
Model 3 Lease Available - arturogarrido
https://www.tesla.com/blog/update-our-vehicle-lineup
======
aerovistae
Uh, wait. They're taking the Model 3 Standard off the menu....so.....that
means the $35k version just got stopped?

Sigh. It's a bit sad for me because I have been a bigger fanatic for this
company than almost anyone, for maybe 9 years now, and my passion is fading.

I recognize how hard the thing they're doing is, and how they're doing
everything they can...but the repeated dishonesty is just very off-putting to
me. I don't believe the ends justify the means, and many things could have
been done better. Over and over Elon's PR has been profoundly deceitful.

~~~
reitzensteinm
This is just the 50 kWh Model S, rinse and repeat. Get the positive PR for
launching the low cost version, attempt to sell as few as possible, then take
it off the menu.

~~~
mandeepj
> This is just the 50 kWh Model S

Musk was upfront about this

[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/845279423238590464?lang=...](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/845279423238590464?lang=en)

~~~
reitzensteinm
I don't understand how your link is at all relevant to my comment.

------
tschwimmer
I think the title of this submission should be changed to 'Tesla removes 35k
Model 3 option' or similar. Their cheapest option is now a bit under 40k USD
because they're including autopilot as standard.

~~~
usaphp
Out of all of the people I know who own tesla, I have yet to meet anyone who
bought one without autopilot. I don't understand why would you decide to
purchase tesla over other electric cars if it was not for autopilot. If you
want electric without autopilot - there are better options than tesla, so
maybe the reason why they removed it was because a vast majority of people
were purchasing the autopilot model, and offering the lower priced version was
slowing down their prodution somehow (adding options is always time
consuming).

~~~
pilingual
> If you want electric without autopilot - there are better options than tesla

Please do tell me these better options as I had been considering a Model X but
do not want to be forced to buy autopilot. I just looked into Audi eTron after
reading this update and it only has 200 miles of range. Everything else about
Tesla is the best - range, UI updates, supercharger. What other electric car
is a “better option?”

~~~
LoSboccacc
Kona ev.

------
bryanlarsen
Contrary to the standard short story, there must still be significant demand
for the 3 if Tesla is raising prices rather than lowering them. Yes, the $35k
model 3 is still technically available, but obviously they don't want to sell
them.

If there was little demand, they would rather sell a $35k 3 at no profit than
idle their factory.

~~~
reitzensteinm
I feel like this is a bit of a strawman. If there's a "standard" short story,
it's that the demand for high end Model 3s is too low, and the company can't
profitably be run on the margins of SR/SR+ or even MR alone.

I'm not sure I believe it (Sandy Munro for instance seems pretty optimistic
that a competent manufacturer could profitably make the $35k M3), but
misrepresenting the argument does nobody any favors.

~~~
dragontamer
> (Sandy Munro for instance seems pretty optimistic that a competent
> manufacturer could profitably make the $35k M3)

Its pretty clear what Sandy Munro is doing however. He's trying to sell his
consulting services to Tesla. His whole shtick is pointing out issues with
their design and trying to demonstrate that he knows how to save them lots of
money.

It doesn't seem like Elon is biting however. Munro's video was about
unnecessary welds, and how various shapes could have been made more cheaply.
Only IF Tesla implements those changes (and probably the other changes Munro
was thinking about) could they save money.

Not that I don't trust the guy, but you gotta keep in mind what pays Munro's
bills. He's selling his expertise.

~~~
londons_explore
I feel like both Tesla and Munro can point to those savings now... It's a real
expert who could point to those savings back at the design stage.

Simple things like "these parts could have been combined into one cheaper
simpler part" don't take into account the fact that by making them separate
parts they are easier to contract out, easier to modify one without the other,
and easier to correct issues when yield is poor on one.

------
samcampbell
>> Please note, customers who choose leasing over owning will not have the
option to purchase their car at the end of the lease, because with full
autonomy coming in the future via an over-the-air software update, we plan to
use those vehicles in the Tesla ride-hailing network.

~~~
ABeeSea
There is no way any of these model 3s end up in an autonomous ride share.
Especially with only cameras and no LIDAR. I guess it does give them cover for
not offering the option to buy at the end of the lease. Wouldn’t be surprised
if they reverse this in 2-3 years.

~~~
kylecordes
Sometimes I wonder if the much-ballyhooed short-sellers actually work in the
Tesla marketing department :-)

I know that companies get a lot of flak for saying hedged things. But Tesla
could really benefit from some hedging. This pronouncement in absolute terms
that there will be no lease-end buyout is ridiculous. It depends entirely on
future factors unknown today (to us or Tesla), whether they will give
customers the option of buying out when the lease and actually arrives, and
they know it.

So why not just say so? How about: “Tesla leases do not guarantee the right to
buy-out at lease end, because we hope to use some of the after-lease cars for
a future ride hailing network.”

Sure, it's a few more words to parse. But it would be one less thing for
people to complain about. And it would be true and forthright. It is very good
to be seen as true and forthright when asking customers to spend tens of
thousands of dollars on something.

~~~
londons_explore
The buy-out price at the end of the lease is set by the lessor. If they don't
want to sell, they could just set the price very high. No need to announce
that now - in fact, doing so will simply reduce sales.

------
jakobegger
So to summarize:

\- Tesla launches 35k Standard model along with 37,5k Standard Plus Model

\- Tesla raises price of Standard Plus Model to 39,5k

\- Tesla discontinues Standard Model

So Tesla just increased the base price of the Model 3 from 35k to 39.5k, but
tried to do some marketing tricks to make you feel like it's a great deal.

~~~
dragonwriter
The Standard isn't discontinued, it's just rejiggered to be a software-limited
version of Standard Plus (because logistical simplicity saves more than the
reduced bill of materials) and pulled from the online catalog so that you have
to go to a showroom (remember when they were going to dump those?) or call on
the phone to order one.

~~~
dragontamer
There's a fine line between "Loss Leader" and "Bait and Switch". Its pretty
clear that Tesla sales-reps are going to be VERY strongly trying to upsell
their customers away from the $35k model.

I dunno where the line will exactly be drawn for "Bait and Switch", but Tesla
is getting closer and closer to that line.

------
jakobegger
I assume this means that the promised 35k Model 3 will never come to Europe,
just as all the sceptics predicted.

I preordered a Model 3 on launch day, but I requested a refund when I saw that
the car costs 60000€ instead of 35000€ to 40000€ that I had hoped for.

It's unfortunate -- I love the Model 3's minimalist interior design (judging
from pictures) -- but this is not a car I can afford to buy right now.

------
mandeepj
> Model 3 Standard Plus used to cost $37,500, plus $3,000 for the Autopilot
> option. It now costs $39,500, with Autopilot included

It's just $1000 cheaper now. Good for Tesla as they will get more data.

------
gordon_freeman
I love Tesla and Elon Musk for what he's doing for the humanity but paying
$21,144 ($3000+36*$504) for 36-month, 10K miles/year lease is insanely costly.
I can think of buying a Tesla but can not think to lease it at this price
point.

------
hhs
According to the website, it looks like a Model 3 base (i.e., with Standard
Plus Rear-Wheel Drive; Solid Black Paint; 18" Aero Wheels; All Black Partial
Premium Interior; Autopilot) would have a purchase price of $39,500.

This would have an estimated lease payment of $504/month, with $3,000 down, 36
months, 10,000 miles. And then estimated savings would be added depending on
one's respective EV state rebates.

At the end of the page, it says that there's a Destination & doc fee of
$1,200, so that may need to be adjusted into the lease price.

~~~
abtinf
What is the reasoning to put money down on an auto loan or lease?

~~~
bob_theslob646
This article does a great job of explaining.

[https://www.edmunds.com/car-leasing/should-you-make-a-
down-p...](https://www.edmunds.com/car-leasing/should-you-make-a-down-payment-
when-you-lease.html)

In summary, when leasing, put as little down as possible.

When buying(loan) it depends.

Obviously every person has a different financial situation, ( which also
determines at which interest rate you are allowed to borrow money), but in
general or ceteris paribus , that advice holds in general.

------
bob_theslob646
What's incredibly interesting is that you are required to put a minimum of a
$3000 dollar down payment.

What was also interesting is that you forgo your right to buy back the car if
you lease it, which is also odd.

~~~
xkcd-sucks
Doesn't that make it a rental instead of a lease

~~~
dragonwriter
The only reason “rental” and “lease” aren't the synonyms they usually are in
auto land is because “rental” is used when the period is very short term, and
“lease” is used for a period, generally, of a few years.

------
burfog
It always feels like Tesla owns the cars anyway, having that data connection
to do whatever they feel like doing. Leasing makes it legit.

------
Waterluvian
So how much is a lease?

~~~
bagels
$504 /mo "Before savings"

~~~
jdashg
504/mo for 36mo _plus_ 3k down is really about 590/mo.

"Before savings"

------
maxdo
if tesla 3 with all that pricing failed to lure customers, then 3 or 4k will
not help them at all. It's very sad but looks like nothing going to save
Tesla. With this level of income, their valuation is a bubble.

------
dzonga
These guys snake oil, like never before. Full Autonomy coming soon, when they
can't even detect simple things on the road. Dear ancestors help us!

------
hbcondo714
The HN profile of the user who posted this is "currently working at Tesla"

Edit: removed my comment about insider information per the link provided in
replies.

~~~
make3
it's literally at the top of
[https://www.tesla.com/blog](https://www.tesla.com/blog) maybe it wasn't when
you wrote your comment

~~~
hbcondo714
No, it wasn't. Thanks for mentioning; I updated my comment.

~~~
arturogarrido
for the record, it was public on Twitter and the blog by the time I posted it
here. See
[https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1116533838627262466](https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1116533838627262466)

------
AndrewBissell
With no financing partner in place this is a major cash-negative move for
Tesla. Some shorts have been predicting Musk would do this to try and clear
out inventory and improve demand optics before filing for bankruptcy.

[https://twitter.com/whistlerian1834/status/10965848934824632...](https://twitter.com/whistlerian1834/status/1096584893482463232?s=19)

~~~
ggm
Shorts, who by definition are not dispassionate and have a direct interest in
the ability to project and manipulate market expectations. And when the
emerging reality doesn't match their short position are (evidently) willing to
move down the road to making the conditions they predicted come true.

~~~
thematt
Everything you said could be used to describe longs as well, with incentives
just aligned in the opposite direction.

~~~
ggm
Longs tend to own things. Shorts tend to destroy value to acquire it cheap.
they don't currently hold it, they're seeking profit by securing it under
value. Longs seek to profit from its existence and success.

I don't see these as fully symmetric. I see them as oppositional, and indeed a
long will do the things which improve their position. But since thats
constructive not destructive, there appears to me to be a useful distinction.

What did I get wrong here?

~~~
votepaunchy
> What did I get wrong here?

Your assumption that corporate PR is “emerging reality”. Shorts are also
capable of revealing reality.

~~~
ggm
Yes they are and information is useful, but do you think all shorts are
informative? and do you think these shorts are? I think these shorts are
opportunistic and seek an advantage not an informed position. The longs by and
large in Tesla believe about an industrial transformation.

I think musk is a very flawed capitalist, but I think Tesla is interesting as
a company. Panasonic is huge. Their decision to invest in the battery plant
speaks to me more than the shorts do. Likewise the Chinese decision to invest
in the gigafactory. These are not short positions, they are major long-term
capital investment which is continuing.

