6 ms·

I think this is great but I continue to wonder about Tesla's plan here. The Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages. Other manufa

by avalys 3y ago

I think this is great but I continue to wonder about Tesla's plan here. The Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages. Other manufacturers were behind for years on efficiency, range, etc. but are now catching up - and other manufacturers are far better at making an actual _car_ than Tesla. Build quality, quality control, durability, comfort, noise, etc. Unless Tesla is so confident that their manufacturing skills will give them a continuing and durable cost advantage - that makes up for the fact that they haven't innovated or even improved their basic vehicle design for the past 10 years - I don't see how this works to their advantage.

jabart 3y ago
This would mean they are a nationwide power company with the ability to charge more kWH for reduced charging time. Add in solar panels,battery banks, and optimizing recharging with the local power company and it's printing cash at that point. I think it's also that the EV market needs better charging stations, that are more reliable as the existing charging brands have a bad reputation. Tesla also needs charging stations to work for non-tesla vehicles or the trust in a EV would drop.
rtkwe 3y ago
This lets them bring in tons of money from owners of other manufacturer's cars using their chargers. It also means they don't get forced into CCS in NA which was the probable alternative path to convincing other manufacturers to use their NACS hardware.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  The supercharger network is just a drop in the bucket compared to what they make from selling new cars. And there will be quite a lot of competition for fast chargers, there's no moat at all there. It's an interesting business decision.
starik36 3y ago
> other manufacturers are far better at making an actual car Are they really "far better"? My wife's Tesla hasn't had any issues in the last 3 years. The build quality is great. Every time I have a chance to take the Tesla over my Kia, I do it because it's so much more pleasant to drive it. Over the years I've had many cars. I am struggling to think of one better than the current Tesla that we have.
- croes 3y ago
  Are the cars on the same price level?
  - starik36 3y ago
    After the rebates (here in Southern California), Tesla Model 3 is actually cheaper.
- whycombagator 3y ago
  What other brands have you owned? Kia is not a luxury brand. Tesla competes in the luxury segment
  - kcb 3y ago
    To be fair, Kia EVs are in the same price range as Teslas.
    - whycombagator 3y ago
      Good point, the EV6 and Model Y are comparable in price. I suppose I’d be curious to know if GP was referring to an EV Kia
- JLCarveth 3y ago
  For one thing, other car manufacturers succeed in making the car look good. if you don't mind driving around in a bar of soap, Tesla is fine.
constantly 3y ago
Speaking for myself, but although I loathe Elon and deride Tesla’s build quality, there’s truly nothing like driving around a Plaid Model S for it’s absolutely tearjerking speed. The weird steering wheel continues to annoy, however. Stepping back though, one can get a performance Model 3 very inexpensively, relatively, and as far as I can tell or have seen, no other manufacturer outside of Porsche (with BMW making some minor inroads) has electric cars close to as fast. So if given a choice between a ridiculously fast Tesla and a, say, much slower Volvo for the same or more money, I’ll go with the Tesla. Not that I base the entire purchase on acceleration performance, but all else being relatively equal I will be driving a Tesla until others catch up.
- 650REDHAIR 3y ago
  I couldn’t disagree more. Anything that does 0-60 in under 10s is fast enough for me. I’d rather have a quieter and more comfortable ride. I have an actual race car to race on an actual track and don’t need to endanger myself or others going Plaid speeds on public roadways. I have a 5 year old Avalon Hybrid that was in the bodyshop and rented a Tesla for a month and it was awful. Brand new and it felt like I was driving a Wish.com golf cart. The only redeeming feature was the supercharger in my building.
  - b0sk 3y ago
    that’s not the experience most of the drivers desire
    - gabrielsroka 3y ago
      I'm not arguing, but do you have a source for this? I happen to agree with GP. I'm 55, I want a quiet, comfortable car. I don't care about performance.
    - mbushey 3y ago
      Nor is it the experience anyone with a Tesla experiences. Nothing else comes close to Tesla in build quality (My wife's Subi Forrester is a flaming POS in comparison) or driving experience. Every other car company makes vehicles to make money, and fail on target after warranty (or in the case of Ford during warranty costing Ford billions in warranty costs). Tesla seems to "break" capitalism, they make their cars to last and NOT break.
KindAndFriendly 3y ago
Maybe they foresee that the actual electric cars will be on par in the near future and hence focus on being the leader in energy distribution.
alienzx 3y ago
They've been clear since day 1 they are an energy company, not a car company.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  This is a narrative grafted on after the fact. When Eberhard and Tarpenning founded Tesla - years before Elon was involved - it was founded as a car company.
  - gabrielsroka 3y ago
    > Tesla was incorporated in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning as Tesla Motors. The company's name is a tribute to inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla. In February 2004, via a $6.5 million investment, Elon Musk became the company's largest shareholder. He became CEO in 2008.
bonestamp2 3y ago
Their business plan is that they know they won't make every EV that is sold, but they will make money by charging many more than they sell. The list of Manufacturers on board at this time: Ford, GM, Rivian, Volvo (and presumably Polstar). Hyundai and Stellantis are considering it. If they join, and it'd be silly not to at this point, that's about half the car market right there. Now it's just up to the German and Japanese automakers.
- WorldMaker 3y ago
  Also, SAE (the Society of Automotive Engineers) just announced that they are formally adopting NACS as the standard moving forward for North America. https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775208/tesla-nacs-electric-car-charging-standard-sae-chargepoint https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775208/tesla-nacs-elect...
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  > Their business plan is that they know they won't make every EV that is sold, but they will make money by charging many more than they sell. That's such a tough market, though. They make thousands of dollars per car they sell. Fast chargers are for road trips, which means most EV owners don't rely on them day-to-day. Making the same thousands of dollars of profit from fast charging is no small task. And given it has to be made over the long haul, it's even harder to get the same value. Combine that with the fact that there are already lots of non-Tesla fast chargers and there will be ever more going forward, and I think this business decision looks risky. I can only interpret it as a statement on what they think is going to happen to their new car profit margin.
  - bonestamp2 3y ago
    Sure, but they also get to remain the leader and not have to change all of their cars and chargers, so it's a convenient way to make some surplus revenue. The next closest company in terms of charging infrastructure is VW and they're nowhere near Telsa.
hahla 3y ago
They generate a decent profit on supercharging and increased usage = increased profits.. On the maufacturing side market is saturated with Teslas. They keep dropping the price to increase demand but you can only play that game for so long.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages NACS for Ford doesn't mean a Supercharger experience. Tesla's tight integration will continue to yield fruit for at least a few more years.
- vel0city 3y ago
  NACS for Ford does mean a Supercharger experience. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/05/25/ford-ev-customers-to-gain-access-to-12-000-tesla-superchargers--.html https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023... Allegedly once a physical adapter comes out all existing CCS Fords will be able to access the Supercharger network with Plug and Charge.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > NACS for Ford does mean a Supercharger experience The Supercharger will still be talking to a Ford-built port connected to a Ford battery run on Ford software. I’m optimistic. But it’s not as tight as Tesla all through.
sxg 3y ago
The plan seems very clear to me. They developed a better charger that helped kickstart the market and gave them a competitive advantage. In the future, differentiating on a charger becomes a disadvantage as the EV market gets larger and Tesla owns a smaller percentage, meaning most charging stations will not be compatible with Teslas. The inflection point between the charger being a competitive advantage/disadvantage is occurring around now. Additionally, licensing the rights to the charger gives Tesla a stake in the entire EV market as a whole.
- kcb 3y ago
  All Teslas sold today are compatible with CCS chargers.
  - brewdad 3y ago
    Unless you found yourself in a spot with no other options, I can't imagine any Telsa owner would choose to use a CCS charger that is a worse experience for them in every way.
    - kcb 3y ago
      I wouldn't go out of my way for it but there happens to be an EA charger more directly on the route I frequently travel. So it's nice to have the option.
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    Software compatible. Still have to spend $175 for the physical adapter, it does not come with the car. No charger, in fact, comes with a Tesla these days. I did buy the adapter, of course, because though I may not ever use it I like having the option.
notacoward 3y ago
Seems like you answered your own question. Tesla realizes that other makers are at least perceived to be better at making actual cars. It's immaterial whether that's actually true (though I personally happen to believe it is) because perception is what matters in the market. Therefore, continuing to focus on cars is a losing strategy. They're pivoting to their only real long-term differentiator, which is the charging network and the hardware that connects to it. The interesting question here IMO is when they made that choice.
ryzvonusef 3y ago
Tesla is confident in their economic skills. They have multiple sources of revenue, both one time (they have massive margins on cars) and recurring (selling software on cars, and money from the Energy division, plus now from charging), and they have a LOT in the bank (a sweet 15-20 Billion cash, iirc). Other legacy companies have loads of baggage, and they cannot compete. [1] Supercharging is no longer the moat they must have, and they are willing to drain it to increase more revenue from the access instead. ---- [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23771407/ford-f150-lightning-price-increase-cancel-order-dealer https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23771407/ford-f150-lightn...
gizmo888 3y ago
First - Tesla had to open charging to other manufacturers to receive additional governmental subsidies. Second - Tesla will get addition 7 plus billions grants to add additional charging infrastructure. Third - Tesla will add at least another 10 to 20 billion in charging revenue with at least 30 percent profit to the bottom line. Forth - Once all the other manufacturers signs on, they can offer other services… IMHO
- _2z1p 3y ago
  Plus if their standard takes hold they don’t end up being the next BetaMax of history.
  - maxerickson 3y ago
    It's definitely a case where network effects are good for everybody. Like you can travel across say lower Michigan on the Supercharger network right now, but there's ~2 planned stop routes from the Mackinac Bridge to Detroit, it's tenuous, not some huge lead.
willio58 3y ago
Tesla isn't doing this out of the kindness of their heart, they make money off of charging cars. I bet the money they make off of charging stations comes easier too. Like they really just need to pay for maintenance. Compared to building cars, delivering them, providing service, etc. it's kind of a no-brainer to just make tesla chargers able to charge all EV's and just keep building out that network.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  But why wouldn't someone (really, anyone) be just as equipped to build out NACS stations? Each new manufacturer switching over to NACS means the really big companies (bp, Shell) who already have tons of physical land and infrastructure, will be more incentivized to serve NACS, doesn't it?
  - gizmo888 3y ago
    Hopefully Buys out, Partnerships or Rents out all that Real Estate
  - worrycue 3y ago
    Don’t know about BP or Shell but local power companies seem prime to take over that space. Tesla relies on them for power. I don’t see why the local power companies won’t cut out the middle man that’s Tesla and service customers directly.
    - alephnerd 3y ago
      > local power companies seem prime to take over that space Theoretically yes, but in action they are hemmed by their regulators as they are quasi-public owned and operated.
    - willio58 3y ago
      In theory, they could do this, but local power companies are so regulated and bureaucratic that they'd never be able to take on building and maintaining charging stations for cars. At least that's how it is where I live (I have family that works at my local power company)
danans 3y ago
> I don't see how this works to their advantage It probably doesn't, apart from some kind of bragging rights about how their charge connector standard won in North America (which however facile, is important to the most zealous among their customer base). Tesla was forced to open their charging network to become eligible for federal tax credits. If Tesla starts preferencing or discounting charging for their cars in their network going forward, they will lose those credits and perhaps get in other trouble. Given that, they are making the best of the situation by partnering with their competitors, who themselves failed to have Tesla's foresight about the importance of a comprehensive charging network - even after Tesla clearly demonstrated the value in that. Remember, VW was forced to create Electrify America as part of the Dieselgate settlement.
pkulak 3y ago
Seems like a choice between continuing to compete in one market, or competing in the same market while also absolutely dominating another.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Which market is the one they will dominate? Supporting NACS is not a hurdle, and there are already quite a lot of non-Tesla DC fast chargers in existence. Some of them have already announced they'll add NACS plugs themselves. There's no magic to building another charging station, and if everyone supports plug-and-charge (or hell, just reliable credit card processing), it'll be a super competitive market with tight margins.
  - pkulak 3y ago
    All well and good to say, but every other company that has tried to charge EVs has utterly failed, and it's been over a decade now. Once customers can move freely between all the networks, the ones with bad reliability will disappear. Right now that's every network not Tesla. Like you said, the margins are tight. EA can't just lower their prices. And even if they could, who's gonna take a chance on a shitty network during a family road trip to save a couple bucks? Not me.
    - clouddrover 3y ago
      > but every other company that has tried to charge EVs has utterly failed You need a broader perspective. Europe is a bigger EV market than North America is at present. European charging networks that are going strong, offer faster charging than Tesla, and are growing include Fastned, Circle K, EnBW, Ionity, Shell, BP, etc. They've had the benefit of Europe standardizing on CCS type 2 Combo. When everyone can build to the same standard it drives investment and development.
      - pkulak 3y ago
        This is the North American charging standard. North America previously standardized on CCS1 (which is exactly the same as CCS2, but without 3-phase support, which we don't need here) and it has done nothing. My perspective is plenty broad. What point are you trying to make, exactly? That if we just continue doing exactly as we have, NA will turn into Europe eventually?
rootusrootus 3y ago
I think this is their way of saying the current profit margins aren't going to persist. It is exceedingly difficult to make a fast charging business with the kind of profit margin they currently rake in on new car sales, so giving up the single biggest reason people buy a Tesla is a statement unto itself.
huijzer 3y ago
Sandy Munro currently believes that Tesla is 5 years ahead. Heck, even the Ford CEO has openly said that it’s very hard to catch up to Tesla in terms of software, batteries, and vehicle design [1]. For example, here is a video explaining the differences in the Tesla vehicle manufacturing over the years [2]. [1]: https://youtu.be/JdId8tXiJIo https://youtu.be/JdId8tXiJIo [2]: https://youtu.be/WNWYk4DdT_E https://youtu.be/WNWYk4DdT_E
nunez 3y ago
They were probably forced their hand here by the US Government, which is really sad given that the rest of the industry basically got a free pass for shunning EV adoption for years. That said, this is definitely making me interested in a non-Tesla for our next EV. Tesla's tech is unrivaled, but the competition has better hard products. Once the competition's lane-keeping/"smart" driving catch up to Tesla's APv2, I think I'm out. Even though I absolutely love using FSD beta.
clouddrover 3y ago
> The Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages. Not really. Tesla chargers are slow and low voltage compared to other charger manufacturers. Other charging networks are deploying 400 kW chargers. Like FastNed has deployed 400 kW chargers from EVBox and Alpitronic: - https://fastnedcharging.com/hq/fastned-and-evbox-join-forces-to-install-one-of-the-first-400-kw-ev-fast-chargers-in-europe/ https://fastnedcharging.com/hq/fastned-and-evbox-join-forces... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZWN_-a2j4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZWN_-a2j4

by avalys 3y ago

jabart 3y ago

This would mean they are a nationwide power company with the ability to charge more kWH for reduced charging time. Add in solar panels,battery banks, and optimizing recharging with the local power company and it's printing cash at that point. I think it's also that the EV market needs better charging stations, that are more reliable as the existing charging brands have a bad reputation. Tesla also needs charging stations to work for non-tesla vehicles or the trust in a EV would drop.

rtkwe 3y ago

This lets them bring in tons of money from owners of other manufacturer's cars using their chargers. It also means they don't get forced into CCS in NA which was the probable alternative path to convincing other manufacturers to use their NACS hardware.

rootusrootus 3y ago
The supercharger network is just a drop in the bucket compared to what they make from selling new cars. And there will be quite a lot of competition for fast chargers, there's no moat at all there. It's an interesting business decision.

starik36 3y ago

> other manufacturers are far better at making an actual car Are they really "far better"? My wife's Tesla hasn't had any issues in the last 3 years. The build quality is great. Every time I have a chance to take the Tesla over my Kia, I do it because it's so much more pleasant to drive it. Over the years I've had many cars. I am struggling to think of one better than the current Tesla that we have.

croes 3y ago
Are the cars on the same price level?
- starik36 3y ago
  After the rebates (here in Southern California), Tesla Model 3 is actually cheaper.
whycombagator 3y ago
What other brands have you owned? Kia is not a luxury brand. Tesla competes in the luxury segment
- kcb 3y ago
  To be fair, Kia EVs are in the same price range as Teslas.
  - whycombagator 3y ago
    Good point, the EV6 and Model Y are comparable in price. I suppose I’d be curious to know if GP was referring to an EV Kia
JLCarveth 3y ago
For one thing, other car manufacturers succeed in making the car look good. if you don't mind driving around in a bar of soap, Tesla is fine.

constantly 3y ago

Speaking for myself, but although I loathe Elon and deride Tesla’s build quality, there’s truly nothing like driving around a Plaid Model S for it’s absolutely tearjerking speed. The weird steering wheel continues to annoy, however. Stepping back though, one can get a performance Model 3 very inexpensively, relatively, and as far as I can tell or have seen, no other manufacturer outside of Porsche (with BMW making some minor inroads) has electric cars close to as fast. So if given a choice between a ridiculously fast Tesla and a, say, much slower Volvo for the same or more money, I’ll go with the Tesla. Not that I base the entire purchase on acceleration performance, but all else being relatively equal I will be driving a Tesla until others catch up.

650REDHAIR 3y ago
I couldn’t disagree more. Anything that does 0-60 in under 10s is fast enough for me. I’d rather have a quieter and more comfortable ride. I have an actual race car to race on an actual track and don’t need to endanger myself or others going Plaid speeds on public roadways. I have a 5 year old Avalon Hybrid that was in the bodyshop and rented a Tesla for a month and it was awful. Brand new and it felt like I was driving a Wish.com golf cart. The only redeeming feature was the supercharger in my building.
- b0sk 3y ago
  that’s not the experience most of the drivers desire
  - gabrielsroka 3y ago
    I'm not arguing, but do you have a source for this? I happen to agree with GP. I'm 55, I want a quiet, comfortable car. I don't care about performance.
  - mbushey 3y ago
    Nor is it the experience anyone with a Tesla experiences. Nothing else comes close to Tesla in build quality (My wife's Subi Forrester is a flaming POS in comparison) or driving experience. Every other car company makes vehicles to make money, and fail on target after warranty (or in the case of Ford during warranty costing Ford billions in warranty costs). Tesla seems to "break" capitalism, they make their cars to last and NOT break.

KindAndFriendly 3y ago

Maybe they foresee that the actual electric cars will be on par in the near future and hence focus on being the leader in energy distribution.

alienzx 3y ago

They've been clear since day 1 they are an energy company, not a car company.

arcticbull 3y ago
This is a narrative grafted on after the fact. When Eberhard and Tarpenning founded Tesla - years before Elon was involved - it was founded as a car company.
- gabrielsroka 3y ago
  > Tesla was incorporated in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning as Tesla Motors. The company's name is a tribute to inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla. In February 2004, via a $6.5 million investment, Elon Musk became the company's largest shareholder. He became CEO in 2008.

bonestamp2 3y ago

Their business plan is that they know they won't make every EV that is sold, but they will make money by charging many more than they sell. The list of Manufacturers on board at this time: Ford, GM, Rivian, Volvo (and presumably Polstar). Hyundai and Stellantis are considering it. If they join, and it'd be silly not to at this point, that's about half the car market right there. Now it's just up to the German and Japanese automakers.

WorldMaker 3y ago
Also, SAE (the Society of Automotive Engineers) just announced that they are formally adopting NACS as the standard moving forward for North America. https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775208/tesla-nacs-electric-car-charging-standard-sae-chargepoint https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775208/tesla-nacs-elect...
rootusrootus 3y ago
> Their business plan is that they know they won't make every EV that is sold, but they will make money by charging many more than they sell. That's such a tough market, though. They make thousands of dollars per car they sell. Fast chargers are for road trips, which means most EV owners don't rely on them day-to-day. Making the same thousands of dollars of profit from fast charging is no small task. And given it has to be made over the long haul, it's even harder to get the same value. Combine that with the fact that there are already lots of non-Tesla fast chargers and there will be ever more going forward, and I think this business decision looks risky. I can only interpret it as a statement on what they think is going to happen to their new car profit margin.
- bonestamp2 3y ago
  Sure, but they also get to remain the leader and not have to change all of their cars and chargers, so it's a convenient way to make some surplus revenue. The next closest company in terms of charging infrastructure is VW and they're nowhere near Telsa.

hahla 3y ago

They generate a decent profit on supercharging and increased usage = increased profits.. On the maufacturing side market is saturated with Teslas. They keep dropping the price to increase demand but you can only play that game for so long.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages NACS for Ford doesn't mean a Supercharger experience. Tesla's tight integration will continue to yield fruit for at least a few more years.

vel0city 3y ago
NACS for Ford does mean a Supercharger experience. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/05/25/ford-ev-customers-to-gain-access-to-12-000-tesla-superchargers--.html https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023... Allegedly once a physical adapter comes out all existing CCS Fords will be able to access the Supercharger network with Plug and Charge.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > NACS for Ford does mean a Supercharger experience The Supercharger will still be talking to a Ford-built port connected to a Ford battery run on Ford software. I’m optimistic. But it’s not as tight as Tesla all through.

sxg 3y ago

The plan seems very clear to me. They developed a better charger that helped kickstart the market and gave them a competitive advantage. In the future, differentiating on a charger becomes a disadvantage as the EV market gets larger and Tesla owns a smaller percentage, meaning most charging stations will not be compatible with Teslas. The inflection point between the charger being a competitive advantage/disadvantage is occurring around now. Additionally, licensing the rights to the charger gives Tesla a stake in the entire EV market as a whole.

kcb 3y ago
All Teslas sold today are compatible with CCS chargers.
- brewdad 3y ago
  Unless you found yourself in a spot with no other options, I can't imagine any Telsa owner would choose to use a CCS charger that is a worse experience for them in every way.
  - kcb 3y ago
    I wouldn't go out of my way for it but there happens to be an EA charger more directly on the route I frequently travel. So it's nice to have the option.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Software compatible. Still have to spend $175 for the physical adapter, it does not come with the car. No charger, in fact, comes with a Tesla these days. I did buy the adapter, of course, because though I may not ever use it I like having the option.

notacoward 3y ago

Seems like you answered your own question. Tesla realizes that other makers are at least perceived to be better at making actual cars. It's immaterial whether that's actually true (though I personally happen to believe it is) because perception is what matters in the market. Therefore, continuing to focus on cars is a losing strategy. They're pivoting to their only real long-term differentiator, which is the charging network and the hardware that connects to it. The interesting question here IMO is when they made that choice.

ryzvonusef 3y ago

Tesla is confident in their economic skills. They have multiple sources of revenue, both one time (they have massive margins on cars) and recurring (selling software on cars, and money from the Energy division, plus now from charging), and they have a LOT in the bank (a sweet 15-20 Billion cash, iirc). Other legacy companies have loads of baggage, and they cannot compete. [1] Supercharging is no longer the moat they must have, and they are willing to drain it to increase more revenue from the access instead. ---- [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23771407/ford-f150-lightning-price-increase-cancel-order-dealer https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23771407/ford-f150-lightn...

gizmo888 3y ago

First - Tesla had to open charging to other manufacturers to receive additional governmental subsidies. Second - Tesla will get addition 7 plus billions grants to add additional charging infrastructure. Third - Tesla will add at least another 10 to 20 billion in charging revenue with at least 30 percent profit to the bottom line. Forth - Once all the other manufacturers signs on, they can offer other services… IMHO

_2z1p 3y ago
Plus if their standard takes hold they don’t end up being the next BetaMax of history.
- maxerickson 3y ago
  It's definitely a case where network effects are good for everybody. Like you can travel across say lower Michigan on the Supercharger network right now, but there's ~2 planned stop routes from the Mackinac Bridge to Detroit, it's tenuous, not some huge lead.

willio58 3y ago

Tesla isn't doing this out of the kindness of their heart, they make money off of charging cars. I bet the money they make off of charging stations comes easier too. Like they really just need to pay for maintenance. Compared to building cars, delivering them, providing service, etc. it's kind of a no-brainer to just make tesla chargers able to charge all EV's and just keep building out that network.

ethanbond 3y ago
But why wouldn't someone (really, anyone) be just as equipped to build out NACS stations? Each new manufacturer switching over to NACS means the really big companies (bp, Shell) who already have tons of physical land and infrastructure, will be more incentivized to serve NACS, doesn't it?
- gizmo888 3y ago
  Hopefully Buys out, Partnerships or Rents out all that Real Estate
- worrycue 3y ago
  Don’t know about BP or Shell but local power companies seem prime to take over that space. Tesla relies on them for power. I don’t see why the local power companies won’t cut out the middle man that’s Tesla and service customers directly.
  - alephnerd 3y ago
    > local power companies seem prime to take over that space Theoretically yes, but in action they are hemmed by their regulators as they are quasi-public owned and operated.
  - willio58 3y ago
    In theory, they could do this, but local power companies are so regulated and bureaucratic that they'd never be able to take on building and maintaining charging stations for cars. At least that's how it is where I live (I have family that works at my local power company)

danans 3y ago

> I don't see how this works to their advantage It probably doesn't, apart from some kind of bragging rights about how their charge connector standard won in North America (which however facile, is important to the most zealous among their customer base). Tesla was forced to open their charging network to become eligible for federal tax credits. If Tesla starts preferencing or discounting charging for their cars in their network going forward, they will lose those credits and perhaps get in other trouble. Given that, they are making the best of the situation by partnering with their competitors, who themselves failed to have Tesla's foresight about the importance of a comprehensive charging network - even after Tesla clearly demonstrated the value in that. Remember, VW was forced to create Electrify America as part of the Dieselgate settlement.

pkulak 3y ago

Seems like a choice between continuing to compete in one market, or competing in the same market while also absolutely dominating another.

rootusrootus 3y ago
Which market is the one they will dominate? Supporting NACS is not a hurdle, and there are already quite a lot of non-Tesla DC fast chargers in existence. Some of them have already announced they'll add NACS plugs themselves. There's no magic to building another charging station, and if everyone supports plug-and-charge (or hell, just reliable credit card processing), it'll be a super competitive market with tight margins.
- pkulak 3y ago
  All well and good to say, but every other company that has tried to charge EVs has utterly failed, and it's been over a decade now. Once customers can move freely between all the networks, the ones with bad reliability will disappear. Right now that's every network not Tesla. Like you said, the margins are tight. EA can't just lower their prices. And even if they could, who's gonna take a chance on a shitty network during a family road trip to save a couple bucks? Not me.
  - clouddrover 3y ago
    > but every other company that has tried to charge EVs has utterly failed You need a broader perspective. Europe is a bigger EV market than North America is at present. European charging networks that are going strong, offer faster charging than Tesla, and are growing include Fastned, Circle K, EnBW, Ionity, Shell, BP, etc. They've had the benefit of Europe standardizing on CCS type 2 Combo. When everyone can build to the same standard it drives investment and development.
    - pkulak 3y ago
      This is the North American charging standard. North America previously standardized on CCS1 (which is exactly the same as CCS2, but without 3-phase support, which we don't need here) and it has done nothing. My perspective is plenty broad. What point are you trying to make, exactly? That if we just continue doing exactly as we have, NA will turn into Europe eventually?

rootusrootus 3y ago

I think this is their way of saying the current profit margins aren't going to persist. It is exceedingly difficult to make a fast charging business with the kind of profit margin they currently rake in on new car sales, so giving up the single biggest reason people buy a Tesla is a statement unto itself.

huijzer 3y ago

Sandy Munro currently believes that Tesla is 5 years ahead. Heck, even the Ford CEO has openly said that it’s very hard to catch up to Tesla in terms of software, batteries, and vehicle design [1]. For example, here is a video explaining the differences in the Tesla vehicle manufacturing over the years [2]. [1]: https://youtu.be/JdId8tXiJIo https://youtu.be/JdId8tXiJIo [2]: https://youtu.be/WNWYk4DdT_E https://youtu.be/WNWYk4DdT_E

nunez 3y ago

They were probably forced their hand here by the US Government, which is really sad given that the rest of the industry basically got a free pass for shunning EV adoption for years. That said, this is definitely making me interested in a non-Tesla for our next EV. Tesla's tech is unrivaled, but the competition has better hard products. Once the competition's lane-keeping/"smart" driving catch up to Tesla's APv2, I think I'm out. Even though I absolutely love using FSD beta.

clouddrover 3y ago

> The Supercharger network is one of their remaining competitive advantages. Not really. Tesla chargers are slow and low voltage compared to other charger manufacturers. Other charging networks are deploying 400 kW chargers. Like FastNed has deployed 400 kW chargers from EVBox and Alpitronic: - https://fastnedcharging.com/hq/fastned-and-evbox-join-forces-to-install-one-of-the-first-400-kw-ev-fast-chargers-in-europe/ https://fastnedcharging.com/hq/fastned-and-evbox-join-forces... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZWN_-a2j4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZWN_-a2j4