expired Tesla Model S Ludicrous Performance (née P100D) - From $164,465 (33% off - was $248,000+)

28340

Didn't expect this to be my first post, but here we are.

Obviously not a deal for everyone, and still a high yield investment depreciating asset, but Tesla has adjusted the price on their highest end Model S and Model X by about 33% which is a pretty significant saving of about $82,000 - $85,000 (or thereabouts) varying based on on-road costs for whichever state you're going to register the car in.

E.g. VIC pricing

  • Tesla Model S Ludicrous Performance (previously known as P100D) - $165,529 (was $248,112)
  • Tesla Model X Ludicrous Performance (previously known as P100D) - $172,502 (was $258,402)

For anyone previously looking to buy one of these, the value proposition has become a lot better. Still not for everyone. A pricing change of this magnitude is pretty much unheard of in the automotive industry, so it should be interesting to see what impacts it has on the resale value of existing used cars.

Here's an article from Carsales summarising the changes

UPDATE: These prices will only be valid until March 18th 2019 as Tesla will be increasing prices to make up for closing less stores than initially planned. They estimate 3% on average, but this higher margin variant may end up absorbing a large portion of the price increases.

Related Stores

Tesla
Tesla

Comments

  • +267 votes

    Hell of a first post!

    • +141 votes

      Can't agree more………the Eneloops in there alone worth this much

    • +12 votes

      Well we know they have Eneloops because Panasonic makes the battery for Tesla. This folks is why Eneloop deals are far and few between, all stock redirected to Tesla.

      /s

    • +6 votes

      Yep you save enough from this deal to buy a high yield investment car!

    • +1 vote

      Seems so! Wasn't expecting such a widespread reaction from the OzBargain community. Makes me curious as to how many of us actually ended up putting an order through. Any hands?

    • +23 votes

      Why is there a luxury car tax on this?

      The luxury car tax was set up to protect our local car manufacturers. They no longer exist !!!

      • +1 vote

        Free money for the government.

        • -1 vote

          Free money for the government.

          They need "free" money to provide your healthcare, schooling, roads etc.
          Or would you prefer the American model where they lower taxes and just keep borrowing money instead?

          • +5 votes

            @manic:

            They need "free" money to provide your healthcare, schooling, roads etc.

            Don't forget the $5000 helicopter rides.. and the $2000 a month internet fees..

            Or would you prefer the American model where they lower taxes and just keep borrowing money instead?

            I don't mind paying more taxes, as long as they are transparent, and truly for the betterment of the people for Australia, not for the politician's buddies.

            Protectionism protects inefficient industries, all it does is put a bandaid on a gushing wound.

            Or better yet, it's like collecting money from normal people to spend on a really stupid kid to make them be able to temporarily compete with smarter children around the world. It's completely logical if the kid will outsmart their competition, but if nothing changes (like the Australian automotive industry), what's the point?

            just keep borrowing money instead?

            You can only do that if you are large enough, or as per credit limits, have a proven capacity to repay the debt.
            Which the Australian Automotive industry does not have..

            •  

              @cwongtech: "Or better yet, it's like collecting money from normal people to spend on a really stupid kid to make them be able to temporarily compete with smarter children around the world. It's completely logical if the kid will outsmart their competition, but if nothing changes (like the Australian automotive industry), what's the point?"

              Hey, hey! We're all equal ;)

      • +3 votes

        LCT in its current state isn't working very well, demonstrated no better than by Toyota buyers paying more than a lot of prestige brands.

        Rework is required, but the government will be mindful to balance the growing hole caused by the decline in fuel excise tax revenue, all the while trying to incentivising EV uptake growth.

      •  

        According to NSW labor, if you can afford a decent car and now a boat, you are obviously earning too much.
        Its all for the nurses, so its ok to double, no triple tax the smart workers.

        http://www.mysailing.com.au/boats/boating-industry-blasts-ns...

      • -1 vote

        luxury car tax is the perfect tax.

        Buyers in practice have a constant budget. If the tax was removed, they would still spend just as much, because it is all about prestige, status. Yes they would have a fancier car, but so would all their peers, so no status gained.

        • +4 votes

          luxury car tax is the perfect tax.

          it servers no purpose other than to raise gov revenue.

          • -2 votes

            @jv: Do you fail to see why we need that? Are public services and infrastructure a bad thing?
            That money pays the salaries of doctors so they can buy Teslas.

            But also, the tax helps our balance of payments.

        •  

          It's not the perfect tax, because the current threshold is affecting suburban mums and dads (who are not doctors or lawyers), just wanting a Toyota Kluger or a Toyota Prado for their growing families. It needs some more thought and refinement, especially now that aussie manufactured cars no longer exist.

          • +6 votes

            @pathacks: And why do they want a Kluger? To keep up with the Jones.
            But most Klugers are still under the LCT threshold. $20k under for the base model. And the tax only applies to the excess.

            Fewer tanks on the road by wannabe 4WD-ers who never the the bitumen, the better.

            •  

              @manic: I wouldn't necessarily put a suburban family choosing a safe, comfortable SUV for their family in the same bucket as a high net worth individual buying their second Ferrari.

              'Luxury' is a sliding scale, and the current application of LCT gets the beginning of the scale all wrong. Should there also be a 'luxury' goods tax on anything that could be classified as a form of consumption beyond the bare basics?

              • +1 vote

                @pathacks: And its not. Even Kluger is under the threshold, unless you go for all the options like super-gas-guzzling and panda-skin seat covers.

                • +2 votes

                  @manic: And if you're saying LCT is the perfect tax all about taxing people who buy cars for status, why is it that the following cars don't attract a cent of LCT?

                  Audi A4 Allroad 2.0 TFSI Quattro $74,800
                  Audi TT 2.0 Sport Coupe $74,700
                  Audi A5 Sportback 2.0 TFSI $70,100
                  BMW 230i Luxury Line Convertible $74,400
                  BMW 330i Sportline sedan $70,900
                  BMW X3 2.0d xDrive $69,900
                  Mercedes C300 sedan $71,400
                  Mercedes GLC250d $74,000
                  Mercedes SLC 180 convertible $71,900

                  •  

                    @pathacks:

                    you're saying

                    Cathy Newman?

                    They get a higher threshold by being more fuel efficient.
                    But surely you knew that?

                    So you are saying the threshold should be set lower? :-)

                    • +1 vote

                      @manic:

                      They get a higher threshold by being more fuel efficient.

                      Really? So there are factors other than "prestige, status" that people consider when buying a car? And they shouldn't be paying extra tax for not wanting to use more petrol? Great!

                      I'm saying that the current <7km/100km "fuel efficient vehicle" threshold is now completely outdated, as the low capacity forced induction Euro engines have been showing for years now. Especially the impending wave of EVs, LCT needs to be revised.

              • +1 vote

                @pathacks: good point. iphone should have luxury phone tax. i cant afford one. its luxury to me. lost track of when iphones began to cost so much its crazy.

    •  

      Watts Up! this is just Ludicrous. I think this is a fire sale and current owners are being burnt. I should just Short Tesla but before I make that fatal decision have to put the Positives and the negatives together and see I don't get sacrificed to the Gods of Lithium. (#sarc@adiscountisa discount)

    •  

      You’d have to call it viral

  • +66 votes

    A bargain is a bargain, good first post :)

  • +162 votes

    wow, current owners just saw a hell of a depreciation drop :/

    • +21 votes

      sucks to be a current owner.

    • +17 votes

      Tesla entire range takes a similar % price cut to make the international market price equivalent to the US (i remember i'd read it somewhere a few days ago) .

      wish AUS government and car makers could do something about, as comparing to US, AUS car price is ridiculous. there is no long excuses to protect local car markers and make every one suffer…

      • +7 votes

        Tesla spends a fortune on warranty repairs. Anecdotally, the cars are somewhat unreliable, but the service is top-notch when they break.

        I have a friend in California who is on his second Tesla, and he says that while his experience is that they often break down a few times a year, Tesla are out there with a replacement within hours that he can use while they repair it.

        Trying to achieve the same level of service in a more sparsely-populated country with a smaller EV market must be expensive.

        • +12 votes

          Trying to achieve the same level of service in a more sparsely-populated country with a smaller EV market must be expensive.

          Australia is one of the most urbanised nations in the world. This "we're a few people in a big place" reason is usually unjustifiable.

          • +4 votes

            @thevofa:

            This "we're a few people in a big place" reason is usually unjustifiable.

            Yes and no. I agree with you in that most of the Australian population is collected in a few capital cities. However, the flip side is that the distances between those cities are quite vast.

            My issue with having a Tesla is that the supercharging infrastructure in Australia is just not there yet. They've built up the basic routes so that you can make it from, say Mel to Syd in a Tesla, but beyond that, there are plenty of places in Australia which you can't get to on a Tesla because it's too far away from somewhere you can charge.

            These things will improve over time and I would hazard a guess to say that putting in superchargers would be easier to set up petrol stations with the infrastructure required to get fuel to very remote locations. In a sense, the long run outlook is really good. However, at the moment, one of the reasons why I won't get a Tesla is that I enjoy long roadtrips and in AU, with a Tesla, that's not practical yet.

            •  

              @p1 ama: You present information that shapes your own purchasing decisions. That's fine, but has little relation to the original point you claimed - that increased prices, including for servicing, are related to our population density.

              • +3 votes

                @thevofa:

                You present information that shapes your own purchasing decisions. That's fine, but has little relation to the original point you claimed - that increased prices, including servicing, are related to our population density.

                It addresses the original point, that in Australia, because we have vast distances between cities, it can be expensive to install the infrastructure required to make Tesla a viable purchase, e.g. superchargers. Ultimately, there will have to be superchargers placed in unprofitable locations because the distances in Australia can be so vast. These are necessary to making Tesla a viable alternative to petrol cars.

                These costs (amongst others) will drive up the costs of bringing Tesla cars to Australia.

                • +2 votes

                  @p1 ama: The distances between 80% of our population are comparable to European nations and the eastern US states. No-one expects a charging station at Uluru.

                  This same faulty logic is used to justify the sad state of our roads when we need less than 2000km - less than many other much smaller countries - to connect the bulk of the population. Sydney to Melbourne is one of the busiest transport corridors on earth yet we barely completed a 2 lane carriageway only a few years ago. Again, no one expects a freeway to Uluru.

                  A market that tolerates price gouging will increase the costs of goods and services here - that's about it.

                  •  

                    @thevofa:

                    No-one expects a charging station at Uluru.

                    Why not? It may not make profitable sense for Tesla to install one there, but if EVs are going to replace petrol for cars and trucks, obviously there needs to be a charging station there. The fact that there are petrol stations in even more remote areas shows the need.

                    This same faulty logic is used to justify the sad state of our roads when we need less than 2000km - less than many other much smaller countries - to connect the bulk of the population. Sydney to Melbourne is one of the busiest transport corridors on earth yet we barely completed a 2 lane carriageway only a few years ago. Again, no one expects a freeway to Uluru.

                    As someone who's driven over 60,000km all over Australia, I disagree. Most of the interstate routes are actually fine. Traffic in the cities are a much bigger problem. I don't think our interstate system is that sad at all.

                    A market that tolerates price gouging will increase the costs of goods and services here - that's about it.

                    Yes, things are more expensive in Australia. That's not a good thing, but at least be intellectually honest and realise there are reasons for that beyond just "price gouging".

                    Shipping things to Australia does cost more money. We also have a high minimum wage and people here make more than most places around the world. Land is expensive in the capital cities, we have high import tariffs on many goods…etc.

                    The truth is that the cost of living in Australia is not terribly high. https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/rankings_by_country.js...

                    We still sit lower than many European countries you're comparing us to including Switzerland, France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Denmark…etc. Of course, it's nicer if we're cheaper, but those are the facts.

            •  

              @p1 ama: Hiring a petrol car for long trips outside supercharging network should solve the issue for me. I maybe drive more than 300 mile once or twice a year not more and I am sure I will be saving more money from not buying fuel to offset the cost of hiring a car for those rare trips.

          •  

            @thevofa: The capital cities are a long way apart, and there are so few EVs that many city blocks in California probably have more Tesla vehicles than many cities in Australia (literally).

          • +5 votes

            @thevofa: Yeah, same with NBN. Despite that the majority of the country lives in a couple of major centres with no body in between. People yell Australia is so big as an excuse.

            • +1 vote

              @garratt torlesse: It's a joke. Instead of being honestly critical of ourselves we delude ourselves with excuses for our poor form. Our roads and network infrastructure are an embarrassment in light of our apparent wealth.

        • -1 vote

          They are the Apple of cars, agreed.

        •  

          serious question here, poorly educated.
          A few searches and you find there is data out confirming the car has reliability issues and also that Tesla has good service. When does it not become anecdotal to make your reply? Or do you say anecdotal because of the reference to your friend afterwards?

          •  

            @smellyboy2k: I didn’t bother to do any searching for proper studies from reputable institutions. I just know a Tesla owner, who in turn knows others who have the same experience.

            My policy is that if I can’t back up a claim with a reference from a reputable study, I’ll affix the caveat that it’s anecdotal information.

            My pet hate is people who supply information as absolute truth without a citation to back it up. I don’t do that.

      • +10 votes

        there is no long excuses to protect local car markers and make every one suffer…

        There are no local car makers…

      • +5 votes

        Australian Luxury Car Tax is 33% https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Luxury-car-tax/

        In California for example, car tax on new and used is only 7.5%

  • +110 votes

    Don't remember the last deal with an $80,000 discount. I guess you've earned my +

    • +15 votes

      I can show you many listings on realestate.com.au with bigger discounts than $80k…..

      • +6 votes

        But you cannot buy 10+ identical houses at 80k saving.
        That is why this is a bargain and not your multiple listings on realestate.com of different houses

        •  

          You can if it's a street with a lot of the same type of unit. I see that everywhere. A whole lot of identical units. But I haven't seen any on OzB yet

          • +1 vote

            @lostn: There are no identical units on the same street. It will be on a different level and facing different directions.

            •  

              @eunnip: I'll take a photo for you next time. They are not on a different level.

              But if they're facing different directions, I still consider them the same thing. To call them unique because they're facing a different direction is splitting hairs. The architecture and look are the same.

              •  

                @lostn: Oh my friend have you purchased property before? Everyone knows value of homes change significantly depending on which direction you face. Facing north and south is completely different to East and west in terms of energybusage, heat/UV and overall comfort.
                If you manage to find 10+ units all facing the same direction with all identical layouts, with all 80k discount in Australia then you have a bargain.
                Also real-estate is dependent on what the market is willing to pay unless you are talking about off the plan newly built units.

                •  

                  @MountFranklin: All I'm saying is, it's not true that units must always face a different direction or must be on a different level.

                  "There are no identical units on the same street. It will be on a different level and facing different directions."

                  Nor did I say you can find them 80k off on Ozb, or that their prices didn't vary based on what the seller and buyer is willing to accept.

                  If the houses are on the same street next door to each other, you can't have them face different directions. The front is the front, the back is the back.

                  Also, it's not really a discount if it's a permanent price cut in accordance with another market. Discounts by nature are temporary.

  • Top