So you're suggesting only selling the 75kwh version, which means some folks who want it would otherwise not be able to afford it. How is that good for anyone? And if you buy a 60kwh version, would you be happier if it actually had fewer cells? Comments above indicate that means it would charge more slowly and charging would wear it out faster, but that appears to be the solution you prefer.

They are only selling the 75kwh version. They're just charging more to let people actually use the the thing they bought.

It's not clear to me that the batteries in the 60kwh version aren't 'reject' batteries that weren't quite up to snuff to support the full 75. So just because Tesla pushed out this update doesn't mean that every car is actually capable of getting the full 75. Where-as the cars sold as 75 are guaranteed to reach that.

I don't know the details of Tesla's batteries exactly, but I'm pretty sure they're just use a ton of 18650s. If too many of them won't hold a charge, then instead of fixing it they can just call it a 60 rather then a 75.

My understanding is that they offer the upgrade option to all of the 60 kwh owners.

Huh, nevermind, you would be right:

https://electrek.co/2016/07/26/tesla-upgrade-software-limite...

That's a bit silly. I suppose in someways it is nice for the consumer that they have the 60kwh version if they're basically selling it close to a loss with the hope that you'll pay for the battery upgrade, but obviously it begs the question why the 75 model can't just be the same price.

> but obviously it begs the question why the 75 model can't just be the same price.

Because Tesla would make less off of each 75, which is no good when you need cash to expand operations. Have to squeeze every dollar out of each sale, manufacturing and R&D costs money!

That's a just a fancy way of saying that they charge more because there are people willing to pay it.

Correct. I'm unsure what the problem is.

No problem. I was just providing another description of their behavior.

There usually isn't anything notable about a business approximating a rational economic actor.

>>They are only selling the 75kwh version. They're just charging more to let people actually use the the thing they bought.

Definitely not true. The parts are the same, the support contracts are not.

The 60kwh has been discontinued after tepid demand. The 75kwh is the cheapest Model S one can buy today, but that wasn't true for a few months 60kwh was up for sale.

In economics, price discrimination results in less consumer welfare as customers are charged prices closer to their maximum willingness to pay.

Price discrimination is bad for consumers.

Puhleese, if you're going to make a statement like that you need to at least attempt some sort of citation.

The vast majority (in the US at least) of price discrimination instances are cases where anyone is free to choose the cheaper option. Rich people can clip coupons too, they just decide it's not worth it for them. Heck, the whole reason for a Tesla Model 3 and Model S is price discrimination. I think it's a great thing I'll be able to get a Model 3 while richer consumers can choose a Model S if they care to.

It is common economic knowledge/theory. My citation is any economic textbook on price discrimination.

Let me give you an extreme example.

Imagine that a company perfectly knew the exact maximum amount of dollars that you personally are willing to pay for their product. Then, they offer you that product for 1$ less than your maximum.

This is called perfect 1st degree price discrimination, and results in ~zero consumer welfare, because consumer welfare is the difference between actual price paid, and max willingness to pay price, which in this case are both ~equal to one another.

>>It's capitalism, sure, but it's not one of the better parts.

Alright, then there is no 60 kWh version of the car. Is that a better version of capitalism?

> Alright, then there is no 60 kWh version of the car.

That's implicit short-term thinking which I find strange given the speed at which such technology improves nowadays.

Even assuming the government made a law against artificial software lockdown punishable by death, this luxury vehicle would still come down in price and improve in quality well within the lifetime of most of the people who are currently drooling over it.

That's not an argument for making such a law, just a refutation against what is probably a false dichotomy between car and no car.

Yes. Because it would result in a lower price for the larger battery version.

Price discrimination is horrible for consumers.

>>Yes. Because it would result in a lower price for the larger battery version.

Why? 75 kWh version requires a more intensive support contract, more warranty repair, and more service.