[grkvlt]

But 'buying up used Teslas' is not some dodgy scheme, only to be considered by sketch operations. Buying used stuff is actually pretty common as a strategy for many businesses. It allows them to obtain things they need, but minimise capital costs.

In this (hypothetical) case it'd also be giving a saving on operating expenses, which would be attractive - but I can see why Tesla would be worried about their costs rising from the superchargers being used by taxis.

In general it seems fair not to allow businesses to abuse them since the pattern of use would be much more frequent and probably drawing more power. They're a perk for everyday drivers, not a way for Tesla to subsidise the operating costs of small businesses for free.

[greglindahl]

Actually, paying a driver to wait at a supercharger costs more than the electricity is worth. So yes, it's totally dodgy.

[wolfgke]

> Actually, paying a driver to wait at a supercharger costs more than the electricity is worth. So yes, it's totally dodgy.

This is a business decision of the actual car owner.

[martin_bech]

But charging at a regular charger would take 5-6x longer.

[will_hughes]

You can purchase a three-phase 230V / 80A wall charging station from Tesla.

If you are running a fleet and need a lot of capacity, then you can throw money at Tesla and get a private supercharging deployment (they've done it before).

[greglindahl]

Almost all regular charging happens overnight, with no one waiting.

[dillondoyle]

But if car is resource not to be wasted it would be driving Uber pax 24/7 minus charging and maintenance. Maybe 3 drivers per car. Sure, fewer pax at 5am but probably dependent on what city/market.

[martin_bech]

Yes for regular use, but if you want to use the cars commercially, supercharging will in many cases be better/much faster.