"How the least-likely person to purchase a Model S became an owner" is one person's story of the financial justifications for buying a Tesla S. In his words: "This is my story about how I ended up purchasing a Tesla Model S. No snazzy car photos not trying to sell you on the beauty of the car, there are plenty of websites for that. This site is about the economics of purchasing and owning a Tesla."
Baed on feedback to the author, there have been some adjustments to the model he used, but it's interesting to see that the luxury electric car is competitive even with climate change and other factors eliminated. Comparison spreadsheets are here.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Tesla Model S Cost of Ownership vs. Honda Odyssey
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 32 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 3, Funny) by geb on Wednesday April 16 2014, @10:09AM
A relatively wealthy family man living in silicon valley is "the least-likely person to purchase a Model S"?
Setting aside such less likely buyers as uncontacted tribes, I was hoping this would be a story about a Honda exec buying a Tesla.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 16 2014, @10:56AM
The dude calls himself the most unlikely Tesla buyer because all his previous car buys were practical choices.
But he's 43 and has a history of boring cars. So, to your 'wealthy' and 'living in Silicon Valley', you can (probably) add 'mid-life crisis'.
(Score: 1) by opinionated_science on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:56AM
Laugh My Ass Off !!! (caps is like yelling...!)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:16PM
Wait, he said:
The RAV4 EV, which we had just purchased, decimated the pack.
We purchased our Model S in March, and sold our Ody and Leaf this month
So he had three cars, a monster old (2007ish) Honda Odyssey (18mpg)
A brand new RAV 4 Electric (49 thousand dollar vehicle, range of 103 miles max)
And a Leaf 27K, 84 miles on a single charge.
He bemoans the size of the Honda, and buys a Rav 4E, which is just as big, (he makes no mention of selling this one). He had a totally impractical (except for fetching groceries) Leaf, and a ridiculously expensive Rav suv.
For So-Cal, none of those vehicles make sense, because people drive 100 miles on a whim down there, and none but the aging Odyssey would make the longer trips he brags about taking in the Tesla.
(If his daily commute was within the Leaf range, the smart choice would have been to sell the Rav4.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by FatPhil on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:27PM
However, you must remember that it's the tosser himself who's describing himself as that, not anyone else. What he really means is "person who previously couldn't find a persuasive enough reason to buy the vehicle with the most expensive list-price [finally finds an excuse to do so]"
The headline should just read "Rich man buys expensive toy, then justifies it to himself".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Kell on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:41PM
+1 cuts through bullshit.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 2, Informative) by RandomSchmoe on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:37PM
So, in other words, you didn't RTFA and see his history of purely practical car purchases and his primary comparison to his current Honda. Since you're too lazy to go look I'll let you know the Tesla comes out about on par in TCO with his Honda Odyssey.
The Best Comments Ever Seen On Slashcode [seenonslash.com]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:40PM
Upon doing a little research I think even you would agree that
a 49k 100 mile range Rav 4 EV, and a 27k 80 mile range Leaf are hardly practical cars.
If anything, he has a new-found penchant for buying electric vehicles, but likes to drive to Vegas and other single day distances, and found out that charging any EV mid-trip is a huge and impractical time waste.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Tesla is sweet. Saw a couple in my recent drive through southern California. I'd love to own one.
The only version that comes close to making sense for me is the 85kWh version which Tesla claims has a range of 300 miles, but the EPA says 265 miles. However, when we travel, we routinely do 500 mile days. (My grandkids live 465 miles away, without a couple hour recharge, I can't make that distance).
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday April 17 2014, @05:07PM
A Honda Odyssey seems to be a ludicrously overpowered, crappy fuel consumption, SUV. A luxury vehicle. What was your (and his) comparison attempting to prove?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by cmbrandenburg on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:02PM
At Soylent News, the editors don't bother to edit submissions for clarity, accuracy, or conciseness—it's the new Old Slashdot.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by mmcmonster on Wednesday April 16 2014, @10:18AM
I just bought my Model S a month ago.
The Tesla is a heavy car. I have the all weather tires and have no problems getting around in the rain and small amount of sleet that we've had in the last month. The handling on turns is not quite as nimble as my BMW 328xi was, but certainly better than a Lexus sedan. The acceleration is incredible. Both the 0-60 and the 50-80 you may use to get around on the highway. Acceleration is also amazingly smooth (since there aren't any gear changes).
The inside is quite futuristic and minimalistic. The touch screen dominates and there are only two physical buttons on the center console.
The software on the touch screen is quite intuitive. Button placement for a few things are a bit off (ie: the button to remote a radio station from the list of favorites is right next to the button to list the favorite radio stations), but I expect that to be fixed in a software update. Software updates happen over-the-air, and I got one in the last week that added some nice options to navigation and allows the car to change height on the highway automatically when you hit a certain speed.
Range anxiety was a real thing for the first couple days or so. Now I don't blink an eye. My daily commute (each way) is 40-60 miles. I'm taking the car on a road trip this weekend about 500 miles away. Something that was already planned, and will pass by a couple Tesla supercharging stations on the way so I don't have to worry about it.
I haven't visited a supercharging station yet, but I hear that they're quite fast (100 miles in 10 minutes?). They also have build permits to build several within a couple hundred miles of me. (see here: http://supercharge.info/ [supercharge.info] )
The only thing I don't like about the car is the attention it gets me. I'm not one to brag about my car or myself in general and have a degree of social anxiety when dealing with people I don't know. I'm hopeing others get the car in my area to take some of the heat from me.
(Score: 0) by Fry on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:17AM
The only thing I don't like about the car is the attention it gets me. I'm not one to brag about my car or myself in general and have a degree of social anxiety when dealing with people I don't know. I'm hopeing others get the car in my area to take some of the heat from me.
...to have such first world problems!
Perhaps you should think of it more as an opportunity to work on your anxiety?
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:36AM
I'm quite comfortable in my anxiety, thank-you-very-much. ;-)
But seriously, it does help a bit. I'm horrible at keeping up with small talk and prefer awkward silence. It's not uncommon for others to just walk away because I stopped talking. This does help a little, as it's something to talk about.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Leebert on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:47AM
I don't see this as a feature. I hate not having physical buttons for climate control and audio. It means I have to actually look. It also means that they can change it after I've gotten used to it (iOS 7, anyone?).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mmcmonster on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:55PM
Agree that the lack of physical buttons is a bit annoying. It allows them a lot of flexibility, but I can't just feel around for stuff.
There are certain icons on the top and bottom of the screen that are always in the same place, so at least muscle memory will get me pretty far.
In addition, there are physical buttons on the steering wheel that allow me to make calls (without using voice recognition), change the music source, check driving efficiency (to make sure you can go as far as you plan to go), and simple things like that.
In practice the most annoying part of the touch screen (for me, so far) is changing the climate control settings other than temperature and defrost (ie: fan speed, recycle air). In reality I didn't need to do it much in previous cars and don't do it much now.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 16 2014, @02:04PM
Yes, with automatic climate control, there's a lot less need to mess with the climate control settings while driving. Just set it to your preferred temperature and be done with it.
(Score: 2) by Adrian Harvey on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:55PM
I agree - the early Priuses had almost everything controlled from their touch screen. Made them feel futuristic, but was a pain when you wanted to quickly adjust the aircon, say to de-mist, whilst driving. The gen3 prius, in response to feedback, moved lots of controls out to physical buttons. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla does the same in time...
(Score: 4, Informative) by mojo chan on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:45PM
You do have physical buttons for radio and climate control. They are on the steering wheel. You have ones on either side that can be configured to control whatever you like.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Angry Jesus on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:05PM
> The only thing I don't like about the car is the attention it gets me.
Take the badges off. Without the badges very few people will recognize it as anything other than a vaguely mazda-esque sedan. If that's not enough, you could probably pick up some mazda badges on ebay and put them on to really make the car invisible.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tempest on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:04PM
That's similar to what I was thinking when considering a Porche. It was a nice car in good shape, and fairly cheap (former salvage car). But I did NOT want the kind of attention that would give me, nor the highlight for thieves. I figured I'd put a Volkswagon (or something) logo on it, along with chrome letters for a made up model name to put next it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:05AM
He compares the NPV of several cars, including electric vehicles and luxury cars. His findings are that
Taking him at his word that a lower NPV is a good thing, I don't see his findings as being too strong an argument in favour of Teslas. Why? because
1) Other cars, including gas-powered cars like the Suburus, do better
2) The Tesla is only competitive against similarly priced luxury cars
3) After a mistake in his spreadsheet was corrected, the Odyssey did better than the Tesla, anyway
PS - could someone explain why a lower NPV is a good thing? I would have thought the opposite would be true.
(Score: 1) by Fry on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:23AM
Taking him at his word that a lower NPV is a good thing, I don't see his findings as being too strong an argument in favour of Teslas. Why? because
1) Other cars, including gas-powered cars like the Suburus, do better
NPV isn't the only factor. Low NPV plus no fun to drive is not better than higher NPV and a blast to drive...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RandomSchmoe on Wednesday April 16 2014, @02:57PM
Only in a purely financial sense. The RAV has far worse safety, for example. Storage space and performance are also factors.
Only by $4k over 8 years. That's a very small difference.
The Best Comments Ever Seen On Slashcode [seenonslash.com]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by BigJ on Wednesday April 16 2014, @06:41PM
NPV is used to calculate the value of cash flows of an investment. In this case, the value of purchasing different automobiles. The most positive NPV is the one you want to select. The investment in this model is the purchase of an automobile. The yearly cash flows are the expenses of operating the automobile. His model jacked up all the directions of the cash flows, so the analysis is not immediately intuitive.
Actually the entire treatment of depreciation in his model is incorrect. Depreciation in an NPV analysis is used to reduce income for the purposes of calculating tax cash flows. It can also be used to estimate the market value of an asset at the end of the analysis timeframe (being done here). Calculating the NPV (net present value) of depreciation is just plain wrong.
After correcting all the errors in the analysis we get the following...
Tesla NPV = -$101,118
Honda Odyssey NPV = -$57,662
Conclusion: After 8 years, you lose $100k buying a Tesla and only lose $57k buying an Odyssey
Choose Odyssey
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Blackmoore on Wednesday April 16 2014, @02:10PM
No sir, you are not the "least likely" - the "Least Likely" person to get a Tesla would be someone who earns far less than you do.
You know, like that Intern you aren't paying. Or your cleaning service that you have in (although I can't find fault in hiring them - it is very hard to keep a house clean when you have kids).
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:48PM
The fact that he considers $1200 for tyres every three years to be reasonable says a lot. Who the hell pays $1200 for a set of tyres?
I'd love to buy a Tesla, but they are hardly affordable on my (fairly good) salary.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 2) by emg on Wednesday April 16 2014, @05:55PM
"The fact that he considers $1200 for tyres every three years to be reasonable says a lot. Who the hell pays $1200 for a set of tyres?"
I think that's about what my last set of winter tires cost. Of course they're still doing fine four years later.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Thursday April 17 2014, @06:47AM
Yeah...but you only use them in the winter. So they are only 1.5 years old (unless you live in Alaska, Canada, Norway or Finland).
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by WillR on Wednesday April 16 2014, @09:11PM
Someone with 600Nm of torque at the motor and a desire to transfer it to the road surface?
(Score: 1) by soylentsandor on Thursday April 17 2014, @02:50PM
Someone with a desire to transfer 600Nm of torque to the road will not be able to make his tyres last 3 years. Unless he does an outstanding job in restraining himself, in which case he could buy more affordable tyres.
(Score: 1) by paddym on Wednesday April 16 2014, @08:31PM
So his calculations were wrong, but they bought the Tesla and sold the Odyssey anyways? Sounds like this wasn't the least likely person to buy a Tesla then.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Thursday April 17 2014, @02:11AM
People rarely buy a car as an investment. If you want to invest, buy stocks or bonds - they are less likely to perish in an accident. They do not wear out, they do not get dirty, they do not get old, and they have far better resale value than any car.
People buy a car as a tool, as a vehicle. Selling a car is rarely profitable; it may be useful if you want to always drive a relatively new car; but it's typically most efficient to drive the car until the wheels fall off, then scrap it and buy another, new. I exclude the lemons from this analysis, but those are accidents.
As you buy the car to carry you around, the resale value is of no interest. It drops by $10K within a year, but it doesn't mean that the car became worse by 50% - quite the opposite, the car has just become perfect, having left the first part of the bathtub curve. Resale value only reflects people's psychology; it has little to do with the bang for the buck.
If so, the only correct questions to ask would be:
My point is that you cannot just grab a manual on accounting and make a wise decision on purchasing an EV. Today's EVs are best positioned for heavy daily use with plenty of charging between the rides. That could be taxicab duty, for example, or fixed delivery routes. An EV is not very useful for an individual who usually drives 5 miles to work and back, but periodically has to drive to an airport that is located 100-120 miles away. A common man needs a universal car that is always ready to drive him anywhere he needs, with five minutes of recharge at any gas station giving him 300-400 miles of range. A common man does not even drive enough miles to justify savings on gas, considering that his up front payment for the car is snowballing into the future as a lost profit on investment that he could have made. As the only advantage of an EV is lower operating costs, it has to be driven hard, preferrably 24/7, and be easily replaceable in case charging is needed. (A taxicab driver can drop the car off and grab another one that is charged.)