To state the obvious: the fact that there are different manufacturers for the EA chargers does a lot to explain all the different problems and behaviors we have all experienced at EA. Each charger obviously has different a OS and different firmware, so we are probably dealing with at least eight different "configurations" for otherwise "should-be-the-same EA chargers". On top of that, you have 150's vs 350's, older generation chargers from some of the manufacturers, differences in how the stations are provisioned for power, there is probably some Time of Use load shedding going on, load sharing with other vehicles, broken hardware, and outright bugs or corner cases in the charger protocol.
Then there is the issue of how the vehicle "wants" power: SOC at the start of charging, pre-conditioning effects (or lack thereof), outside air temp, Lucid charging firmware, and un-revealed differences between either Lucid models or even within a model, etc. Plus OTA updates that change vehicle behavior over time.
It is going to be very, very difficult for end users to experience predictable behavior in that environment, even if EA manages to "fix" all their broken chargers.
As an early adopter of Teslas, I knew that their investment in their own charging network made a lot of engineering and business sense. Sitting on both ends of the wire, having a uniform(-ish) fleet to charge, all of the vehicles being able to draw 100kW and up (compared to many vehicles with 15kW draw sitting at EA 150s), and not having to respond to bugs from other vehicles: all of these things make the job for Tesla charging infrastructure much, much simpler than that for EA.
Previously, I figured that by now, the power of the market would have created some serious competition. I was wrong.