17 ms·

How much of this is because Tesla is new and the aftermarket support isn't there yet? I also see you mention "Tesla certified", but there are plenty of non-cert

by rconti 8y ago

How much of this is because Tesla is new and the aftermarket support isn't there yet? I also see you mention "Tesla certified", but there are plenty of non-certified shops people take their Tesla/Non-Tesla cars to all the time.

threeseed 8y ago
a) Tesla isn't new. b) Plenty of new cars come onto the market and I've never heard of any, ever needing to wait a year for parts. c) If you take it to a non-certified shop it ceases to be Tesla Certified which would mean a big hit to resale value.
- gambiting 8y ago
  Re: b) - exotic cars have this problem a lot, a brand new model of a Lamborghini or a Ferrari usually has zero availablity of parts for 6-12 months after deliveries start, if you get into an accident right at the beginning you might seriously wait a year for a replacement part, in certain states such car would just be lemoned even though the damage might be relatively simple to repair, all because you can't get the parts. On my own AMG I've had to wait 3 months for an engine part specifically because it's sent directly from Affalterbach and they don't exactly keep lots of spares around. Not as bad as a year but I can totally see it happening if your car is not super common.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    This is one among many reasons that almost nobody buys a Lamborghini or Ferrari (and among the people who do, for almost none of them is it their daily driver).
    - idlewords 8y ago
      It's not their daily driver because they're waiting for parts!
    - bigDICK 8y ago
      Why would the truly rich care if one of their toys is damaged? Certainly they have many supercars in their stable. Side note: Wasn't John Carmack using Ferrari's as a daily driver when he wasn't modifying them and when the dealership would sell them to him?
    - joering2 8y ago
      There is big difference between owning Lamborgini and Ferrari - I take if you don’t know it then you don’t own neither. Anyways, I own two Ferraris but these are like good 1985 Burgundy - you dont drink it you collect it. I plan to sell both in next 10 years at 130% markup with very small millage, less than 1000 miles (usually me and wife do a round around a city once a quarter) Laborginis are rich mans way of showing he loves throwing money away. No self-made or self-respected wealthy businesman would get one, the millage is irrelevant and they don’t get more expensive withing the time. Basketball and football players love them. Parts are cheap and plenty. Ferraris take so long to fix because collectors barely drive them abd even less often get them crashed.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        I think you meant this for the comment above mine. I could give a shit about the difference between Ferraris and Lamborghinis.
      - Theodores 8y ago
        I don't think you understand the Lamborghini brand proposition. Obviously the cars are just a brand of the VW group with Audi or even SEAT parts beneath the bodywork, however, the heritage is not what you describe. Mr Lamborghini was a self made entrepreneur and he was viewed as some peasant of a tractor manufacturer by Mr Ferrari. So when he made his own car he made them for self-starters like himself. He had no heritage to play on, didn't go racing and he wasn't a snob. Meanwhile Ferrari chased the stuffy old money, the old people that didn't have Lamborghini 'larger than life' style but neded the proverbial male body extension. So long as they were the right class (upper) Ferrari was okay to sell to them, he didn't want to see 'common scum' like Mr Lamborghini driving his creations. Although VW have done great things with the Lamborghini brand and made the cars desirable to those you disparage, the fact that so many parts are shared with Audi and even SEAT cars changes matters when it comes to parts availability - you can get them. As for those Ferrari cars and what the brand stands for there is a lot to take on board. The Formula 1 side is still a mobile billboard for fags, even if the 'Marlb*ro' logo is subliminal in the West, in developing markets this sponsorship deal is selling the coffin nails nicely. Then there are the chintzy theme parks and the toy/keyfob business. I know everyone has an inner nine year old to appeal to but I don't see how Enzo would have liked this distraction from the racing passion. As for the resale market and this matter of appreciation in prices. Ferrari are a glorified 'Franklin Mint' these days, it is all about artificial scarcity. The Ferraris that have real value go on the track at Goodwood and Silverstone - doing so is very much part of the pedigree and they do get bashed about a bit. A 1960's 275 or other icon of the brand sees the track and has storied heritage - the people that drive them being real drivers. New 'designed for speculator' Ferraris might appreciate but they don't have intrinsic historical value. People in the Arabian Peninsula and the United States who have more money than taste buy them for the garage and never drive them to the edge in order to win a race. Technologically the cars have also lost a bit of the lustre. The whole business was based on selling V12 engines which no longer works. If it is petrol power you want then the McLaren cars have the race winning innovation these days whether in the engine bay or the carbon fibre tub. Take away the prancing horse and the design isn't iconic really, on a scale of one to 'Testarossa' a modern Ferrari is nowhere near. I am not sure that owning a vast quantity of Ferrari cars gives someone a particularly unvarnished viewpoint. Taxi drivers think the Prius is the best car ever for monetary return on investment but that doesn't make them experts. For a long time antiques were a good investment, people sold them in rings, the things forever going up in value. Then IKEA came along and fashions changed - chintz was chucked out. The problem with the not-so-classic car market (recent supercars) is that four door saloons from the Tesla company provide the instant acceleration thrill that is so much more appealing than noisy exhausts. There is major danger that once EV takes over nobody is going to be interested in the heritage-less garage queen cars that were only bought by rich people for investment potential. You won't be able to drive them in cities due to emissions, so they won't even have utility value. Anyway, good on the Lamborghini owners for living the dream that Mr Lamborghini innately understood.
  - twblalock 8y ago
    Tesla is aiming to be a mass-market car manufacturer -- the Model 3 is proof of this. The standards for mass market are different -- people expect to drive their cars daily and expect maintenance and repairs to be relatively painless. Most mass-market manufacturers are able to make that happen. Why can't Tesla?
    - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
      Yeah like they could take a page out of the Hyundai book (back when Korean cars were considered notoriously unreliable) and offer a ten year warranty, maybe replacing vehicles immediately instead of covering repairs. Then people wouldn't complain about reliability, even if it was a problem
- rconti 8y ago
  Can you explain (c)? What ceases to be Tesla Certified? The car? I've never heard of a car itself as being certified by a manufacturer, or it mattering. The only context I can imagine is a dealership selling a used car as "certified pre-owned" or similar (that's BMW's term, others have their own). That means they provide a warranty with the used car, have inspected it, etc. So I suppose, in theory, Tesla could claim that if you get the car repaired by a non-certified shop, they will not in the future take your car in as a 'certified' vehicle for sale, which only means that your resale value when selling the car back to Tesla, assuming they do such a thing is lower. As far as I know, due to Magnusson-Moss, the manufacturer cannot require that you service the vehicle at their facility or a "certified" facility. Of course, if you have sub-par work done, or parts installed, they can refuse future warranty claims if those subsequent claims were a result of sub-par work or parts. This isn't to say that manufacturers can't try to make it hard on you if you don't do what they want you to do. But, all that said, I still feel that (c) is a point without meaning.

by rconti 8y ago

threeseed 8y ago

a) Tesla isn't new. b) Plenty of new cars come onto the market and I've never heard of any, ever needing to wait a year for parts. c) If you take it to a non-certified shop it ceases to be Tesla Certified which would mean a big hit to resale value.

gambiting 8y ago
Re: b) - exotic cars have this problem a lot, a brand new model of a Lamborghini or a Ferrari usually has zero availablity of parts for 6-12 months after deliveries start, if you get into an accident right at the beginning you might seriously wait a year for a replacement part, in certain states such car would just be lemoned even though the damage might be relatively simple to repair, all because you can't get the parts. On my own AMG I've had to wait 3 months for an engine part specifically because it's sent directly from Affalterbach and they don't exactly keep lots of spares around. Not as bad as a year but I can totally see it happening if your car is not super common.
- tptacek 8y ago
  This is one among many reasons that almost nobody buys a Lamborghini or Ferrari (and among the people who do, for almost none of them is it their daily driver).
  - idlewords 8y ago
    It's not their daily driver because they're waiting for parts!
  - bigDICK 8y ago
    Why would the truly rich care if one of their toys is damaged? Certainly they have many supercars in their stable. Side note: Wasn't John Carmack using Ferrari's as a daily driver when he wasn't modifying them and when the dealership would sell them to him?
  - joering2 8y ago
    There is big difference between owning Lamborgini and Ferrari - I take if you don’t know it then you don’t own neither. Anyways, I own two Ferraris but these are like good 1985 Burgundy - you dont drink it you collect it. I plan to sell both in next 10 years at 130% markup with very small millage, less than 1000 miles (usually me and wife do a round around a city once a quarter) Laborginis are rich mans way of showing he loves throwing money away. No self-made or self-respected wealthy businesman would get one, the millage is irrelevant and they don’t get more expensive withing the time. Basketball and football players love them. Parts are cheap and plenty. Ferraris take so long to fix because collectors barely drive them abd even less often get them crashed.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      I think you meant this for the comment above mine. I could give a shit about the difference between Ferraris and Lamborghinis.
    - Theodores 8y ago
      I don't think you understand the Lamborghini brand proposition. Obviously the cars are just a brand of the VW group with Audi or even SEAT parts beneath the bodywork, however, the heritage is not what you describe. Mr Lamborghini was a self made entrepreneur and he was viewed as some peasant of a tractor manufacturer by Mr Ferrari. So when he made his own car he made them for self-starters like himself. He had no heritage to play on, didn't go racing and he wasn't a snob. Meanwhile Ferrari chased the stuffy old money, the old people that didn't have Lamborghini 'larger than life' style but neded the proverbial male body extension. So long as they were the right class (upper) Ferrari was okay to sell to them, he didn't want to see 'common scum' like Mr Lamborghini driving his creations. Although VW have done great things with the Lamborghini brand and made the cars desirable to those you disparage, the fact that so many parts are shared with Audi and even SEAT cars changes matters when it comes to parts availability - you can get them. As for those Ferrari cars and what the brand stands for there is a lot to take on board. The Formula 1 side is still a mobile billboard for fags, even if the 'Marlb*ro' logo is subliminal in the West, in developing markets this sponsorship deal is selling the coffin nails nicely. Then there are the chintzy theme parks and the toy/keyfob business. I know everyone has an inner nine year old to appeal to but I don't see how Enzo would have liked this distraction from the racing passion. As for the resale market and this matter of appreciation in prices. Ferrari are a glorified 'Franklin Mint' these days, it is all about artificial scarcity. The Ferraris that have real value go on the track at Goodwood and Silverstone - doing so is very much part of the pedigree and they do get bashed about a bit. A 1960's 275 or other icon of the brand sees the track and has storied heritage - the people that drive them being real drivers. New 'designed for speculator' Ferraris might appreciate but they don't have intrinsic historical value. People in the Arabian Peninsula and the United States who have more money than taste buy them for the garage and never drive them to the edge in order to win a race. Technologically the cars have also lost a bit of the lustre. The whole business was based on selling V12 engines which no longer works. If it is petrol power you want then the McLaren cars have the race winning innovation these days whether in the engine bay or the carbon fibre tub. Take away the prancing horse and the design isn't iconic really, on a scale of one to 'Testarossa' a modern Ferrari is nowhere near. I am not sure that owning a vast quantity of Ferrari cars gives someone a particularly unvarnished viewpoint. Taxi drivers think the Prius is the best car ever for monetary return on investment but that doesn't make them experts. For a long time antiques were a good investment, people sold them in rings, the things forever going up in value. Then IKEA came along and fashions changed - chintz was chucked out. The problem with the not-so-classic car market (recent supercars) is that four door saloons from the Tesla company provide the instant acceleration thrill that is so much more appealing than noisy exhausts. There is major danger that once EV takes over nobody is going to be interested in the heritage-less garage queen cars that were only bought by rich people for investment potential. You won't be able to drive them in cities due to emissions, so they won't even have utility value. Anyway, good on the Lamborghini owners for living the dream that Mr Lamborghini innately understood.
- twblalock 8y ago
  Tesla is aiming to be a mass-market car manufacturer -- the Model 3 is proof of this. The standards for mass market are different -- people expect to drive their cars daily and expect maintenance and repairs to be relatively painless. Most mass-market manufacturers are able to make that happen. Why can't Tesla?
  - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
    Yeah like they could take a page out of the Hyundai book (back when Korean cars were considered notoriously unreliable) and offer a ten year warranty, maybe replacing vehicles immediately instead of covering repairs. Then people wouldn't complain about reliability, even if it was a problem
rconti 8y ago
Can you explain (c)? What ceases to be Tesla Certified? The car? I've never heard of a car itself as being certified by a manufacturer, or it mattering. The only context I can imagine is a dealership selling a used car as "certified pre-owned" or similar (that's BMW's term, others have their own). That means they provide a warranty with the used car, have inspected it, etc. So I suppose, in theory, Tesla could claim that if you get the car repaired by a non-certified shop, they will not in the future take your car in as a 'certified' vehicle for sale, which only means that your resale value when selling the car back to Tesla, assuming they do such a thing is lower. As far as I know, due to Magnusson-Moss, the manufacturer cannot require that you service the vehicle at their facility or a "certified" facility. Of course, if you have sub-par work done, or parts installed, they can refuse future warranty claims if those subsequent claims were a result of sub-par work or parts. This isn't to say that manufacturers can't try to make it hard on you if you don't do what they want you to do. But, all that said, I still feel that (c) is a point without meaning.