The case can be made even stronger if the consumer's efficiency gap is taken into account.
For example from "Market failures and barriers as a basis for clean energy policies by Marilyn A. Brown" we read:
"Meier and Whittier (1983) studied a case in which
consumers were given a choice in stores throughout the
United States of two refrigerators that were identical in
all respects except two: energy efficiency and price. The
energy-efficient model (which saved 410 kilowatt hours
per year, more than 25% of energy usage) cost $60 more
than the standard model. The energy-efficient model was
highly cost-effective in almost all locations of the
country. In most regions, it provided an annual return
on investment of about 50%. In spite of these favorable
economics, which were easily observed by the purchaser,
more than half of all purchasers chose the inefficient
model. The higher purchase price of the efficient model
was presumably the principal barrier to its purchase."
An annual ROI of 50% is left on the table because people have to pay something upfront for benefits later!
Tesla's pricing strategy here is quite blunt. They hope people don't care about the costs, only the looks and the sustainability.
Disclaimer: I don't know how sustainable the manufacturing process of this solution is.
I would assume (hopefully) that the following is true: my guess is that Tesla is currently executing a similar plan to produce solar products in the same format they produced the cars - expensive, high end up front. Roll your moderate price, high end products with the income, rinse and repeat.
I think if this is the case, they certainly don't want to hint at it incase they lose consumers who will sit back and wait for the cheaper option they ironically wouldn't arrive.
For example from "Market failures and barriers as a basis for clean energy policies by Marilyn A. Brown" we read:
"Meier and Whittier (1983) studied a case in which consumers were given a choice in stores throughout the United States of two refrigerators that were identical in all respects except two: energy efficiency and price. The energy-efficient model (which saved 410 kilowatt hours per year, more than 25% of energy usage) cost $60 more than the standard model. The energy-efficient model was highly cost-effective in almost all locations of the country. In most regions, it provided an annual return on investment of about 50%. In spite of these favorable economics, which were easily observed by the purchaser, more than half of all purchasers chose the inefficient model. The higher purchase price of the efficient model was presumably the principal barrier to its purchase."
An annual ROI of 50% is left on the table because people have to pay something upfront for benefits later!
Tesla's pricing strategy here is quite blunt. They hope people don't care about the costs, only the looks and the sustainability.
Disclaimer: I don't know how sustainable the manufacturing process of this solution is.