as "HW3" (now known as "FSD Computer") and is not in any Teslas at the moment.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1111788218142216192?ref_...

sliken• 7 years ago

HW3/AP3 started shipping recently.

pdq• 7 years ago

Per the new lease:

"Please note, customers who choose leasing over owning will not have the option to purchase their car at the end of the lease, because with full autonomy coming in the future via an over-the-air software update, we plan to use those vehicles in the Tesla ride-hailing network."

Elon once again promising fully autonomous vehicles in 3 years.

Also, isn't this a rental? A lease normally has a residual, so you can choose whether to buy the car.

danso2• 7 years ago

He’s promised FSD in 2019, just a couple months ago, even though Tesla logged no testing miles in the last 2 years in California: https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-tesla-full-self-drivin...

tntn• 7 years ago

I guess they are just counting on testing via the irresponsible tesla drivers who tape water bottles to the steering wheel and such.

Twirrim• 7 years ago

So more of the mostly deluded, same old, same old, Elon hype.

There's so many indicators that FSD is ages away from being safe, and so many stories of Tesla's just randomly steering in towards barriers and needing quick action from their drivers, even as recent as last month.

henryfjordan• 7 years ago

He didn't promise autonomous cars in 3 years, he promised they won't be ready for at least 3 years. Hence the leasing scheme

FireBeyond• 7 years ago

Other than the "The car will be able to self-drive, coast to coast, this year" back in Jan/Feb, you mean?

twoodfin• 7 years ago

Anyone want to lay odds on these cars ending up in a “certified pre-owned” program instead?

This seems like a scheme to both boost future new car sales and effectively “sell” the same car twice.

ergothus• 7 years ago

I recall a LOT of EV-1 owners (relatively speaking) that wanted to buy their vehicles when the program ended, and they were denied.

Doesn't mean anything here, other than it is really hard to predict what "dumb" choices companies will make.

Someone12342• 7 years ago

Unless they completely replaced the cells in the battery packs, I'd pass on a pre-owned EV. Even modern battery packs degrade year on year.

gibybo6• 7 years ago

If I could bet $100 to win $1 that they don't end up in a self-driving fleet at the end of the lease, I would.

kbos87• 7 years ago

It’s also interesting that they would even give the context that they plan on using these cars as part of a self driving network. Any other company could and would only say that there is no option for buyout and leave it at that.

_red• 7 years ago

I have yet speak to any experienced embedded developer who actually thinks "full autonomy" is remotely possible in the near/mid term. The suggestions that it is possible, seems to come mainly from junior developers and snake-oil salesman.

We don't even have "full autonomous" trains, planes, or trucks yet.

latch• 7 years ago

I generally agree that the lack of automation for seemingly simpler problems is good argument. However, there are a number of automated subway systems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_...

gibybo6• 7 years ago

"full autonomy" means lots of different things to different people.

Some people think of it as being able to drive anywhere at any time in any condition. This is unlikely to ever happen before AGI. What matters in Tesla's case is more likely being able to drive in some small number of places in specific circumstances without a physical driver in the vehicle (but possibly a remote one to handle unusual circumstances).

Now I don't think Tesla is going to even get to that in 3 years, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Waymo there.

sagarm• 7 years ago

I'm skeptical of autonomy in three years myself, but embedded engineers are hardly a convincing authority on the subject.

trickstra9• 7 years ago

how do you call those subway lines without driver cabin? They are in service for a number of years in a couple of cities around the world

njarboe2• 7 years ago

Would an auto-car that crashed at a rate 1/10th of humans be a successful "full autonomous" vehicle? You could save 30000 lives a year in the US by deploying such vehicles and probably more due to knock-on effects. But that would be about 10 auto-car deaths/per day. No way that works with the current media.

Unfortunately, it seems many people are not going to accept auto-cars with less than airplane like safety levels. Of course that will never happen. So yes, "full autonomous" vehicles are a long way off (probably forever), unless someone (Waymo?, Tesla?) can show they are much safer and some kind of national or state level laws are passed to restrict the legal liability of the makers and owners of such vechiles. Sort of like how ski resorts would not exist without special laws restricting liablity.

Spooky23• 7 years ago

Leases are rentals. A true lease always has a residual, but nothing forces the lessor to sell it to you.

It's yet another red flag for buying a Tesla, as if you have something happen that is an uninsured liability to the car, or won't be resolved in the timeframe at the lease, you're stuck.

oldjokes• 7 years ago

It's becoming hard to believe anything that Tesla puts out or Elon says. It is a real shame the $35K 3 turned out to be a lie, the amount of PR that phrase has generated over the years is on par with all of SpaceX.

linuxftw4• 7 years ago

Some of us knew it was a lie from the jump. It's called 'not believing the hype.' I knew it was a bait and switch as soon as it was announced.

Weirdly, this hasn't seemed to tarnish the reputation of tesla in the eyes of it's fans.

mannykannot• 7 years ago

Tesla seems to be coy about the terms - for example, how much does it cost to exceed the annual mileage cap? At the end of a lease, would you get a discount on a subsequent lease or purchase?

This is all probably moot, as I imagine Tesla's lease has a clause allowing it to unilaterally change the rules at any time, and it has displayed no reticence in doing so over other issues.

jaxbot• 7 years ago

The idea that Tesla could get fully auto vehicles out of the existing Model 3s their building today is laughable. Even top-tier AV companies, with larger teams and far more advanced sensors, can't. There's a huge difference between working 95% of the time, and working well enough for a full auto fleet, and Tesla won't get there with pure cameras and a single front-facing radar. It's possible they could retrofit the old cars with new hardware, but other AV companies have suggested that retrofits aren't automotive-grade enough to last over time (sensor mounts drift too much, etc).

Gpetrium• 7 years ago

This quote serves three purposes: (1) It emphasizes the value in software, not the car's 'carcass'; (2) It hypes a future marketplace and business model for Tesla's stock purchasers; (3) It tells the customer that they are better off buying the good instead of renting.

I agree that it seems to be a rental. If the business expects to continue to make updates to the car's software assuming that it will be determining factors for its value, it will be difficult to determine the residual value at the end.

Does that mean that leases will cease to exist? That we will find a way to price the software updates? or that older cars will stop being updated the same way cellphones & OS systems are?

kristianc2• 7 years ago

This quote serves three purposes: (1) It emphasizes the value in software, not the car's 'carcass';

If only it were like software. Producing another marginal unit of software is trivial.

philwelch3• 7 years ago

Tesla’s self-driving promises are reaching Theranos levels of sheer implausibility. The frustrating part is that they don’t need to make these absurd claims about self-driving; they already have a successful electric car business.

mhermher9• 7 years ago

You're not digging deep enough. The reason they need to hype it is because they don't have one.

pyify3• 7 years ago

Except that they actually have a limited form of self-driving, which has proven successful over millions of miles of driving?

Comparing something to Theranos only works if that something doesn't have a working product. You can see that Tesla's autopilot works. It isn't perfect yet but it is a real thing.

Cookingboy2• 7 years ago

This has nothing to do with FSD. Tesla can now set the lease rate with a very artificially low residual value so they can charge more monthly (but is offset somewhat by the capitalized cost deduction of the tax rebate), and then actually sell the car at market value after 3 years.

It's one way to double dip on the same vehicle and get more than 100% in revenue in respect to the original MSRP.

But sure throw that line in to cash in on the hype of ride sharing IPOs and FSD so they can raise a nice equity round in the near future.

jmpman• 7 years ago

When would they be able to book the monthly lease, and the subsequent sale to their bottom line? It seems like a lease wouldn’t be the best method to help the short term finances.

ForHackernews• 7 years ago

Well, that offer lasted all of two weeks?

legitster2• 7 years ago

I get the strong impression that even as a loss leader, the $35,000 figure was based on some back of envelope calculations. We know that they have had to expand or increase the cost in several ways since they started production.

I know they really want to make the Model T of electric cars, but it took about a decade of development for Ford to deliver one under $500. And I don't think Tesla has quite mastered the science of car production yet.

linuxftw4• 7 years ago

I believe it was an outright lie, an effort to solicit deposits and lure people into a bait-and-switch of higher priced models. All evidence to date suggests I'm right. Of course, they're never going to come out and say 'we fooled you' but I don't know what level of evidence people need before they reach the conclusion for themselves.

legitster2• 7 years ago

'Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence."

b_tterc_p• 7 years ago

And what evidence would that be

pyify3• 7 years ago

"All evidence to date suggests I'm right".

Can you give us some examples of all of this evidence?

Shivetya2• 7 years ago

Maybe unrealistic in the end but I think they realized it was cheaper to not change up the assembly line too much and instead just build them all with the same interior options. Removing extra speakers is easy, not installing all the ambient lighting is simple, swapping out a leather interior with cloth isn't as that not only is a large item it means you need to secure supplies for an option that may not have sufficient uptake to get a good discount.

plus the added bonus is that you can yourself choose to buy features you skipped out on earlier. It also would be a boon for resale as well. Letting the buyer decide to add options you passed on.

35k base model should probably been adjusted for inflation but Musk's ego boxed Tesla. Let alone that its one thousand or twelve hundred in delivery plus taxes on top of that 35k price so there never really is a 35k car. In the end I look at it this way, if your budget is so inflexible that less than a five percent change in price is make or break you should not be buying it in the first place.

aurailious2• 7 years ago

Getting to 37k isn't a bad accomplishment. It may not be the big number, but its still a pretty good price point. Hopefully this is the end of the chaos pricing has been the past few weeks.

I wonder if there will ever be a sub 30k car by Tesla someday. The average new car is around 37k now, so about half the market is under that.

mhermher9• 7 years ago

Maybe if Musk actually listened to the people he hires, they could have, you know, foreseen these kinds of things. The kind of things that car manufacturers forecast on a daily basis. Why is Tesla so uniquely chaotic?

mullen• 7 years ago

Maybe I am missing something but the Standard Range Plus Model 3 with no extras is about $34,500 (That is including Federal and California rebates).

kristianc2• 7 years ago

Ah, another Tesla announcement that's backtracked after a couple of weeks.

Purely as an outsider looking in it seems like there's a lot of caveat emptor about buying a Tesla: wait times seem apt to increase, models seem like they'll be arbitrarily subject to conditions, and random conditions seem to get attached about which models can and can't use chargers.

There also seems a high likelihood of waiting a long time and paying $2,500 deposit for something which never arrives. And if you do get stiffed, there seems to be an attitude of 'it's your fault' (usually for not spending even more money with Tesla).

Not the kind of consistency I'd want when making an investment in a car, to be honest.

leesec6• 7 years ago

There also seems a high likelihood of waiting a long time and paying $2,500 deposit for something which never arrives.

Any examples of this? Pretty sure everything has arrived at some point, albeit a delay.

pyify3• 7 years ago

If you were buying a car, would you not judge it by its merits, such as its handling abilities, safety, fuel costs, pollution, and ability to get you from A to B? That is the kind of consistency which most people look for when buying a car.

azhenley2• 7 years ago

This article makes the change sound negative and confusing.

But reading the original Tesla announcement [1], it all seems reasonable. People were buying the Standard Plus model six times more often than the Standard model, so they got rid of it. Good.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/update-our-vehicle-lineup

hn_throwaway_992• 7 years ago

Baloney. I'm sure lots of people who even wanted to buy the Standard model were put off because they never saw any actual deliveries of the 35k vehicle.

azhenley2• 7 years ago

As a Model 3 owner, I'm glad that they regularly shake things up. I want them adapting fast rather than waiting long periods of time to make changes.

melling• 7 years ago

Here’s a new interview with Musk on self-driving:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dEv99vxKjVI

The podcast if you prefer:

https://lexfridman.com/elon-musk/

usaphp• 7 years ago

Did they also dropped the price for a base model with autopilot by $1,500? It used to be $40,500 now it’s $39,000

xmpir• 7 years ago

So I guess jailbreaking Teslas will become a thing at some point in the future. If all the limits are software only people will find ways to use the car they own in the way they want...

crsv• 7 years ago

And suddenly the true context of their hacking competitions around their software platform make even more sense...

username2232• 7 years ago

And Elon will randomly brick people's cars out of spite. It's a strange future.

glitch003• 7 years ago

It already is: https://www.fastcompany.com/90209541/meet-the-renegade-whos-...

apolymath• 7 years ago

All I know is that Tesla is dominating the luxury car market right now.

steelframe• 7 years ago

As someone who owns both an I-PACE and a Model X, I can say that Tesla hasn't quite nailed the "luxury" part yet.

leesec6• 7 years ago

Once again I gotta say the negativity is astounding. People are so stoked to be rooting for this American tech company to fail. I really don't get it.

The main gripe I see is that Tesla misses deadlines or makes promises they cannot fulfill. Is this not super common in nearly every industry? Have none of you missed deadlines?

I remember this article[1]from last year stating GM would release fully autonomous cars with no steering wheel in 2019! Yet clearly that is not going to happen and I never heard any backlash, but I guess it's not cool to hate GM.

I also am astounded to see people constantly saying Autonomy is a decade+ away. They already have cars driving people 95% of their miles, which would've seemed impossible 6 years ago, and yet here we are, and the last 5% is going to take a decade? How many times are people going to doubt Elon before they realize they're betting against someone whose done the impossible many times over.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/12/16880978/gm-autonomous-ca...

dwighttk2• 7 years ago

They already have cars driving people 95% of their miles

I'm skeptical. I'd be surprised if more than 40% of my miles were freeway.

Call me when we have fully autonomous trains and then I'll start thinking about losing my skepticism about autonomous cars.

leesec6• 7 years ago

I'm skeptical. I'd be surprised if more than 40% of my miles were freeway.

I didn't mean this was the average but I probably should have said commutes. My commute is nearly all highway and I basically don't touch the car from on-ramp to exit-ramp.

Call me when we have fully autonomous trains and then I'll start thinking about losing my skepticism about autonomous cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_...

wil421• 7 years ago

People don’t want them to fail. Some are frustrated by the overpromises and Self Driving vaporware Elon has been pushing for years. I’d be fine with Tesla saying they will be the best electric car company in the world with best in class Driver Assist but I guess that’s what CEOs do.

I plan to buy a Tesla in 2-3 years I just hope they can get their pricing and production streamlined before I do otherwise I’ll buy something German.

dv_dt2• 7 years ago

A German maker was the only one to strongly fail some preliminary, but much simpler automatic emergency braking tests by the IIHS.

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/02/21/iihs-says-these-small-su...

kreetx• 7 years ago

Regarding the negativity towards Tesla: IIRC the specific author, Edward Niedermeyer, has had this same type of tone before (which is why I remember). So I'd say this is not representative of some general attitude, but of this particular guy.

leesec6• 7 years ago

Ahh, I actually understand the hit pieces. There is a lot of money to be made on Shorts if Tesla fails. I just don't understand the community of people who some how make being anti-Tesla a part of their identity.

mhermher9• 7 years ago

GM didn't take any money for those cars did they? FSD is scammy vaporware, and they are selling it now. Tesla is a dishonest company run by a narcissist.

nemo1618• 7 years ago

They already have cars driving people 95% of their miles, which would've seemed impossible 6 years ago, and yet here we are, and the last 5% is going to take a decade?

"The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time."

minikites2• 7 years ago

I really don't get it.

Tesla has over-promised and under-delivered for years while maintaining a tremendous amount of hubris throughout.

leesec6• 7 years ago

So people want the whole company to go bankrupt and for 50k people to lose their jobs and we have no one leading the charge towards electric vehicles?

The Internet is a weird and ridiculous place.

madengr• 7 years ago

Spending 90% of the money or time, on the last 10% of performance, is common in my experience. The ratio may be not that extreme, but that’s the crux of it.

humantiy2• 7 years ago

Once again I gotta say the negativity is astounding.

How do you figure what they did should be something that is considered a positive? They are raising the price of the base car that was supposed to be for the masses. Now granted to a degree it was a bait and switch anyway given that most people interested in the car want the bells and whistles that they don't get on the base model anyway. Raising the base price to me seems to be something that should be considered a negative no matter the auto maker.

astounded to see people constantly saying Autonomy is a decade+ away.

Because in all likelihood it is. What they've done in the last 6 years is impressive but wasn't impossible. Even if 95% of their miles can be done autonomously the other 5% is not to be snuffed at as being just as easy. I look at it as 80/20. They've done the 'easy' 80% of it, but the problem is now you're stuck with all the difficult next steps (ie one off situations, roads with no markers, construction, user driving mistakes, ect) as well as the potentials for legal liabilities if they go fully autonomous.

mrfusion• 7 years ago

The lease doesn’t look too bad but how much does insurance cost?

jefurii• 7 years ago

When are they going to make an electric car that regular working people can afford?

Tesla Shakes Up Model 3 Lineup

Related Stories