i last joined in on page five, i can't believe we're at like 10 pages already.
Its amazing a bunch of non tesla owners are upset about this. I'm a member of several tesla owners groups because friends know i want one, and i haven't seen a single actual tesla owner complain about this.
the story should actually be Tesla doing something good for its owners.
I've said it others have said it, none of this is cloak and dagger, its all very open. Anyone who bought a 60kw car would have to be willfully ignorant to not realize that they paid less for a 75kw battery that they could upgrade.
Every tesla comes with all the hardware for the autopilot software. Are you guys upset that you can buy the car without the autopilot software that you can buy later? Its the same fucking thing.
It makes sense that people who invested in the product are ok with it, and those that choose not to invest are more likely to complain about it... I don't think that really proves much other than people who skew towards accepting the practice are more likely to try the product, and vice versa.
I personally don't see the autopilot as the same situation - that product will require constant updates and tweaking, the infrastructure required to maintain I can justify Tesla charging extra for it.
I do have a hard time seeing why people are so upset in either direction - I happen to be mildly disappointed that this practice has seeped into a new and burgeoning industry, but it would just be one factor among many to consider when purchasing. IMO, it doesn't do anything to encourage loyalty, because lowering the price point of the longer range model would show time that the company put the customer as a higher priority than most industries do. I don't get really worked up about it though.
I have been part of an organization that did this practice of limiting access to customers when it cost them nothing, and in that scenario it generated much more short term revenue at the cost of long term customer loyalty and product quality. It's a rather specific scenario, but in my part time job teaching martial arts (Brazilian jiu jitsu), it can take years to move between levels.
The organization realized that it could raise the prices of tuition for full access to the academy - suddenly long term students were charged for the ability to train with people of different levels, and new students joined at a "lower" rate while being restricted from training with anyone but lower ranks. Unless you paid a premium fee, then you could join any class. The thinking was that they could gouge the higher level students for higher rates, while elongating the beginner phase of new students, milking them for a longer amount of time in a sport where the phase after beginner has a high rate of attrition.
The formula worked really well while the owner was still a big name in the UFC, but as more and more competition opened up in the area, students realized they were little more than a bottom line to the owner, and numbers dwindled. Furthermore, the quality of the product dwindled, as limiting access to varied levels of training offers unique insights into the sport.
I don't see this as a cautionary tale for Tesla, but I do see it as a cautionary tale for consumers. It has made me much more likely to buy from a business that shows more than cursory care for the customer (especially when it doesn't provide PR), because the culture of the business is skewed towards valuing the customer. The result is usually a more positive product experience regarding the intangibles.
