LNG: TESLARATI

Battery manufacturer Panasonic released its fourth-quarter operating profit numbers on February 3, and it showed that the Japanese company was able to cut production costs and post a 3% rise in operating profit. Panasonic was able to accomplish this thanks in no small part to its partnership with American electric car maker Tesla.

Panasonic’s profit for the last quarter of 2019 was 100.4 billion yen (about $915.22 million), an increase from the $899.38 million, or 97.6 billion yen profit the company posted a year earlier in Q4 2018, according to Reuters. The Japanese company’s profit numbers beat analyst projections by a considerable margin.

Eight different analysts polled by financial data company Refinitiv put Panasonic’s quarterly earning numbers at only 67.36 billion yen. The company was able to maintain its profit forecast at 300 billion yen through the first three months of the year as well, once again beating analyst predictions who pegged the company at 295.14 billion yen.

After Tesla ramped production at Giga Nevada, Panasonic’s battery business has improved significantly. The company has executed on its goals and increased its production volume due to Tesla’s goal of building more cars every year to match the overwhelming demand for its vehicles such as the Model 3. Expectations are high that Tesla’s vehicles will see even more demand as the company releases the Model Y, which will compete in the lucrative crossover market.

Just a week ago, Tesla released its 2019 Q4 numbers, reporting a revenue of $7.38 billion after delivering a record 112,000 vehicles. The company is also ramping up its production numbers at Giga Shanghai, and breaking ground on Giga Berlin. Giga Shanghai is already operational and catering to the local Chinese market, while Giga Berlin is expected to start operations sometime in late 2021. It remains to be seen if Panasonic will be involved in Tesla’s overseas factories.

Tesla stocks are soaring amidst the company’s success following the company’s Q4 delivery numbers and earnings call. Shareholders of TSLA stock have continued to enjoy regular boosts in stock value, and Panasonic’s success in cutting costs while increasing profits is a residual effect of Tesla’s great start to 2020. So far, Tesla stock has been on a meteoric rise, surging 16.88% at $760.38 per share as of writing. 

With Panasonic’s battery business with Tesla stronger than ever, the future seems bright for the two companies. Panasonic’s profits from its auto battery business will likely curb fears of an alleged rift between the two companies, which was hinted at by Tesla critics last year.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

After a long period filled with rumors of an impending partnership, Tesla and Contemporary Amperex Technology Co Ltd. (CATL) have officially signed an agreement for Giga Shanghai’s battery cell supply.

The two companies’ recently-signed deal is currently set for two years, according to Reuters. Tesla will ultimately decide how many batteries it will purchase between July 2020 and June 2022. This will likely depend on the battery needs of the company as it ramps Model 3 and Model Y production locally.

Tesla had previously announced its partnership with CATL, albeit informally. The company stated that they had come to an agreement with two suppliers for China, CATL and LG Chem, which has a facility close to Giga Shanghai. Panasonic, Tesla’s long-term battery partner, will not be contributing its resources for Giga Shanghai’s operations, at least for now.

Giga Shanghai is already operational, and local deliveries of the Made-in-China Model 3 have begun. The company held initial deliveries at an event in Giga Shanghai on December 30, 2019, and this was followed by customer deliveries soon after. During the handover ceremony for local customers, Elon Musk announced the launch of Tesla’s Model Y program in China as well.

Tesla is planning to make a big impact in China’s auto market with Giga Shanghai. The country hosts the largest automobile market in the world, with around 28 million cars bought locally in 2018. This is a far cry compared to the United States’ 17.27 million vehicles.

Tesla has introduced several updates to its strategy in China, such as reducing the price of its vehicles to make them more competitive in the market. CEO Elon Musk has also noted that Tesla was able to cut its operating costs by removing tariffs, purchase tax exemption, local cost supply, and getting rid of the need to export the vehicles from the US to China. Tesla believes that the company will be able to completely localize its supply chain for Chinese production by the end of 2020 as well.

Giga Shanghai is currently producing at a run rate of 3,000 Model 3s a week. Eventually, the company plans to boost the plant’s production rate to 500,000 vehicles a year. The addition of new battery manufacturers will help Tesla ramp this production rate to its eventual goals. With demand increasing in the world’s largest car market, Tesla is poised to make a strong presence in China with more than ample growth in 2020.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

SpaceX has completed its third rocket launch of 2020 and the most recent booster to launch safely returned to Port Canaveral on Saturday after an exceptionally hard drone ship landing.

Falcon 9 booster (first stage) B1051 lifted off for the third time on January 29th, following up two prior orbital-class missions by placing SpaceX’s fourth batch of 60 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO). B1051 debuted on March 2nd, 2019 when it became the first Falcon 9 rocket to launch SpaceX’s next-generation Crew Dragon spacecraft, successfully sending the vehicle on its way to what would end up being a flawless rendezvous with the International Space Station (ISS). Less than four months later, B1051 completed its second mission, this time lifting off from SpaceX’s Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), California facilities before landing in zero-visibility fog conditions just a thousand feet from the pad.

Compared to some of the higher-energy geostationary (high orbit) launches SpaceX often performs, B1051’s two prior launches allowed for relatively gentle reentries and landings. On January 29th, 2020, after sending SpaceX’s 3rd batch of upgraded Starlink v1.0 satellites (Starlink V1 L3) on their way to space, the Falcon 9 booster experienced the hardest successful landing seen after a SpaceX launch in quite some time.

With Starlink V1 L3 complete, SpaceX has officially launched an incredible 120 satellites weighing some 32 metric tons (70,500 lb) in a single month – 22 days, to be precise. If everything goes as planned, those two monthly Starlink launches should become SpaceX’s average over the rest of 2020, necessary to satisfy the company’s goal of completing 20-24 Starlink launches this year alone. If SpaceX replicates its January successes this month, the company’s Starlink constellation – already ~230 satellites strong – may even be ready to start serving internet to customers in the northern US and Canada as early as March 2020, less than two months from now.

Meanwhile, the mission marked SpaceX’s second Falcon 9 landing and recovery of the new year, as well as the sixth time an orbital-class SpaceX booster has completed three launches. SpaceX continues to push the envelope of reusable rocketry ever since it debuted Falcon 9’s Block 5 upgrade in May 2018.

Designed to enable no less than 10 launches per booster with minimal refurbishment in between, SpaceX’s Block 5 reusability milestones have gotten much closer together ever since the company began dedicated Starlink launches, reusing a payload fairing for the first time and launching two Falcon 9 boosters for the fourth time in just the last two and a half months. In fact, SpaceX already has plans to launch Falcon 9 booster B1048 for the fifth time – another major reusability first – as early as the next 4-5 weeks.

Hard landing; tough rocket

Starlink V1 L3’s launch followed a trajectory almost exactly identical to the two V1 missions that preceded it in November 2019 and January 2020 and Falcon 9 B1051 ignited its central Merlin 1D engine for the last time around eight minutes after liftoff. Twenty seconds or so later, the Falcon 9 booster rapidly shut down its landing engine, visibly falling several feet onto the deck of drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY).

The results of that unintentionally hard landing are extremely apparent in photos taken of the same booster after its first (March 2019) and third (Jan 2020) landings on drone ship OCISLY, compared above. Taken from almost identical perspectives as the drone ship passed through the mouth of Port Canaveral, the difference in the booster’s height and stance are hard to miss, with B1051’s engine bells and the black ‘belt’ of its heat-shielded engine section clearly sitting several feet lower after Starlink V1 L3.

While subtle, the most important difference is near the tips of each visible landing leg’s telescoping boom, visible in the form of a final, smaller cylinder on the left (earlier) image. On the right, that cylinder has effectively disappeared. This is actually an intentional feature of Falcon 9’s landing leg design: known as a ‘crush core’, the tip of each leg boom holds a roughly 1m (3ft) long cylinder of aluminum honeycomb, optimized to lose structural integrity (crush) only after a specific amount of force is applied. In essence, those crush cores serve as dead-simple, single-use shock absorbers that can be reused as long as a given booster’s landing is gentle enough.

B1051’s third landing was definitely not gentle enough, but it appears that the booster’s rough fall onto the drone ship’s deck was just within the safety margins those crush cores provide. Why B1051 fell onto the deck is unclear, potentially caused by the drone being at the bottom of a swell or a last-second anomaly with the booster’s landing engine. Thankfully, regardless of the cause of the anomaly, B1051’s crush cores can be quite easily replaced, meaning that the booster can remain operational as long as its hard landing didn’t cause any less-visible damage or stress elsewhere on the rocket.

In short, SpaceX smart design decisions very likely allowed a part worth just a few thousand dollars to save a Falcon 9 booster worth tens of millions of dollars from the scrap heap. With a little luck, B1051 should have at least several more launches in its future before entering retirement.

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Elon Musk announced that Tesla will be hosting an AI hackathon, together with the company’s artificial intelligence and autopilot team, at his house in four weeks’ time.

The Tesla chief announced his plans via Twitter on Sunday. Despite impressive numbers revealed during the Q4 2019 earnings call and update, Musk and his Tesla team are not resting on their laurels and remain focused on pursuing advancements to its neural network, which is in the center of Tesla’s goal of achieving a full self-driving vehicle.

During the recent Q4 earnings call, an investor asked the Tesla chief executive for updates on FSD.

“I think that’s looking like maybe it’s going to be couple of months from now. And what isn’t obvious regarding Autopilot and Full Self-Driving is just how much work has been going into improving the foundational elements of autonomy,” Musk said.

Tesla will hold a super fun AI party/hackathon at my house with the Tesla AI/autopilot team in about four weeks. Invitations going out soon.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 2, 2020

Musk continued to explain how the Tesla team is making great strides in labeling efficiency.

“…in terms of labeling, labeling with video in all eight cameras simultaneously. This is a really, I mean in terms of labeling efficiency, arguably like a three order of magnitude improvement in labeling efficiency. For those who know about this, it’s extremely fundamental, so that’s really great progress on that,” Musk said.

Tesla vehicles rely on a custom chip that boasts of 144 tera operations per second (TOPS) for its self-driving capabilities. This two-chip FSD computer works in tandem with LPDDR4 RAM modules that come with a peak bandwidth of 68 GB/s. There are also two neural network accelerators that work in tandem to process as much as 1TB of data per second. This setup is roughly three times faster, about 80%, and about 1.25 times more power-efficient than the previous hardware. It is also able to process about 2,300 frames per second compared to the 110 frames per second processed by Tesla’s Hardware 2.5.

In his series of tweets on Sunday, Musk also mentioned Tesla’s “Dojo” supercomputer, which is speculated to be capable of processing vast amounts of data to train the company’s neural network. Through active learning, Tesla curates the most useful video clips from its fleet of connected cars and train the neural net to recognize things that it did not previously know.

“Our networks learn from the most complicated and diverse scenarios in the world, iteratively sourced from our fleet of nearly 1M vehicles in real-time. A full build of Autopilot neural networks involves 48 networks that take 70,000 GPU hours to train. Together, they output 1,000 distinct tensors (predictions) at each timestep,” Tesla wrote on the Autopilot AI section of its website.

“At Tesla, using AI to solve self-driving isn’t just icing on the cake, it the cake” – @lexfridman

Join AI at Tesla! It reports directly to me & we meet/email/text almost every day. My actions, not just words, show how critically I view (benign) AI.https://t.co/iF97zvYZRz

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 2, 2020

The last major software update rolled out by Tesla allowed its vehicles to visualize more things while driving in inner-city streets. Teslas now render stoplights, stop signs, traffic cones, traffic pylons, and more.

With the upcoming AI hackathon, Tesla will get together with developers to seek out more efficient algorithms and overall improvements to the core logic for its Full Self-Driving suite through a time-boxed event. With fresh eyes working with the existing AI and autopilot team of Tesla, the carmaker may be able to accelerate the timeline and rollout of its full-featured Full Self-Driving suite sooner.

Further advances in FSD and its Autopilot feature will widen the gap between Tesla and its competitors and solidify the company’s position as one of the leading automakers in the world. These improvements will also take Tesla a step closer to the possibility of Robotaxis that they can deploy at scale.

The hackathon will also allow Tesla to fish for new AI talents to join the team. On Sunday, Musk also mentioned that the electric carmaker is looking for world-class chip designers and C++/C engineers for vehicle control and other functions of Tesla vehicles.

Musk reiterated that educational attainment is not important when joining Tesla but rather a clear understanding of how AI and neural networks function and the ability to build useful applications using that knowledge.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tesla Dyno Mode can be activated in three easy steps for owners looking to test performance of their all-electric vehicle on a dynamometer and in a controlled setting.

Tesla owner and Drag Times YouTuber Brooks Weisblat posted a video on how to turn on the Dyno Mode on a Model 3 and see how the secret mode affected the car’s performance.

Information on how to enable Model 3 Dyno Mode is also documented on a Tesla EPA filing dated October 2019. The said document details how a user can activate the Dyno Mode in three easy steps.

How to activate Tesla Dyno Mode

1. Vehicle must be in Park.
2. While holding down left (turn signal) stalk, press and hold the Tesla “T” logo at the top of the screen.
3. Enter Dyno Mode activation password, “dynotest”.

Dyno Mode can be deactivated by the user by pressing the “Power Off” button within the Safety & Securit tab of the UI.

Once the Dyno Mode is activated the car will prompt drivers with a warning that the vehicle is on Dyno Mode and that one should not drive on public roads. With the Dyno Mode on the vehicle’s traction control is disabled, stability control is disabled, as well as automatic emergency braking.

“Fair warning — be very, very careful,” said Weisblat.

The Dyno Mode was specifically created to have representative driving controls while testing the vehicle on a chassis dynamometer or a rolling-road dyno where proper vehicle testing and calibration are done.

Weisblat went for a drive to test the performance of the vehicle. Without a Dyno Mode on, his Tesla Model 3 was able to hit 60 mph from a full stop in 3.1 seconds. According to him, his best time historically is 2.9999.

The DragTimes YouTuber turned on Dyno Mode and did another 0-60 mph test and clocked in 3.1 seconds but felt a bit of wheelspin. He gave it a few more tries and was able to clock 3.027 seconds on better pavement. Tesla pegs the 0-60mph time of the Model 3 Performance at 3.2 seconds while its Long Range All-Wheel Drive and Standard Plus versions clock 4.4 seconds and 5.3 seconds, respectively.

Weisblat’s final opinion on the Model 3 Dyno Mode is that it provides a slight improvement but might provide a bit more on a sticky drag track but it’s hard to tell.

“Dyno Mode, it’s pretty much just used for if you’re gonna dyno the car,” he said.

But of course, Model 3 owners who want to drift their Model 3s need to switch off its amazing traction control. Some owners turn off a wheel sensor but the system can go haywire since something is missing. The system will turn off ABS, Autopilot, regenerative braking, and even power steering. Furthermore, taking a wheel sensor out can potentially damage a vehicle.

Again, the Tesla Dyno Mode was created for testing Teslas on a dynamometer. If one will try to drive while it’s on, better stay away from other cars or pedestrians, or better yet, do it on a track.

Here’s the new Tesla Dyno Mode video from Drag Times:

Teslarati does not condone the use of Dyno Mode. Any information or opinion expressed in this article is to be processed at the discretion of the reader.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

After resisting Tesla for years, the heart of American auto, Michigan, finally allowed the electric car maker to establish a foothold in the state. It was a hard-fought battle for Tesla, and a victory well worth more than CEO Elon Musk’s one-word celebration on Twitter. But at the same time, Tesla’s settlement with Michigan, which would allow the company to sell and service its cars in the state, marks a point of no return for traditional auto. 

It may not be evident now, but from this point on, it will be twice as difficult for states to resist disruptive new EV makers that do not follow a traditional dealership sales model. This means that even other carmakers such as Rivian will likely have a clear path forward in their expansion into the United States’ auto market, absent of the direct sales roadblocks that the Elon Musk-led company has dealt with for years. 

Michigan is considered the heart of the US auto industry, and for good reason. The country’s motoring history was written within the state’s borders, and iconic companies that changed the industry, such as Ford, call Michigan their home. Yet, for all its dedication to the car industry, Michigan has also been very resistant to Tesla, preventing the electric car maker from selling its vehicles in the state due to the company’s direct sales strategy.

Tesla’s difficulties in Michigan were a painful reminder that the company’s goal of transitioning the transportation industry towards sustainability would be marred with difficulties left and right, signified by the state’s dealer franchise laws. This is one of the reasons why the company’s settlement with the state is so important. Daniel Crane, a University of Michigan law professor who specializes in antitrust and regulatory issues, explained these points in an interview with Automotive News. 

“The handwriting’s on the wall for the franchised dealer as the exclusive way consumers interact with car companies. It’s pretty clear it’d be impossible for the state to deny someone else; it paves the way for any new EV company that doesn’t want to use traditional dealerships.”

“The legacy companies can’t continue forever to use a dealer model from the 1930s. Being required to use only that, I think, is a competitive disadvantage. They’ll have to find a way to get flexibility in their distribution method, or they’ll be left behind,” he said. 

The dealer model deserves some recognition, as the United States’ auto industry would likely not have gotten this far without it. Yet in the age of electrification, dealerships, which are known for their flexible pricing strategies and reliance on regular vehicle maintenance, are starting to become outdated. Tesla is the living representation of this, as the company’s cars are priced like tech devices, and its vehicles require far less maintenance compared to internal combustion cars. 

One key takeaway from Tesla’s conquest and subsequent victory in Michigan is the fact that the electric car maker is only the first of many. The state has allowed the company to sell and service its cars within its borders, and it will be hard-pressed to not do the same for other automakers. Tesla may be leading the charge, after all, but it is not alone. There’s Rivian, which is also planning on adopting a non-dealership sales model, and more are likely coming. By allowing Tesla to sell and service its cars within the state, Michigan has just accelerated the industry’s transition to sustainability. 

Very few may see it now, but through this little settlement with Tesla, the US auto industry may have just passed the proverbial point of no return.

Tesla’s recent settlement with the state of Michigan can be read below.

Tesla-MI-Joint Stipulation and Motion for Entry of Dismissal 1-22-20 679161 7 by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Just nine months after scrapping temporary Starship facilities built at a Los Angeles port, the company has unexpectedly reconsidered that decision, restarting talks to build a steel Starship factory in California.

In March 2018, nearly two years ago, the public first became aware of SpaceX’s plans to build a Starship factory in Port of Los Angeles. Begun while Starship was still known as BFR (Big Falcon Rocket) and designed to be built almost entirely out of carbon-fiber composites, the company’s first in-house effort to build its next-generation rocket began in an unassuming tent erected on port property around December 2017. Unintentionally foreshadowing the future of both Tesla Model 3 and SpaceX Starship production, that temporary tent was completed in just a month or two and officially began supporting BFR prototype production in April 2018.

In December 2018, CEO Elon Musk rebranded BFR as Starship and revealed that SpaceX would take the extraordinary step of redesigning the fully-reusable rocket to use stainless steel instead of carbon fiber. One year after SpaceX began building carbon fiber hardware, Musk moved quickly to make the radical move to steel permanent, literally scrapping its BFR prototype tent and abandoning its lease of a separate facility that was meant to host a more permanent composite Mars rocket factory in the near future. Now, almost exactly a year canceling its Port of LA factory, SpaceX has returned with plans to build and finish new port-based Starship production facilities just a few months from now.

Completed in September 2018, the closest SpaceX ever got to producing its 2017 BFR iteration was a large ring-like composite structure, also known as a barrel section. Measuring some 9m (30 ft) wide and 4-6m (12-20 ft) long, both 2016, 2017, and 2018 variants of SpaceX’s next-generation fully-reusable rocket would have been assembled from a number of similar components — all to be built out of carbon composites with giant mandrels (a bit like inverse molds).

While it’s more than likely that SpaceX could have managed the feat, building a reusable orbital spacecraft like Starship out of carbon fiber posed a vast array of challenges. When Musk revealed that SpaceX would move from carbon fiber to steel in December 2018, the CEO went into some detail to explain several of those challenges and why the major change was thus worth the substantial body of work it would force the company to scrap and redo from scratch.

The two biggest hurdles for BFR were quite simple. From a technical perspective, carbon fiber is dramatically less temperature-resistant than most metals (especially steel), meaning that despite it offering a much higher strength-to-weight ratio on paper, almost every inch of the spaceship and booster’s exposed surfaces would have to be insulated. For Starship, this would be exceptionally challenging given that the spacecraft must fundamentally be able to survive numerous orbital-velocity reentries with little to no refurbishment in between. While a steel Starship would still need a proper heat shield on its windward half, the other half of its steel hull could likely be almost entirely unshielded thanks to the fact that most steels remain structural sound at much higher temperatures.

Beyond the “delightfully counterintuitive” technical properties that could make a steel Starship as light or even lighter than the carbon composite alternative, Musk also noted that a huge motivator for the switch was the fact that the cutting-edge composites SpaceX would have to buy were incredibly expensive. In September 2019, Musk stated that composites would have cost some $130,000 per ton, whereas a ton of the stainless steel SpaceX is now using can be purchased for just $2500. In simpler terms, from a material cost perspective, steel Starships and Super Heavy boosters could cost an incredible 50 times less than their carbon composite twins.

Port Factory 2.0

For now, it’s unclear exactly what SpaceX foresees for Starship’s newly re-proposed Port of LA factory. The same primary constraint remains: there is still no affordable way to ship full-scale 9m-diameter Starship hardware by road. The most likely explanation for the resurrected interest in port facilities is that SpaceX still wants to keep some major aspects of Starship manufacturing within reach of California’s vast aerospace talent pool, as well as the company’s own California headquarters, situated just 20 or so miles from Port of LA.

At the same time, SpaceX probably has all the space it could possibly want at its Hawthorne, CA headquarters after a massive Triumph facility was recently vacated, meaning that any intentional expansion in Port of LA is probably motivated by the need to transport massive rocket parts from California to Texas and Florida. Daily Breeze also reports that “SpaceX would manufacture its…Starship spacecraft and…Super Heavy [booster] on the property” if it receives approval, seemingly implying interest in full-scale rocket production at its prospective port factory.

Regardless of whether SpaceX wants to build smaller Starship subcomponents (i.e. nose cones, header tanks, fins, plumbing, crew compartments, etc.) or complete spaceships and boosters, the company is seemingly far more eager to get port facilities in place, this time around. Specifically, SpaceX told a city council member that it wanted to get a Port of LA facility up and running just 90 days after it expressed new interest in the concept.

To do so, SpaceX will copy the methods used to create both Tesla’s General Assembly 4 factory addition and its own massive Starship production space in South Texas, relying on Sprung Instant Structures to erect a massive semi-permanent tent or two in an extremely short period of time. Unfortunately, because of how abruptly SpaceX abandoned its Port of LA factory lease, the company will have to repeat the permitting and environmental review process from scratch, making it very unlikely that it will be able to begin construction within the next month or two.

Regardless, SpaceX certainly remains as agile as ever. Stay tuned for updates on this surprise resurgence of plans for a Port of LA Starship factory.

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tesla has updated its refund policy for software upgrades purchased through its mobile app, following a ruckus that had some customers accidentally buying upgrades they had no intention of buying. In what amounts to a “butt-dial”, Tesla owners were accidentally buying software upgrades through the unintentional press of the “Purchase” button on their mobile devices.

The electric car company has updated its support terms on its Upgrades page to indicate that all in-app purchases will be eligible for a refund within the first 48 hours from purchase. When customers open the Upgrades section in their mobile app, they will find an option to ask for a refund under the Purchased tab. The app will also ask them to provide a reason for asking for a refund.

“For upgrades purchased from the Tesla app, you can request a refund from the Tesla app within 48 hours of purchase,” the company notes via its Upgrades page. “All refund conditions are available in your Tesla app.”

The update is applicable to upgrades bought through the app only. For customers who bought upgrades through one of Tesla’s Service Centers, they must contact the Service Center for a refund. Refunds are also not applicable to subscriptions, including Premium Connectivity.

Just saw this today. Tesla refunds in general should be easy to get electronically & certainly through customer service. Will he addressed.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 15, 2020

The latest update comes after a number of customers aired their dissatisfaction about accidentally buying upgrades through the app and not being able to ask for refunds.

Last year, Tesla pushed an update to its app to allow owners to buy software upgrades directly from their phones. It wasn’t long before customers began reporting that they were making unintentional purchases through the app with no way to ask for a refund, setting them back by $2,000 for the Acceleration Boost and roughly $6,000 for the Full Self-Driving upgrade.

“The Black Swan” author and scholar Nassim Taleb was one of the customers who took to Twitter looking for a speedy resolution by tagging Tesla chief Elon Musk, who is known to regularly respond to tweets from customers. Musk replied by promising to address the issue and assuring customers that Tesla provides refunds in general. Two weeks after the tweet exchange, it appears Tesla has followed through.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});