• ch00f@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    That just means they could be selling the full range version cheaper.

    No. The additional price of the full-range version is partially subsidizing the lower priced version. People are willing to pay the current price for the longer range version, why would they lower the price?

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The additional price of the full-range version is partially subsidizing the lower priced version.

      That makes it even worse!

        • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because they are over charging people for the same hardware. Everyone is receiving the same product except for the fact that the cheaper one is hamstrung by an unnecessary software change. If it wasn’t for that all these cars would be identical. If they can sell it cheaper then do so. If they can’t don’t. If you want to have different price tiers make a version with more actual features. How are you not seeing this as a bad thing?

          • ch00f@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because there is no inherent link between the cost of manufacturing a product and the price at which it’s sold.

            If they can sell it cheaper then do so. If they can’t don’t.

            So if Tesla develops new technology that allows them to produce cars cheaper, should they be required to lower the sale price of their vehicles?

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              So if Tesla develops new technology that allows them to produce cars cheaper, should they be required to lower the sale price of their vehicles?

              No, they price them based off tons of factors. I understand that. What I’m saying is they’ve demonstrated that they can sell the vehicle at that cheaper price point so do it. If it only works because the people paying more are subsidizing the cheaper ones then the price should probably be somewhere in the middle. When they are selling two identical vehicles those should be the same price. What they are doing is the same as if they were selling a “headlights” version and “no headlights” version and accomplishing that by just smashing the headlights on the latter as they roll of the line. It’s dishonest, stupid, and wasteful.

              • ch00f@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                They’re not destroying anything. The car can still be upgraded by either the current owner or the next one.

                Ironically, you’re advocating for going through the effort of physically removing batteries to sell at a lower price. That’s closer to your headlight analogy. The car was designed to have a specific battery size, and the equipment is already built to make that size. It is not easy to physically alter the batteries at scale.