Re:Tesla Surges Above $500, Leaving Analyst Targets in the Dust
by sokoloff on Monday January 13, 2020 @03:15PM
(#22038138)
Going from $0.11/mi to $0.05/mi ($0.20/kWh in MA) even at 20K miles per year saves $100/mo. That’s not economically compelling. Driving 1/4 of that (per driver) is even less compelling. I bought an electric because I wanted one (and there was $10K in government cheese in the trunk).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Tesla Surges Above $500, Leaving Analyst Targets in the Dust
by bdamm on Monday January 13, 2020 @06:16PM
(#22039841)
$100/mo is pretty compelling to lots of people. Why throw money away? My locale is even better because I pay $0.08/kwH (Portland, Oregon). We like to ski; every time we drive up the mountain was $50 in gas for our Ford Escape. Now it's roughly $5. That alone represents $180 a month. In the summer we have different hobbies that are equally travel intensive so it's a year-round win.
Re:Tesla Surges Above $500, Leaving Analyst Targets in the Dust
by sokoloff on Monday January 13, 2020 @07:03PM
(#22040229)
Why spend $50K or more to save $100 or even $180 a month for maybe 8 years and get $10-20K back at the end? That’s just not compelling on an RoI basis.
There are many reasons to like a Tesla. It’s almost surely not the cheapest way to motor though. A $5K Honda and investing the difference will be wildly cheaper during the ownership period (including no need to carry collision/comprehensive insurance!) and have a much higher residual value (in the investment account). To me, that should be more compelling to many people.