backtop


Print 80 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Apr 20 at 12:04 PM

He'll either lobby Congress for legislation or file a federal lawsuit

Tesla CEO Elon Musk is determined to win the fight against auto dealers and sell his company's vehicles directly to customers, but if he doesn't succeed at the state level, he's willing to make it a federal case. 

"If we're seeing nonstop battles at the state level, rather than fight 20 different state battles, I'd rather fight one federal battle," said Musk.

According to Musk, he will likely take one of two approaches if it comes down to a federal matter. He will either lobby Congress to pass legislation for the direct sales of EVs made by startup companies like Tesla (and tie it to an energy or transportation bill) or file a federal lawsuit to fight the state restrictions as unconstitutional violations of interstate commerce.

However, The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) said it will continue to defend franchise and consumer laws in the states.

"NADA will vigorously defend the franchise system," said David Westcott, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association. "A better option for Mr. Musk is to take advantage of the dealer network that already exists."

Musk has been pushing support for a recent bill in Texas, called House Bill 3351. This would allow distributors and manufacturers of electric vehicles (EVs) only to sell directly to customers without the use of dealerships. 

He has gone as far as offering to build a second manufacturing plant in Texas, and is even trying to appeal to Texas consumers by discussing a design for an electric pickup truck that would be stronger than any current gasoline truck.


In addition to Texas, Musk has had issues persuading other U.S. states to allow the auto startup to sell its cars directly. Some of its problem states include Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York and Virginia. 

Musk could have a huge fight ahead, though. NADA said that 48 states have some sort of restricition on factory-owned dealerships. Musk went on to say that about 20 of those have restrictions that would make his business model difficult while about six others have restrictions that would make it extremely difficult. 

Musk has called the new Texas bill (and this overall business model of selling directly) a "life or death" situation for startups like Tesla. 

“For us this is life or death,” said Musk. “If we can’t go direct we will not be able to sell cars.”

In the past, Musk has said that he's open to a dealership model at some point when sales increase, since dealerships do promote competition and keep prices down. But at a startup level, he said this type of model isn't the best route. 

Tesla currently sells about 10,000 cars in North America, where about 1,500-2,000 are sold in Texas. 

Tesla is shipping over 500 Model S EVs weekly, and recently reported that the company is now profitable thanks to the Model S exceeding sales targets. Tesla Model S sales reached 4,750, which topped the sales outlook of 4,500 posted in the February shareholder letter.
 
In addition, the automaker is partnering with Wells Fargo and U.S. Bank to offer customers more financing options for Tesla’s vehicles. 

Source: Automotive News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 12:27:30 PM , Rating: -1
He's asking for nothing but special treatment.




RE: Pretty pathetic
By HercDriver on 4/16/2013 12:38:45 PM , Rating: 5
I'm surprised to hear you say that. I figured you'd be more on the lines of "the dealerships do not have a "right" to someone else's profits". Why should a company be forced to use a dealership business model, if it will hurt their profitability? Also, consumers will have to pay more for the cars if they are sold through dealers. If I want to buy one of these cars, why shoud I have to pay "slick Willie" at the dealer a couple thousand bucks commission? Dealerships provide no added benefit to a company that only sells a few thousand cars. the people who want one do not need a dealer to "convince" them to buy one, thus "earning" their commission.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By othercents on 4/16/2013 12:48:00 PM , Rating: 3
Using the dealership model makes sense when you are moving millions of vehicles, but start-ups or companies trying to break into the US market have issues with this model. Hence the reason why they should change it to allow companies that produce less than 100,000 vehicles per year to sale directly. Most states allow motor-homes to be sold direct due to the lower number produced and a smaller market being sold too.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By ebakke on 4/16/2013 1:03:23 PM , Rating: 3
Or change the law to let each industry and each company decide for themselves.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By yomamafor1 on 4/16/2013 1:37:14 PM , Rating: 1
Because the banking and cable industries that adopt this model have worked well for the smaller guys.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Samus on 4/16/2013 1:12:37 PM , Rating: 5
His cars also require virtually no maintenance. There are no filters, oil changes, belts/chains, etc. There is little incentive to buy it from a dealership you wont be going back too for years.

The only thing this car needs is tires, wipers, and brakes every 50k and a coolant change (battery pack/motor) every 100k.

The differential is "sealed for life" synthetic 75w140, the wear on the brakes is minimal because (like a Prius) the majority of heavy energy isn't absorbed into the rotors using friction material, but with regenerative braking through the drive train.

Batteries are the only real question.

Tesla already has a list of certified repair facilities on their website to do this.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Nortel on 4/16/2013 1:52:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
a coolant change (battery pack/motor) every 100k.

Yea, just a new battery and motor every 100k... Probably costs about the same as a coolant flush right?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 4/16/2013 4:55:17 PM , Rating: 3
The parent post referred to the coolant, not the entire package.

You do know that electric motors are far more reliable than combustion engines?

Changing fluids is a lot cheaper than cleaning valves, replacing timing chains, etc.

(or was that your attempt to be humorous?)


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Spuke on 4/16/2013 6:48:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Changing fluids is a lot cheaper than cleaning valves, replacing timing chains, etc.
Who does this on their gasoline engine? I've owned nothing but timing chain engines and have NEVER replaced one of them. Also, never got my valves cleaned either. How exactly is that done?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2013 7:00:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, never got my valves cleaned either. How exactly is that done?


Seafoam :)

Something you'll all have to be infinitely more familiar with the more these fascist push Ethanol and other "green" fuels onto us.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By theapparition on 4/17/2013 10:13:38 AM , Rating: 3
Seafoam is some good stuff. Just don't do it in the garage.

Wait for a nice windy day.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Kazinji on 4/16/2013 8:27:16 PM , Rating: 2
They have yearly scheduled maintenance. Can have a Tech come to your house. http://www.teslamotors.com/service#/tesla-service


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 2:24:25 PM , Rating: 2
I believe the reason states require cars to be sold through dealerships is so consumers aren't screwed when the car breaks and without a service center. I live in Charleston, SC. If I bought a Tesla, I'd have to ship it to Raleigh, NC to get it serviced if anything goes wrong.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By 91TTZ on 4/16/2013 3:57:27 PM , Rating: 3
Why would you ship your car somewhere else when there are mechanics all over the place that can fix it for you?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Spuke on 4/16/2013 6:51:17 PM , Rating: 2
Where are all these Tesla mechanics located?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/17/2013 8:46:06 AM , Rating: 2
Uh...because warranty repairs generally have to be done at an authorized service center....


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2013 5:27:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm surprised to hear you say that. I figured you'd be more on the lines of "the dealerships do not have a "right" to someone else's profits". Why should a company be forced to use a dealership business model, if it will hurt their profitability?


I agree with you.

My problem is that Musk isn't challenging the rule et-all, he's just fighting for (yet another) special exemption simply because he's offering EV's.

Do we want level playing fields or not? I'm a bit confused.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/13, Rating: -1
RE: Pretty pathetic
By lelias2k on 4/16/2013 6:02:22 PM , Rating: 5
When you are fighting 100-year old companies, with a product that challenges one of the most - if not THE most, powerful industries in the world, I think you are entitled to try to play by the same rules.

Especially since what he is proposing is something that I see eventually becoming common practice.

I sold cars and I honestly hate the whole dealership experience. I would love to simply go online, put my car together, get financing, and wait for it to arrive. Screw the middle men, as they are not adding anything positive to the process. Unless you think that all the things they try to put down your throat are any good. In which case let me know and I'll be happy to sell you your next car.

And let be honest, we already are half-way there. A lot of my customers used to arrive knowing if I had the car they wanted, what would be a good price to pay, etc.

So, in the end, killing dealerships would benefit everybody but the dealership. But why would Musk fight for an industry that is clearly against him?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By seamonkey79 on 4/16/2013 6:53:12 PM , Rating: 2
I am about completely turned off dealerships, enough that I'm still fixing my car myself to keep it going while I figure a way around dealing with a dealership. Salespeople in most businesses are a bit shady, but car dealerships still ooze that classic used car sales stereotype of the 60s/70s television shows, only they're trying to sell you a new car.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Spuke on 4/16/2013 6:55:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
When you are fighting 100-year old companies, with a product that challenges one of the most - if not THE most, powerful industries in the world, I think you are entitled to try to play by the same rules.
Yes, exactly and one of those rules is to open a dealership like everyone else in the auto field.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By chmilz on 4/16/2013 12:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
You're right. All manufacturers should be able to sell direct. With the internet, why am I dealing with high pressure sales guys at dealers when I should just be able to order right from the factory without that dealer markup?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Solandri on 4/16/2013 2:28:24 PM , Rating: 2
Cars are something you purchase once every 5-10 years, right? By the time you want to buy a new one, all the models and prices and a fair amount of the technology have changed. Consequently, it's difficult for any individual buyer to accurately gauge the actual value of a car. On top of that, people tend to "fall in love" with one particular make or model.

That type of situation is vulnerable to the manufacturer artificially inflating prices. If all Fords are sold directly to individuals, and Ford is in charge of direct pricing, and the individuals don't really know the value of the cars, it's pretty easy for them to ratchet up the price without the individuals figuring out they're being ripped off.

OTOH if you insert a middleman who buys and sells a wide variety of cars every day, he has the information and the experience to determine when a car is overpriced in comparison to the competition. He'll be able to detect artificially high prices long before individual buyers ever could, and due to his volume of purchases he'll be in a better position to call the manufacturer out on it and negotiate a lower price. So it's possible that the car dealers are actually helping the market.

Middlemen aren't always a bad thing. If they insert value into the system (added features, marketing expertise, better pricing information, etc), they can actually be a good thing for the market. The hammer manufacturer is really good at making hammers, but lacks market estimation and distribution experience. So they sell to a distributor. The distributor is really good at estimating market demand and transporting hammers across the country, but they lack retail sales experience so they sell to retail stores. The local hardware store is really good at retail sales, but lacks the skills and knowledge to actually use hammers to build carpentry and houses. The contractor has those skills, so they buy from the retail store.

Technically the distributor and hardware store are middlemen, but they actually make the system more efficient by providing valuable services. If you eliminated them from the market, prices would actually go up because distribution and marketing would have to be handled by the manufacturer. Smaller manufacturers wouldn't be able to do that, so they'd drop out of the market. The few remaining manufacturers would face less competition, and they'd ratchet up prices. Net result is the price the contractor pays for a hammer would go up because you eliminated the middlemen.

I could see an argument that the Internet now allows individuals to compare car prices as well as a dealer. But online shopping works because they stores like Amazon use UPS as their distribution system. Last I checked, UPS doesn't deliver cars from the factory to the end buyer. So it seems to me those car dealers you hate are still adding value by estimating demand and telling manufacturers how many cars to send where.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 2:50:32 PM , Rating: 1
Not sure where you live but more people lease today. Maybe not Tesla's but in general.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mint on 4/17/2013 10:22:59 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe more than they used to, but it's still only ~25%.

Leasing is a good model for EV to sell to consumers, especially the low end ones. It illustrates the true monthly cost, and it's easy to compare fuel costs that way. That's when $199/mo for a Leaf plus ~$40/mo for electricity looks very attractive compared to any other car.

A big chunk of the initial cost becomes the manufacturer's risk, since the consumer has the option to walk away after three years. If the battery is of good quality, then the manufacturer will be able to afford a solid warranty for off-lease vehicles and keep selling them for a premium over gas cars that are more costly to fuel and maintain.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By 91TTZ on 4/16/2013 4:10:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Cars are something you purchase once every 5-10 years, right? By the time you want to buy a new one, all the models and prices and a fair amount of the technology have changed. Consequently, it's difficult for any individual buyer to accurately gauge the actual value of a car. On top of that, people tend to "fall in love" with one particular make or model. That type of situation is vulnerable to the manufacturer artificially inflating prices. If all Fords are sold directly to individuals, and Ford is in charge of direct pricing, and the individuals don't really know the value of the cars, it's pretty easy for them to ratchet up the price without the individuals figuring out they're being ripped off.


How would this differ from any other product? You would comparison shop like you do with anything else. TVs, computers, used cars, food, furniture, etc. Why are all these products not marked up to insane prices? Because nobody would buy them.

With just about any product you're going to have competition and each manufacturer needs to find ways to undercut their competition. Having a middleman that also needs to make money can only serve to raise the price.

Also, nobody is proposing that we abolish all car dealers. They could still exist, they just won't be required to exist by law. If you want to buy a car at a marked-up price from a dealer go ahead. Look at the used car market. There are dealers for used cars but you don't have to go through a dealer. You can buy a used car from anyone. I could sell you my used car.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mint on 4/17/2013 12:19:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, nobody is proposing that we abolish all car dealers. They could still exist, they just won't be required to exist by law.
The problem is that they keep disappearing as soon as manufacturers start selling direct. A person goes to a dealership to test drive a couple cars, then makes his purchase direct, and the dealerships go out of business.

Then people who already bought cars from that manufacturer have few places left to bring their car for repair. New buyers lose a mechanism for comparison shopping, which is absolutely fundamental for a competitive and efficient market.

Direct selling for computers or clothes or whatnot is a little different than for cars.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Dr of crap on 4/17/2013 1:08:37 PM , Rating: 2
No it's not. Might be for some, and works for a lot of others.

A lot of people search online, find what they want and prices that they should pay and THEN go into the dealership - ummm sounds like electronics and Best Buy doesn't it?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mint on 4/20/2013 12:04:05 PM , Rating: 1
You just proved my point with electronics. Retail is getting hammered by online sales (which are just a thin layer away from direct sales). Circuit City went bankrupt, BestBuy is on its way.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Kazinji on 4/16/2013 8:38:42 PM , Rating: 2
OTOH if you insert a middleman who buys and sells a wide variety of cars every day, he has the information and the experience to determine when a car is overpriced in comparison to the competition. He'll be able to detect artificially high prices long before individual buyers ever could, and due to his volume of purchases he'll be in a better position to call the manufacturer out on it and negotiate a lower price. So it's possible that the car dealers are actually helping the market.

I argue with a lot of that, but prices for cars are what your willing to pay. 100k Porsche Cayenne used are barely a 1/3 of that. Used Roadster can prob be had for a bit as there sold out in US. Middleman often tack on extra cost because it's rare even if it's new. Why? because they can. Dealerships that take advantage of this are prob pissing off customers which complain to Tesla.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Landiepete on 4/17/2013 9:28:26 AM , Rating: 2
I can see some of the arguments here, but let's not start off with false premises.
Car dealership DO NOT exist for the sole purpose of extorting money from you.
The serve to get products from the manufacturer to the consumer, to service the vehicles according to the manufacturers specification, to assure they adhere and keep adhering to the environmental guidelines, to handle factory recalls, and to repair defective or damaged vehicles in a timely manner with the appropriate parts and tools. Agreed some are better at this than others, but it is what they are for.
Let's also examine Mr. Musk's statement. He claims that, if his vehicles are to be soled through dealer franchises, they become a losing proposition.
I can, however, not determine from the article why he deems this to be so. I can guess at the reason : his EV's are so expensive to produce at this time that adding a dealer overhead would make them so expensive they would become unsellable. This may be true at this time. If you make 500 cars a month, and if we make this -for the sake of argument- 10 cars per US state (I said : for the sake of argument, didn't I ?) and he would have to commission 5 dealerships per state, how many cars would they effectively be able to service every month ? Do the math. It can't possibly work. Even if they had enough reserves to to tie them over for one year they'd go bust the second.
Even if he used existing dealers, they would have to invest in training, tools, dedicated workstations, spare parts inventory, etc, for what ? 4 services a month whey they have a really busy month ? Again, do the math.

So how does Mr. Musk envision this ? Or did he 'forget'? It's called 'the cost of doing business'. Surely he budgeted for this ?

Or does Mr. Musk have other reasons for making his statement ? I would like to know them.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By GarnS on 4/17/2013 6:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
Landiepete I want to say thank you! You have kept a level head and shared some very good points to be considered. I usually hear a lot of arguments against Musk on this topic. But most can say nothing relavent/convincing besides just saying he is wrong, with nothing of substance to back it up. So thank you! But I do question a few things you wrote above…. Why wouldn’t Tesla be able to offer the services you mention that the dealers can offer, like service to the manufacturers’ specification, assure they adhere to environmental guidelines, handle factory recalls, repair defective or damaged vehicles in a timely manner with the appropriate parts and tools? Tesla has a service team, which at this time, comes to your home and provides most of these services at your home. And he is trying to change the laws so he will be allowed to have service centers that can do warrenty work to the spects you mention. That is one of the things the curent laws restrict him from being able to do.

Musk is trying to do this (“making his statement”) because at this point most dealerships do not favor EVs. And so for that reason alone they would not try to sell them to customors. Where is their incentive to sell an EV over an ICE? It certainly isn’t in the fees to be charged at a later time from their service centers, which won’t be needed as offten with EVs.
Please watch…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zKAd80DWS0
If links can’t be showen please search for the video entiteled “Elon Musk: The TT Interview”. I believe he addresses a lot of your ligitiment concern within this short video.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Landiepete on 4/18/2013 7:15:09 AM , Rating: 2
I've just saw the clip you posted, thanks. Unfortunately, I still don't see a valid argument from a consumer point of view.
Apart from problems that will arise from his proposal (when dus a start-up loose it's start-up status ? Even worse, how does a start-up that becomes a no-startup-any-longer suddenly afford a state-wide dealer network ? Aren't they just postponing the problem ?) I'm trying to imagine what would happen if my Tesla broke down (I'm actually considering purchasing one, so it's not too far from the realm of the practical).
Imagine this : you're driving along minding your own business, and your car breaks down. You pull up on the hard shoulder, and ring the AA or your insurance. A while later a truck arrives. A guy opens your hood, can't fix it, and tows your vehicle to the nearest dealership where you are handed the keys to a loaner while they fix your car. Two days later you get a phone call to pick up your car, drive over, hand them the keys to the loaner, pay yur bill (OR NOT)and you're on your merry way.
Now, same deal, your Tesla breaks down. You call the AA. No you don't. They know nothing about EV's (yet). You call Tesla. How many intervention units do you have in your state ? Two ? Four ? They tell you the nearest one is 150 miles away and has two more appointments that day. They send a tow truck. The car is sent back to your home, because there's no dealers. The day after the Tesla truck arrives at your door. You've taken the day off, because they couldn't tell you what time they would be arriving. But you weren't going anywhere anyway, since the Tesla's dead. The tech can't fix it, it needs to go back to the factory ? You get a voucher for the rental (the tow guy couldn't give you that, because 'Tesla has to verify your vehicle is indeed unfixable in situ'. You ALWAYS have to wait for the Tesla truck. Reverse thing happens when your car is eventually fixed.
I'm just pulling this out of my behind, of course, but I haven't heard Mr. Musk elaborate on how he will handle these situations. And as long as he doesn't I'm sceptical.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By abraxas1 on 4/16/2013 12:47:02 PM , Rating: 5
It's important to remove any barriers that would inhibit fresh blood from being injected into the American auto industry.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By siconik on 4/16/2013 1:00:42 PM , Rating: 5
LOL, I love how people who foam the mouth raving against "Obama's socialist takeover of the economy" have no problem whatsoever defending artificial barriers to entry, restriction of trade and legislative suppression of free enterprise to the benefit of entrenched moneyed interest as long as it effects the company they don't like. Typical fax-libertarian "Let freedom ring... in my moral envelope!".


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/13, Rating: -1
RE: Pretty pathetic
By NellyFromMA on 4/16/2013 1:16:58 PM , Rating: 2
It's called negotiation and leverage. You don't go into negotiations asking for JUST what you want, then you end up with next to nothing.

ID what you want, then set the bar HIGHER and if you don't achieve it, you are still likely on your way to getting what you ACTUALLY wanted.

Actually, kind of sounds like the dealers... they should APPLAUD THIS! lol


RE: Pretty pathetic
By mdogs444 on 4/16/2013 1:28:45 PM , Rating: 1
This guy is looking for special treatment for EV's. What do you think he'll say if they scrap the law and let ALL car makers (GM, Ford, etc) sell directly instead of via dealership? It would lower their overhead....


RE: Pretty pathetic
By 1prophet on 4/16/2013 1:56:31 PM , Rating: 1
Contrary to popular belief, it's just the opposite, dealers subsidize the automakers, the dealers pay for everything from the vehicles in the lot through the floor plan to the help and facilities.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 2:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
Like it or not, every state requires cars to be sold through dealerships. Even in California its shaky ground to sell direct.

If the public wants that law to change, change it. Special exemptions shouldn't be made only for a single group.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By BRB29 on 4/16/2013 2:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
The public would rather buy direct since it's cheaper. Of course, most of the public doesn't even know the current law exist.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 3:20:29 PM , Rating: 2
And that is a different problem entirely. Educate the public (I know that goes against liberals ideology) about the laws. Then encourage them to change them if they agree.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By jRaskell on 4/16/2013 3:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
You can only educate the willing.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By 91TTZ on 4/16/2013 4:14:12 PM , Rating: 2
He's not trying to gain leverage- he just knows that he stands no chance of changing the entire industry so he's looking for a small exception for electric cars.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2013 12:20:08 AM , Rating: 1
How the fuck does he have to "change an industry"? All he has to do is make a product that people want to buy. There's no conspiracy against him.

Enough with the "Musk vs The World" bullcrap. He's done a great job so far. But lobbying for special privileges and having laws changed just to favor his business is just too much.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2013 5:33:48 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong. Not defending the barriers at all. But they are there. We should either remove them for EVERYONE, or have everyone play by the same rules.

Giving Tesla Motors a special exemption, simply because they provide EV's, is broadly unfair. Also it introduces many problems within the current sales structure.

Your post is just rhetoric and hyperbole with absolutely no structure beyond it. No wonder it got a 5...

quote:
Typical fax-libertarian "Let freedom ring... in my moral envelope!".


Freedom for Tesla, but not others, isn't freedom my good sir. If Musk was challenging the rule in general, I would be cheering. Instead he's lobbying (I thought lobbying was evil on DT? I guess it's fine when it's the GREEN lobby..) for special status!


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Spuke on 4/16/2013 6:57:36 PM , Rating: 2
It's fine because they agree with it. The epitome of hypocrisy.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mint on 4/17/2013 9:39:44 AM , Rating: 2
He doesn't want an EV exemption. He wants a low volume exemption that other small carmakers could use, one that he'd have to give up at some point to keep his company growing. As someone mentioned above, motorhomes can also be sold direct (and they actually do almost 10x the sales volume).


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mint on 4/17/2013 9:46:54 AM , Rating: 2
And before anyone says it, yes, I know that the Texas bill is for EV makers, but at the federal level he'd be fine with a more general bill.

It helps startups get their foot through the door, but low volume will keep them from threatening the existence of the dealership industry (which I agree plays an important role in a competitive marketplace).


RE: Pretty pathetic
By tayb on 4/16/2013 1:03:27 PM , Rating: 1
Shouldn't you be opposing government regulation of private companies? Why does ANY car manufacturer have to sell through dealerships? Dealerships add thousands of dollars to the cost of vehicles and make car buying a horrible experience for many people. It's 2013 and I would like to go to online, buy a car, e-sign the paperwork, and have it show up at my front door. Dealerships aren't a necessary middle man anymore.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 1:13:29 PM , Rating: 2
I am against UNCONSTITUTIONAL regulations. States are allowed to put up almost any regulation they want, regardless of whether I agree with it. I'll oppose the ones I disagree with in my state (most) and support the ones I agree with (very few exist).

What is unconstitutional is all the federal government agencies issuing regulations that have the effect of law without ever having been voted on by the Congress which represents the people.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By wiz220 on 4/16/2013 2:39:46 PM , Rating: 2
The federal agencies you are referring to are able to issue rules and/or regulations because they were granted that power by Congress in the first place.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 3:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
And they do not have the power to abdicate their responsibility. That power is not in the Constitution. So doing so is unconstitutional in itself.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By HostileEffect on 4/16/2013 1:09:16 PM , Rating: 1
Special treatment? I never knew I was required to go to a dealer for a new car, never needed one so never bought one. Its unacceptable to be told I have to buy through a middle man, thats like being forced to buy everything computers through brick ans mortar stores!!


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 1:16:10 PM , Rating: 3
Take that up with the state then. Don't ask for special treatment because your business model isn't viable under the same system as everyone else. It should either be changed for all or none.

It is certainly legal either way. But I think it's shady for a business to ask that they be able to operate under different rules than all their other competitors.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By 1prophet on 4/16/2013 1:58:55 PM , Rating: 2
They don't have any competitors, they are selling a unique product to a niche market like the motor home companies.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 2:17:02 PM , Rating: 2
They are a car manufacturer. Their competitors are every other car manufacturer.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Spuke on 4/16/2013 4:19:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They don't have any competitors, they are selling a unique product to a niche market like the motor home companies.
Most motorhomes are sold through dealers. That said, an automakers competition is other automakers. And, yes, Tesla's competition IS from other automakers.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By HostileEffect on 4/16/2013 2:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
Id rather buy directly from the manufacturer and line my own pocket with the savings.
The state has no business telling me how to buy anything.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By FITCamaro on 4/16/2013 3:24:18 PM , Rating: 2
What someone would rather do and what laws say they can do are two completely different things.

A state has the right to pass laws that govern how it's citizens do things(within the bounds of the federal constitution and it's own constitution). If you don't like a law, you have the right to petition for it to change or be removed.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By HostileEffect on 4/16/2013 3:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
The law only dictates the price paid if proven to be in violation of it, it can't control anyone passed intimidation.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By GarnS on 4/17/2013 6:55:38 PM , Rating: 2
Ok FITCamaro, you seem to go on and on about how Mr. Musk is being so unfair to ask for these laws to be changed. And then you yourself say “If you don't like a law, you have the right to petition for it to change or be removed”. Is that not exactly what Musk is doing?


RE: Pretty pathetic
By HostileEffect on 4/16/2013 2:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
Id rather buy directly from the manufacturer and line my own pocket with the savings.
The state has no business telling me how to buy anything.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Mathos on 4/16/2013 7:34:23 PM , Rating: 1
Not really, if he got the bill passed, it would apply to ALL manufacturers that are trying to sell EV's. Which wouldn't be special treatment.

And I don't blame him. It will make the vehicles cheaper to buy, since they won't have the dealer commission markup on them. You don't realize exactly how much these things get marked up, until you've had a job where you get employee discounts on domestic vehicles.

When I worked for Walmart, our discount on Chrysler/Dodge, was 1% below Factory Invoice. We got GM Supplier/employee pricing on GM vehicles. And X-Plan pricing on Ford. On the Chrysler products the deal had to show you the original factory invoice on the vehicle, in general it would usually knock $4-6k of the price of say a charger, before any dealer incentives. When my mother bought her 12 Impala LT, it's sticker price was $29k, she got it for right around 21k, because of our GM discount.

Do you have any idea how much that can discourage a person from buying a car from a dealership? Not to mention, there are a lot of dealerships that will not give you the incentive discounts they are suppose to.

When I take that into consideration, I don't blame Mr. Musk for wanting to see that issue changed.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2013 7:53:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not really, if he got the bill passed, it would apply to ALL manufacturers that are trying to sell EV's. Which wouldn't be special treatment.


LMAO yeah all one (serious) EV manufacturers. Of which he's the owner of, the only one!

How benevolent of him.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By flyingpants1 on 4/17/2013 11:03:23 AM , Rating: 2
Soon all car manufacturers will be selling pure EVs.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By bug77 on 4/17/2013 11:31:07 AM , Rating: 2
I've heard that first in 2003.


RE: Pretty pathetic
By HostileEffect on 4/16/2013 8:20:30 PM , Rating: 2
I also find it interesting that nearly, if not everyone who posted in favor of a more-free market got rated down.


"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki