Yes, I remember those claims as well. I think there was a flawed logic to begin with and that was that Tesla was demand constrained as "proven" by the release of the MR Model 3. Running with that falsehood, theorized that the Supercharger Network was now dead in it's tracks. Without continued sales, there would be no funding for a continued build out. It would be difficult to imagine how much further behind the public DCFC network would be if not for Volkswagen getting caught in the Dieselgate scandal.I know you've ruled out the Model Y, but the "strategy game" as you call it for long distance EV travel virtually disappears with any Tesla. And, unfortunately for mass EV adoption, it seems that Tesla is the only EV manufacturer that has understood this issue from Day 1.
Almost three years ago when I first started logging into this forum, the great white hope was that charging infrastructure for CCS Combo vehicles would soon catch up with, and even surpass, what Tesla offers. Well soon has come and gone and despite signs of life from EA and a few others, we are still looking at a really substandard long distance charging experience compared to that offered by Tesla.
I really hope that we are still not having conversations in two or three more years about substandard DCFC charging experiences because such continued inadequacy will be the ultimate bottleneck for the average driver considering an EV rather than an ICE. And that doesn't even address the issue of the number of charging stalls being installed at any given location. If you think Thanksgiving week at San Luis Obispo or Kettleman City looks bad for Teslas, just imagine even 25% as many non-Tesla EVs trying to get home on a holiday weekend.
Fast forward to now. We obviously know that Tesla never was nor will likely be demand constrained for quite some time. They are a money printing machine at this point so the aggressive build-out of the Supercharger Network never actually shut down so that the public network could catch up. With the continued popularity of Tesla's vehicles and especially the Model Y, that build out will go to hyperspeed now. It has to or west coast Tesla owners will feel the crunch.
So I think part of the reason that the public infrastructure didn't catch up is that the Supercharger Network isn't static as assumed.
At some point, the EA build out will stop. After that, it will be either capitalism or government subsidies that will keep the public network growing. We already see a significant cooperation at the state level (Florida, New York) that will bring the public network to a viable infrastructure. It's getting close now in quantity and locations, just not reliability. Until they can match the convenience and dependability of the Supercharger Network, regardless of the number of portals, it will always seem inferior.
Elon posted a tweet the other day reiterating Tesla's mission to advance the adoption of sustainable transportation.
"Tesla is open to licensing software and supplying powertrains & batteries. We’re just trying to accelerate sustainable energy, not crush competitors! "
Further down in the replies, Robert Bollinger again reached out to Elon via twitter to ask if Bollinger can use the Supercharger network.
For the life of me, I can't fathom why Bollinger doesn't just contact Tesla directly rather than use twitter which I doubt Elon reads every single response.
Regardless, it would seem to be in the BEV communities best interest to ensure the supercharger bottlenecks are addressed before opening it up to non-Tesla's but the numbers would seem to make that concern moot. The total number of non-Tesla's that would be using the Supercharger Network is about 6 months worth of Tesla's production (WAG). IMO, it would be a negligible impact to the queue's especially if they meet the minimum charging speed threshold originally spelled out. I don't know what that is but would guess it to be 100kW, so the number of non-Tesla's that meet the minimum charging speed is even less.
I believe Rivian is planning on building their own charging network but mostly to address off roading limitations. There was another company too that recently announced their own proprietary network but I'll have to try and find it (not Ford glomming onto the existing one). I imagine that may have more to do with the dysfunctional aspects that are becoming the achilles heel of the public network and that is countless different software's from a variety of manufacturers and vendors, trying to communicate with a handful of charging hardware and software. That along with the payment fiasco has really stalled the adoption IMO.
I don't see an easy or timely solution that addresses that shortcoming that will always be looked upon as a deficiency when compared to proprietary charging networks, regardless of whether they are considered a standard or not. That argument is laughable if 80% of the vehicles on the road use the non-standard protocol that is objectively superior.