What's a deal-breaker for you?

[CyberSleuth]

Apologies if a similar thread already exists, but I was curious if anything might cause people to opt out of the Cybertruck as we get closer to launch.

After final specs, pricing and performance figures are released is there something specific that would lead you to cancel your reservation?

How about once test drives are available?

For me (and many others) a price change beyond 10-15% of the initial figures would be a deal-breaker. If the CT felt unwieldy and un-parkable in the city that would also cause some hesitation.

Otherwise, I'm all in ...barring some unforeseen pitfall.

Sponsored

 

[Dusty]

If the top spec costs a lot more than the Model X Plaid, yeesh. How much more, exactly? I don't know. But, at that point I have to start asking myself some serious questions . . .



. . . like, if my wife would ever bother looking up the price.

 

[cvalue13]

but I was curious if anything might cause people to opt out of the Cybertruck as we get closer to launch.

personally, they’d have to really poop the bed for me to back out. That seems unlikely.

By that I mean they get the features-to-pricing way off. The truck could be far more expensive and I’d still buy it if the feature set blows me away. The truck could be less than expected and I’d still buy it if the reveal pricing stuck. A deal-breaker would far less truck, far more price. Unlikely.

That said, I’m a bit worried about the interior dimensions being materially less than eg an F150 SCREW. And by “worried,” I only mean the same sort of worry I have about tornados: low probability, but high intensity if realized.

 

[Crissa]

Price, yeah. I don't have 10% wriggle room, no. And that was before...

Stock market needs to get back up. Can't spend unless I can replace the buffer I built up. I didn't quite buy at the bottom, so I'm still slightly underwater.

• I wanted a midgate. Is it make or break? Not really. Silverado is offering it, but their truck will be less durable and less efficient.
• I wanted the offroad light. Is it make or break? Not really.
• I want a back window that rolls down. Is it make or break? Not really.
• Integrated ramp. Is it make or break? Well, no one else is offering it, so... I do have my own.
• Vehicle to Home integration. Is it make or break? Well... Okay, this is something I'd sell the truck for one that had it working. (Ford's isn't, since it requires networking to work.)

I dunno. I can't think of anything else... Politics, maybe? I don't know.

-Crissa

 

[Mini2nut]

Day 2 reservation holder here. I really like everything I have seen so far including the unibrow wiper system. Even if I didn’t like the final specs or revised pricing I would buy the truck and flip it for a profit.

Even at a steep 40% price increase (highly unlikely) the $49,900 Dual Motor would be $69,860. That would undercut the Rivian R1T and F150 Lightning.

 

[ÆCIII]

The only "Deal Breaker" for me would be if Tesla started MSM advertising or started including third party sleazy dealer (stealership) networks for distribution.

If they compromised their business model in that way, they would also be compromising substance and revenue to outside middlemen entities, which would effectively lower their standards to that of legacy auto.

Sustainability needs to be in the very DNA of the system that builds the system that builds the product. Weighing down or adding baggage to the company revenue stream with advertising and skimmers, only deprives future reinvestment in the quality of the product and innovation, thus giving less to the consumer while also weakening the sustainability of the company mission.

Legacy auto is only now feeling the true gravity of consequences for their decades of frivolously splitting off streams of revenue to the MSM, third-party dealership networks, and others, because they have never had any serious pressure to competitively innovate until Tesla came along.

With Tesla's substance focused approach we get a much better and advanced product while they maintain healthier margins for future innovation and growth. Tesla has so much more margins to spare because of this, and I can't believe the fund 'managers' question Tesla's margins when legacy auto has had much less margins all along, which shows that those (fund managers) are not sincere or genuine at all.

But if Tesla compromised themselves by giving portions of revenue to the MSM or third party dealer networks, that would not only be a Deal Breaker for just a particular Tesla model; it would be a Deal Breaker for me in everything Tesla, because if that happened the essence of Tesla and its approach to sustainability would be lost.

- ÆCIII

 

[flowerlandfilms]

An even more cyber truck. That's the only thing I can think of.

 

[FrankMcEnnis]

Price, price, price. IF it's not the cheapest pick up truck (ice ou ev) it's not worth it for me or for Tesla or for TSLA. They need to price it cheap to sell.

 

[cybrtrk]

If I was your professor I would give you an A+ in the class and give you the rest of the semester off.

This ladies and gentlemen is a textbook example of using a small window to drive a freaking barge through. Well done sir.

//Thread//

The only "Deal Breaker" for me would be if Tesla started MSM advertising or started including third party sleazy dealer (stealership) networks for distribution.

If they compromised their business model in that way, they would also be compromising substance and revenue to outside middlemen entities, which would effectively lower their standards to that of legacy auto.

Sustainability needs to be in the very DNA of the system that builds the system that builds the product. Weighing down or adding baggage to the company revenue stream with advertising and skimmers, only deprives future reinvestment in the quality of the product and innovation, thus giving less to the consumer while also weakening the sustainability of the company mission.

Legacy auto is only now feeling the true gravity of consequences for their decades of frivolously splitting off streams of revenue to the MSM, third-party dealership networks, and others, because they have never had any serious pressure to competitively innovate until Tesla came along.

With Tesla's substance focused approach we get a much better and advanced product while they maintain healthier margins for future innovation and growth. Tesla has so much more margins to spare because of this, and I can't believe the fund 'managers' question Tesla's margins when legacy auto has had much less margins all along, which shows they are not sincere or genuine at all.

But if Tesla compromised themselves by giving portions of revenue to the MSM or third party dealer networks, that would not only be a Deal Breaker for just a particular Tesla model; it would be a Deal Breaker for me in everything Tesla, because if that happened the essence of Tesla and its approach to sustainability would be lost.

- ÆCIII

 

[rjtumble]

I'm about a day 7-ish reservation so for me, the two things would be 1: if they ramp up the price significantly (I reserved a tri-motor, would prefer a quad). The big deal-breaker for me would be if all the people who get them first end up reporting lots of significant quality problems. I'm not interested in spending this kind of money and then having to bring it back to the shop over and over. I've been saving up for it. If that turns out to be the case, I'll just go buy "normal" truck.

 

[DMC-81]

Price for me. The clincher for me to reserve a dual motor stainless steel truck was the $49K price point.

Since the point in time where Elon said that the CT price "would be different", raw material prices have come down from their pandemic craziness. This, and with Tesla recently reducing the price of their vehicle lineup, it doesn't make sense for them to drastically increase the price of the Cybertruck.

I will accept a modest, justifiable increase, but that is all. Even better would be to honor the original pricing.

I don't care how it compares in price to the Rivian or any legacy offering. I would never buy them.

 

[cvalue13]

and I can't believe the fund 'managers' question Tesla's margins when legacy auto has had much less margins all along, which shows they are not sincere or genuine at all.

alternatively, it demonstrates that “fund managers’ understand margins, global supply chain, etc., but you don’t?

I’m not trying to stand behind every “fund manager’ you might have in mind, but more generally your post has the hallmarks of not getting some things.

Tesla and legacy both pay “middle man skimmers” to get their products to the end of the supply chain / the customer.

The only first-order difference is that Tesla has internalized their skimmers, as CapEx.

Legacy externalizes their skimmers, as OpEx.

Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages.

The ratio of advantage to disadvantage can change with expansion of volume, product range, and geographic footprint.

None of this is to conclude one approach is better or worse, on a net basis. Instead only to at a cartoon level point out that you seem to think the world works in a way it doesn’t.

 

[Deleted member 12457]

Price for me. The clincher for me to reserve a dual motor stainless steel truck was the $49K price point.

Since the point in time where Elon said that the CT price "would be different", raw material prices have come down from their pandemic craziness. This, and with Tesla recently reducing the price of their vehicle lineup, it doesn't make sense for them to drastically increase the price of the Cybertruck.

I will accept a modest, justifiable increase, but that is all. Even better would be to honor the original pricing.

I don't care how it compares in price to the Rivian or any legacy offering. I would never buy them.

I agree with your pricing. Tesla can price it at whatever they want to even at breakeven and they'd still make money. With the Market tanking and our current recession it's going to make it more difficult to put down this much money on a new vehicle. If Tesla wanted to give me a 0% loan over 6-7 yrs, I might be able to accept a minor increase in the original price. At this point, I'm not sure I would spend the extra money for FSD, which I included on my reservation. I like to drive and can still drive on my own. I don't need an autonomous vehicle. My landlord is ready to install EV chargers in many of the rental homes he owns, which is a definite positive for me.

 

[davelloydbrown]

Most of the posts mention price as the main issue. With Elon's lastest price cuts, i would suggest that he is very sensitive to pricing and would very much like to bring the CT to market at the prices quoted in 2019. IMO this is the main reason that the CT has been delayed (other than the difficult 4680 ramp), is because of the bottlenecks and commodity price increases caused by COVID and resulting inflation. Hopefully by next year the 2nd generation of the 4680 will be produced in sufficient quantities and energy density and my prediction would be at most a 10% increase in pricing and the quad version would be in the price range of a Rivian (92 K).

 

[JRu]

One thing on pricing I'm hopeful about is during the last earnings call Elon replied to an analyst question saying even if they sold the cars at cost (or lost money each [can't remember]) tsla cars will still be profitable through FSD subscriptions. With this I'm hoping they keep the price close to the announced pricing

Sponsored