They do account for electricity costs in the "gas savings":

"The average person drives between 10,000 and 15,000 miles and spends between $1,000 and $1,500 on gasoline per year. In comparison, the cost of electricity to power Model 3 over the same distance is up to three times lower. Over the six year average length of car ownership, that's between $4,300 and $6,400 in gasoline savings.

We've assumed a fuel economy of 28 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered sedan, for example, the 2017 BMW 3 series. We've also assumed the national average of $0.13 per kilowatt-hour for electricity and $2.85 per gallon for premium gasoline over the next six years."

That is disgraceful behaviour.

I guess bottled water then should be considered free since it's significantly healthier than drinking any else.

Or maybe my laptop should be considered free since it's used to earn money.

If you order right now, there's a chance you'll still get the car by the end of the year (which is all that really matters with the credit), but you'd be cutting it pretty close. All Tesla claimed was that Oct 15 is the deadline for guaranteeing getting the car before the end of the year. Likely, there'll be a bit of leeway that will see people ordering within the next few days also get the car by the end of the year, especially with a 4-6 week promised turnaround for the AWD models (6-10 on the RWD one talked about here cuts it really close).

The full $7500 tax credit is applicable on any new, inventory, or demo vehicle previously not registered to someone until December 31st, 2018. You might have to order a Model 3 by a certain date to take delivery before then, but the tax credit is applicable until the end of the year.

They don't? Different marketing channels is very different than some egalitarian no advertising model. Tesla was launched on 'incintive to buy no matter the price', their roadster was hardly practical, nor superior to supercars at the time.

You're making a huge assumption. Tesla's past behavior is that they fill their assembly line with the highest margin cars until they run low on demand for them, then add lower margin cars. That says nothing about the profitability of the $35k car. Plus, we're talking marginal profitably: the assembly line is a sunk cost now that it's fully purchased.

I was specifically addressing their claims of disrupting the buying process. Under that criteria, ending price obfuscation (especially the doc fee) should be table stakes. As for the gas savings, it wouldn't be bad at all if they trumpeted the net cost after 5 years and clearly demonstrated the savings, but they lead with a made up price that no one will be paying. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I think part of the point of being disruptive is that you don't need to sink that low.

Thank god in most places in the world that kind of disruption is illegal.

Did Apple include TCO in their iPhone pricing given that they support their device longer than other OEMs ? No.

Did Toyota include TCO in their hybrid car pricing given that it also reduces gas consumption? No.

Did Rolex include TCO in their watch pricing given that the resale value doesn't significantly depreciate ? No.

Nobody does this because it's intentionally deceptive.

I keep seeing people saying "it's too late", but the order page literally says "All customers are eligible for the full $7,500 Federal Tax Credit if they take delivery by the end of the year."

As long as you take delivery before Jan 1, you will get the $7500 federal tax credit. Tesla said you had to order by Oct 15th to guarantee delivery before then.

> It seemed pretty shady to me to charge customers for a feature that wasn't delivered or legally approved or likely even finished

It's still available for the Model X and Model S. The disclosure when you pay for it is very clear. They are not acting sketchy when they sell it to you. I'd guess it has more to do with not enough people ordering it, so removing the option streamlines fulfillment.

> I suspect they're finding the shipped hardware isn't enough to accomplish what they want with the necessary reliability.

Yeah they already admitted to this. Anyone who has paid for full self driving is getting a Hardware 3.0 (HW3) upgrade for free. They said full self driving will require HW3.

> Total speculation, but I'd bet a chocolate chip cookie that they'll find they need to make changes to the sensor array as well.

Yeah, as an owner I'm pretty worried that will be the case but I guess we will see. I doubt they will admit to this publicly though - they seem adamant that the sensors today should be sufficient.

You're right, they're including a $2,500 California rebate.

I'm the opposite direction. I got a RWD LR model 3, but I hardly ever drive it. And when I do it's all local stuff, well under 100 miles per day. I'd rather have saved the $4,000 and gotten a mid-range.

If someone approached me and offered to trade their mid-range + $3,500 for my long-range, I'd happily take that deal.

My guess is that all the battery is used and the extra capacity allows for a "full" charge without really getting full. It could also let the range stay at the original level for a lot longer as the battery deteriorates. I would hope so anyway.

Lithium batteries do not use rare earths.

Tesla's specific battery chemistry uses significantly less cobalt than the other common vehicle batteries

They're doing it with performance models. Their hardware is basically identical to non-performance AWD.

I've been on roller coasters that launch from 0 to 120 mph in 3.8 seconds, which is quicker than a Roadster 2.0. I rode it enough times that even that kind of acceleration no longer felt mind-blowing.

I'm worried that getting a car that does 0-60 in 3.3 would actually feel somewhat underwhelming considering that I'm, I guess "calibrated", for something quicker. Maybe I'd feel different though when I'm in control with the power at my command.

I'll probably test drive a Model 3 next year.

On the plus side, the Model 3 is much better with the cooling issues that S/X have when track racing. What cars this inexpensive have good downforce?

Can you kindly recommend a good $40k-ish car that actually generates downforce?

How much does aero matter on a 4100 lb. car? (1850 kg)

If it's only a software update, when most of ML efforts are open sourced, I don't see why I can't install my own solution.

I continue to be baffled why people are baffled that most people prefer not to travel in cramped, enclosed spaces with random strangers and without the option to carry more than what you can hold in your hands. Sometimes people even have more than one small child with them. Is that really so hard to understand? The personal transport vehicle has been desirable from the beginning of time and now (almost) everyone can afford one. The big downsides are traffic congestion and space taken up with parking and roads. Those can be almost completely mitigated with cheap tunneling tech and automatic driving. Musk and friends are serious working on both of those projects also.