they failed to acknowledge the upside Looking at it, it's Tesla that failed to emphasise these benefits properly. For a firm that is supposed to be innovative

they failed to acknowledge the upside Looking at it, it's Tesla that failed to emphasise these benefits properly. For a firm that is supposed to be innovative and disrupting the industry, this "deal" looks like standard car salesman fud. The only innovative thing is the buy back scheme, which is a little lost beneath the $500 stuff. They'd be better off saying; look, the Tesla S will cost you ~£1,000 per month, but based on what you've entered the best alternative you could have would be $600/mo car, with $400/mo fuel cost (maybe pick some example cars in that price range to compare against directly). And emphasise the ability for you to get a premium car for your money. In fact; this true cost of ownership thing could have worked if they hadn't stamped a big $500 on the front of it. I understand why they have done it this way - fuel costs aren't a fixed cost for most people (by which I mean, you probably couldn't recall offhand exactly what you pay per month, or when you pay it) and so is a cost which people don't appreciate as much as their credit lines. But, still.