40,000 are not enough 'stealing' 1,000 from Tesla

Sticking with the OT, Superchargers in Europe are CCS. So using Superchargers by others there won't require using Tesla patents. The Superchargers will have to be upgraded to accept a payment from other brands. The cost of doing so will have to be addressed in the talks with Germany.

 

All this talk of side stepping, yet non of the Tesla fans has been able to find the oft mentioned offer f

I've looked high and low for that policy on Tesla's web site. I can't find it. Can any of you post the link here, or confirm that it's not it writing?

I can't find a Tesla source that supports that statement either. Where did you find it Zythryn?

Thanks

 

forget the policy, concentrate on whether tesla is legally obligated to open up charging stations to everyone in germany

 

OK. Let's try that. Does anyone know what the german laws say about the legal concept of "common carrier"? Does it (or an EU equivalent) apply in Germany? In some jurisdictions a power distribution company falls under the category of a Public Utility. (Common carrier - Wikipedia)

Or how about if anyone knows exactly what the laws are that govern the resale of electricity as it applies to Tesla in Germany? It looks like it's covered pretty well here: https://content.next.westlaw.com/5-524-0808?__lrTS=20201014033818137&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true

And lastly, there is the question of anti-trust laws in Germany. Would any of them apply to charging stations?

I'm not a lawyer, but I learned a bit in college about how the USA regulates Telephone (communications in general) companies and power companies. I learned even more about it when working in those two industries. It's naive to think that Tesla is installing all of it's foreign chargers under the same rules that might apply to an ordinary citizen in the USA.

Bringing it back to the statement in the OP...

You can whine about that, but where's the proof that Tesla has any right to keep their German chargers private?

 

But the policy bears directly on whether Germany expected that Tesla would willingly open it's chargers to competitor's cars when they applied for permits to operate them in Germany. Every other charger in the nation will be asked to do the same. It's not targeting Tesla.

 

i agree that we can't use american law to figure out what might happen in germany.
each charging companies original agreement should be looked at

but i disagree theoretically that private concerns should be dictated to by governments, especially if original agreements are in place.

asking and trying to work something out is perfectly acceptable, but tesla owners should also be considered as there was an agreement with them when they made their purchase.

stockholders also might be affected

 

The fact that they have installed as private, and have been running them as private since the first one went up in Germany. The government hasn't made any comment, or taken action, to counter how Tesla has been running them. Even now, the government is asking Tesla about making them public.

 

According to the recently imposed requirements for this thread... Where is the proof that the Germans have done as you said? The Transport minister is going to "make sure the existing infrastructure, for example Tesla's Superchargers, will be open to other manufacturers,"

That's much more aggressive than "ASKING". It has connotations that it will not be optional.


Quoted from the OP:

 

This is FALSE.
Can you provide a link that shows this incentive? No.

Way back, Tesla buyers, like buyers for all EVs got $7500 in federal tax credits. As a car maker got to 200K in US sales, this phased out and currently Tesla buyers get no federal tax credits.
In CA there is a clean air rebate of $2500 if your income is below some threshold.
Local utilities also provide a $500 EV rebate to help offset the cost of installing a charger.

Please only post facts or phrase them as opinions.

Mike

 

for all i know, germany might nationalize all the chargers, ministers of magic have amazing powers.

or it could simply be a subversive plot by someone at vdub. stranger things have happened

 

you didn't even get the $7,500 if you fell under Alt Minimum Tax reg's, or if you made too much.
.

 

That was copied directly from the link in the post. It was clearly marked as from that link. That link was Op-Ed: Tesla continues subsidy shopping in Texas despite stock surges | National | thecentersquare.com

Chase it down if you care to. There are not enough hours in the day to validate every single fact on this forum.

 

Perhaps Germany isn't asking just to have more numbers of public chargers available. The EU mandate I linked to earlier contains language about any alternate fuel network having a logical distribution so that anyone of the population has access. Unlike most other third party charger networks, Tesla has been doing this from the beginning.

The minister said they were in "talks" with Tesla about making Superchargers public. If they could flat out do it, they wouldn't need to talk to Tesla.

Here is the Reuters article the OP article was sourcing.
German minister in talks with Tesla over sharing supercharger network | Reuters
"Germany's transport minister is trying to convince Tesla (TSLA.O) to open its network of superchargers to other carmakers to make it easier for drivers of electric vehicles to charge."
That sure sounds like asking.

That op-ed makes no mention of $7500 for buying a Tesla.

 

The part that you quoted (I put it in bold for convenience) was the reporter's interpretation. The actual minister's words were as I posted before. I'll quote it again for clarity. In red so it can't be missed this time.

"I am in direct talks with carmakers such as Tesla to make sure the existing infrastructure, for example Tesla's Superchargers, will be open to other manufacturers," Andreas Scheuer was quoted saying.

I looked for a link in trollbait's post to some EU mandate, but only found a link (in post 18???) to an article ( Standardization Of EV Charging In The EU | CleanTechnica ) that mentioned the mandate. THERE it clearly stated:

Those new laws must, as a minimum:
2. Require providers to enable anyone to use any public charger without having to preregister, or use any unique form of access or method of payment. The ideal would be for everyone to be able to use a credit card to get access, and some new installations are coming with credit card operation, just like a fuel pump.

Within that context, there is no doubt in my mind that the Tesla superchargers are considered "public". Paragraph 26 of that document clearly states that: "Recharging or refuelling points which allow private users physical access with
an authorisation or a subscription should be considered to be recharging or refuelling points accessible to the
public."

And that pretty much settles this whole issue. The DIRECTIVE 2014/94/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 22 October 2014 on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure says Supercharges are public charging points, and the German laws require that public charging points have to be standardized to some extent and usable by all car owners in the country.

The directive is available as a PDF at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0094&from=en

 

OK. I chased it down. The link that you directly copied it from says nothing about Tesla buyers getting $7500 in CA.
Conclusion: you are just making this up.

Maybe you weren't around back in 2017-2019 when Tesla was ramping up sales of the Model 3, but every EV related forum was talking about the $7500 FEDERAL tax credit and when Tesla would hit the 200K unit that triggered the phase out. This was of great interest to many since Tesla had so many pre-orders, and how would Tesla allocate US vs international shipments to maximize the final quarter credits.

Mike

 

Sigh... I never make things up just for fun. It's a really dumb thing to do. Besides, I type too slow for that. But occasionally I do make mistakes. They are most often caused by my shirt hitting the laptop touchpad, causing the cursor to jump just as I'm pasting text. Quite vexing.

That quote was misattributed. It was from the post at Elon Musk and California: First they subsidize him, then they shut him down, then he promises to sue them | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

I do not follow the ever-changing landscape of government handouts and subsidies. There is no need to clutter my memory with facts that were only valid a few years ago. I only look them up when I'm about to use them. I suspect that the $7500 number was based on the tax breaks (tax exemption grants???) that allowed Tesla to buy hardware (~ 415 million in one instance) apparently without paying sales tax. At almost 10% sales tax in Alameda county, that's quite a savings. **

BTW, that last paragraph is what it looks like when I'm relying on memory to discuss facts that I don't have reliable sources for. "Elon said" and "I heard" and "I think" are not reliable sources.

**Tesla To Add Production Capacity For 35,000 More Electric Cars

 

i don't agree that the laws you quoted are saying the tesla superchargers are public. that is certainly open to interpretation.
my interpretation is that any chargers that are available to everyone now, must be open to a simple credit card swipe like a gas pump. no requirement signing up for service or join anything.

tesla may still be seen as private, and not open to the general public.

 

Will second Bisco here. Paragraph 26 does not consider the Tesla Supercharger network to be public.

 

As I said, the operative word there is talks. Within context of such entities, it means negotiations. The minister also told a German newspaper they hope to reach a solution after resolving technical issues. That implies that it may not happen at all.

Definition #7 states, "‘recharging or refuelling point accessible to the public’ means a recharging or refuelling point to supply an alternative fuel which provides Union-wide non-discriminatory access to users. Non-discriminatory access may include different terms of authentication, use and payment; "

Many fleet operators, such as businesses and townships, maintain their own refueling point, and in many cases, it is possible for a private car to drive up to them. However, the station discriminates against private cars; it only refuels or recharges cars owned by the fleet operator. Without this definition, the directive could be used to open private chargers and pumps up to the public, and the owners of such would have to pay to install some system for payment, or give fuel away for free. The authors of the directive didn't want to impose such a burden on those refueling operators.

Now, Superchargers discriminate against non-Tesla cars. Under this definition they aren't public chargers. Not being accessible to the public, that is any private car regardless of make, means paragraph #26 doesn't apply to Superchargers.

The article I had linked had discussed this, Standardization Of EV Charging In The EU | CleanTechnica

This Directive was issued in 2014. It is what has lead to the EU adopting CCS as the standard for DC charging.That in turn, is the reason why European Model 3s got CCS, and converted the Superchargers there; to make it easier for their customers to access more charging. If this directive had declared Superchargers public, why is Germany just now talking to Tesla now? Superchargers have been technically usable by other EVs for years now in Europe. The network even had a brief bug in which it would charge other makes if someone tried it. If Supercharges were declared public, there wouldn't be talks, but court orders.