Anyway, Tesla doesn't need to provide an affordable, mass appeal product. In fact, it's probably better off doing just the opposite. Musk's ploy here puzzles me. Unless Model S sales are slumping -- and I don't think they are -- why bother with this? Does the billionaire Musk simply want to portray a kinder, gentler self and an egalitarian Tesla? Is he merely teeing up a more modest image ahead of plans to enter a broader market against Nissan's ( NSANY) Leaf, General Motor's ( GM) Chevy Volt, other lower-priced EVs and other cars marketed, at least in part, on the basis of superior fuel economy? If he is, he's (A) being disingenuous and (B) addressing a problem that doesn't exist. Play around with Tesla's True Cost of Ownership calculator. You need to be typecast worse than Jennifer Aniston to play the role of a person who would benefit much, if at all, financially by bleasing a Model S. Tesla's assumptions are unrealistic for most of the population. Ultimately, they only matter to its core pool of prospective buyers who don't have to ask what the car costs and likely have already reserved or are driving one. It's not that these cats don't like saving a few bucks (that's often why somebody is relatively well-off in the first place), but, if you're Musk, why ask? What's the point? There's got to be an ulterior motive.
Like I said, play with the numbers. Musk insulted our intelligence hyping the snot out of this big announcement. I am sure the scribes who stayed at work late last night aren't happy. Think about all of the other things they could have been doing with their time! But, more than that, you have a premium product. Rich people in places such as Santa Monica and Beverly Hills are buying it. There's no need to sell them a bill of goods. And, even worse, upon further inspection, the bill of goods will do very little to motivate the rest of us to get into a Model S, even if we are willing and able. Follow @rocco_thestreet -- Written by Rocco Pendola in Santa Monica, Calif.