3 ms·
> This isn't the same thing at all. There's nothing wrong with removing features from a vehicle while you're the owner of it. If someone traded in an ICE car wi
by kennend3 4y ago
> This isn't the same thing at all. There's nothing wrong with removing features from a vehicle while you're the owner of it. If someone traded in an ICE car with a turbocharger, would it be wrong for a dealer to remove that before selling it?
If you say so.. personally, if I bought a used car, then found out features were removed i'd be pissed off.. then again, i am not a tesla apologist.
The "owner" is not the one removing the features.. TESLA IS.. so they can charge the new owner to restore the features.
FOr your turbocharger - Yes, if it was listed on the car's features, then removed after you bought it, it would be wrong to remove it. In fact this could be considered fraud.
Apple consumers and Tesla consumers have one very odd feature in common - ruthlessly defending things.
I dont get why they feel a "need" to do this. You seriously wrote "there is nothign wrong wiht removing features.." .. OMG.
If you enjoy having tesla do this to you, by all means continue to buy their products. I dont think their behaviour is fair and so i wont buy one.
- josephcsible 4y ago> The "owner" is not the one removing the features.. TESLA IS.. My point was that when they disabled FSD in those cases, Tesla was the owner. > FOr your turbocharger - Yes, if it was listed on the car's features, then removed after you bought it, it would be wrong to remove it. In fact this could be considered fraud. Let's use a simpler example then: imagine my spare tire wore out and I didn't bother replacing it. Is it fraud if I sell my car without doing so? > You seriously wrote "there is nothign wrong wiht removing features.." .. OMG. You elided a critical part of what I said. Here's what my whole sentence was: "There's nothing wrong with removing features from a vehicle while you're the owner of it."