backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Mar 14 at 7:14 AM

Tesla will have to stop selling its cars directly in the state starting April 1

Tesla Motors called New Jersey out yesterday for introducing a new rule that would block the automaker's ability to sell electric vehicles directly to customers, but it didn't seem to do much good as the state went ahead and voted in favor of it. 
 
According to CNBC, the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission voted in favor of the ban of direct auto sales in the state on Tuesday. This means that Tesla must stop selling its electric vehicles directly to customers in the state beginning on April 1, 2014. 
 
Tesla already operates two stores in New Jersey, and had plans to open more before this new rule. It's possible that Tesla could use them as showrooms now, where customers can look at the Model S, but must go buy them from dealerships or online. 
 
New Jersey is now the third state to ban Tesla's direct sales model. Arizona and Texas were the first two states to give Tesla the boot. 


Tesla CEO Elon Musk

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s administration proposed the new rule earlier this week, which requires a person to have a franchise agreement with an auto manufacturer in order to be granted a license to sell. 

Following the announcement of that rule, Tesla went to its website to make its opposition known. 

"Unfortunately, Monday we received news that Governor Christie’s administration has gone back on its word to delay a proposed anti-Tesla regulation so that the matter could be handled through a fair process in the Legislature," said Tesla in a statement. "The Administration has decided to go outside the legislative process by expediting a rule proposal that would completely change the law in New Jersey. This new rule, if adopted, would curtail Tesla’s sales operations and jeopardize our existing retail licenses in the state."

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has said in the past that he'd be willing to take the auto dealership battle to a federal level if needed. 

Source: CNBC



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Yet Again
By Mint on 3/12/2014 9:07:51 PM , Rating: 2
A "forced-union" state does not mean every business is mandated to be a union, you halfwit.

It means unions are merely allowed to be in a contract with individual companies where membership is forced. That's due to negotiation between a union and a company. If you want to start a non-union company to compete with them, you are free to do so .

BTW, right-to-work is a regulation. It explicitly prohibits union-employer agreement that mandate membership. I thought you don't want gov't meddling in business?

Dealers prohibiting an independent business from selling cars through law has nothing to do with unions.


RE: Yet Again
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2014 9:15:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A "forced-union" state does not mean every business is mandated to be a union, you halfwit.


Of course not. Wtf did you see me say that?

Stop twisting EVERYTHING!

quote:
BTW, right-to-work is a regulation. It explicitly prohibits union-employer agreement that mandate membership. I thought you don't want gov't meddling in business?


Har har..Jesus H.. That's an example of GOOD regulations. Unions are ran by organized crime. They are thugs and their track record of forcing businesses against their will is beyond established. Right-to-work PROTECTS businesses from these shady and underhanded tactics.

Are you so stupid to believe I think any regulation is evil?

quote:
Dealers prohibiting an independent business from selling cars through law has nothing to do with unions.


What the hell...I never said it did!

I simply said they are why New Jersey came down the way they did on this.

If you think otherwise, you're being willfully ignorant.


RE: Yet Again
By Mint on 3/12/2014 9:51:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote:
A "forced-union" state does not mean every business is mandated to be a union, you halfwit.
Of course not. Wtf did you see me say that?

Do you even read your own posts? When I said, "They don't outlaw non-union companies from doing business in the state", you told me I'm wrong and gave that forced-union link as proof.

My only conclusion is that you think forced union is proof that unions do outlaw non-union companies from doing business.
quote:
Right-to-work PROTECTS businesses from these shady and underhanded tactics.
What's shady and underhanded about that? Do businesses not engage in the same tactics with employees, prohibiting them from working for a competitor with non-compete agreements?

Businesses can say no to unions and if they have balls they'll win, especially in this economy. Who's going to hurt more? 100 newly unemployed with poor job prospects or a rich business owner?

quote:
I simply said they are why New Jersey came down the way they did on this.

And you're completely wrong. There are more right-to-work states prohibiting direct auto sales than forced-union states. It an orthogonal issue, and if anything, the correlation is the opposite of your harebrained theory.

Unions are about collective bargaining. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

NADA does not bargain with anyone. Not with the public, and not with Tesla. Christie passed this law without it going through the legislature, and without public comment.


RE: Yet Again
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2014 11:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And you're completely wrong.


That's clearly your opinion, and you have a right to it.


"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins














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