When your spending 100k on a car you expect Mercedes type of luxury. Previously, Tesla didn't have to compete on that because the Model S/X were ahead of its time an proof of concept cars, with the release of Model 3/Y there is no reason to have one, unless you need the additional size and want to have an electric vehicle on principle.
This is the old way of thinking, and it illistrates perfectly why the other auto manufacturers have been caught flat footed re EVs.
For many decades what you said held true - more money on a car meant a higher quality interior.
Now things have changed dramatically, because what we thought of as a "car" has changed so much.
You can now spend 100k to get a car that never emits a single toxic chemical while being used. A vehicle that much cheaper to drive and own. A vehicle that requires significantly less maintenance, a vehicle that is silent and less fatiguing to drive, etc. etc.
This are all the reasons besides "I got a more luxury interior", and they're the kind of reasons that make an EV compelling.
Yes, but if the EV part is most important to me, why would I spend $100k on a Model S, when I can spend way less on a Model 3?
And if the luxury is most important to me, why would I spend $100k on a Model S, when I can spend the same amount of money on a Porsche Taycan, get a similarly performing EV, but with a luxury interior that blows Tesla completely out of the water?
The Model S has very little going for it right now, which is why the price has dropped considerably in the last year. It finally has competition, and it's simply not holding up very well.
We've got a Model 3, I've had S loaners and my dad's got an S, and I've driven the S as far back as maybe 2013?
There are things I like about both. It's not at all clear to me that if you made me choose a free car to receive, that I'd choose the S over the 3.
If you're making me spend my own dollars, 3 all day. I just don't like the S twice as much.
But they're clearly not worried about cannibalizing their own product line.