Slashdot Mirror
N. Carolina May Ban Tesla Sales To Prevent "Unfair Competition"
nametaken writes with this excerpt from Slate: "From the state that brought you the nation's first ban on climate science comes another legislative gem: a bill that would prohibit automakers from selling their cars in the state. The proposal, which the Raleigh News & Observer reports was unanimously approved by the state's Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday, would apply to all car manufacturers, but the intended target is clear. It's aimed at Tesla, the only U.S. automaker whose business model relies on selling cars directly to consumers, rather than through a network of third-party dealerships. ... [The article adds] it's easy to understand why some car dealers might feel a little threatened: Tesla's Model S outsold the Mercedes S-Class, BMW 7 Series, and Audi A8 last quarter without any help from them. If its business model were to catch on, consumers might find that they don't need the middle-men as much as they thought."
State laws imposing restrictions on manufacturers in favor of dealers aren't new, though; For more on ways that franchise operations have "used state regulations to protect their profits" long before Tesla was in the picture, check out this 2009 interview with Duke University's Michael Munger.
It's just more money-in-politics. The sponsor is State Senator Tom Apodeca, who received the maximum amount allowed ($8000) in campaign contributions from the North Carolina Automobile Dealers Association. Of course, they are AGHAST at the idea that they've got a financial stake in this...
Robert Glaser, president of the dealers association, told the News & Observer that the law prohibiting Tesla sales isn’t just about his industry’s self-interest. Pointing to the Tesla representatives at a recent hearing, he said, “You tell me they’re gonna support the little leagues and the YMCA?”
If that’s the real issue, then I may have some good news for all concerned: I asked O’Connell, and he assured me Tesla would be happy to support the little leagues and the YMCA if that’s what North Carolina requires in order to do business there. Problem solved! Right, Mr. Glaser?
I would be happy to buy my car at a company which actually wants me to be a happy owner of that car, not a company which wants to make as much as profit from selling as many cars as possible.
An AMERICAN car company can't sell cars in an AMERICAN state because it doesn't compete with dealerships?
Wow... just ... wow
Why have a middle man if they cannot offer any better deals or services? I understand it artificially creates jobs, but that seems like a horrible thing to force.
This does not just apply to vehicles.
If there is no value added and only cost added, then it is pointless. If there is value added, then consumers should have a choice for it.
If the only value is creating jobs and expenses, then it is pointless and detrimental to progression, price, and capitalism.
Research Triangle area is practically the Silicon Valley of the south. ...and they're trying to Ban Tesla.
Greed makes you stupid.
And rural backwaters are full of stupid, greedy people. I knew because I was forced to grow up in one.
So, shockingly enough, this gem of free-market-capitalism is being pushed by the state's auto-dealers cartel. Their argument concerning Tesla's menace to the public strikes me as totally compelling:
'Robert Glaser, president of the dealers association, told the News & Observer that the law prohibiting Tesla sales isn’t just about his industry’s self-interest. Pointing to the Tesla representatives at a recent hearing, he said, “You tell me they’re gonna support the little leagues and the YMCA?”'
A terrifying possibility, truly.
It's the Middle class that has traditionally had little choice in dealing the 'middle men', ie. salesmen, dealers, ect... Those of the 1% have their own private networks and make their purchases at or below cost. So much for consumer choice eh?
They're just not in the interest of right-thinking citizens!
Creating a company costs some 150$ or so. Can Tesla Motor Corporation set up a wholly owned subsidiary Tesla Motor Sales and Service Corporation of North Carolina and sell it through them? Corporations are people, but it is lot harder (and more fun) to create real people than corporations.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Interferes with interstate commerce.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Remember kids: Government regulation is bad. Unless, of course, that regulation is to protect a cartel. Then, by golly, it's A-OK.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/overturn-franchise-laws-limit-auto-manufacturers-selling-their-vehicles-directly-consumers/rlShbLzr
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
The problem with being the man in the middle is that, sooner or later, you are going to get cut out. All you are doing is adding costs to the customer and reducing profits for the manufacturer. You can't expect your free ride to go on forever, especially in the days of easy price comparison by consumers and profit maximization by manufacturers.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
So it outsold the 7-series (top end full-size full-luxury sedan), the S-class (top end full-size full-luxury sedan) and the Audi A8 (full-size full-luxury sedan), which even BMW, Mercedes, and Audi would admit make up a small fraction of their overall sales, and this is a win?
When you outsell the 5-series, the E-class, and the Audi A6, then you'll have something to talk about, as all three manufacturers sell an order of magnitude more of those.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
it was called Saturn.
The United States Of America, the country that legalized bribery.
and the argument in TFA from Glaser is that somehow dealerships are vital for things like recalls, malfunctions and service. Recalls and malfunctions are widely visible through Technical Service Bulletins that places like Firestone actually have a system to track. problems are fixable by any local garage, partly because the government tracks them. Taking your car to a dealership for service might happen once or twice, but the local garage is closer and likely more a part of the community than the regional chain of last-name-here car dealership. Glasers boilerplate at the end about who is going to support the YMCA and little league seems a bit far fetched. Crap like that is a write-off for dealerships, not something they do strictly out of kindness.
Good people go to bed earlier.
One of the biggest sources of revenue comes in from sales and licensing of new vehicles where over time dealership industry is powerful on the state level due to this relationship. When dealers make money, the state gets serious revenues. So when a new type of car comes along with a company who can't afford the high barrier of entry to setup a dealer network the whole thing turnes into market protection in the guise of customer service. If you are interested in buying a Tesla and living in a city with a center, you can go there but it is like bizzaro land because they are forced to operate as a "service center" instead of a "dealership" subject to fees and zoning that are often waived or offset for "real dealerships".
It is stuff like this that makes me wish the market would be dragged into the 21st Century. Shopping for a car is one of those tasks that is slightly higher than "doctor visit". There is little to no value added for going to the dealership so I would rather just order directly from maker themselves than to sit through the junk you need to do for a purchasing a car.
This isn't going to stop people buying Teslas. It's going to stop people in N.Carolina buying their Teslas in N.Carolina. All you've managed to accomplish is reducing state tax revenue.
Instead of being "tough on crime" or whatever scapegoat you want to use to show off for voters (ruining countless laws and lives in the process) how about being tough on corporate bullshit? You'd get my vote. Mine's just as good as a 1%er, right?
In North Carolina we have successfully outlawed global warming (you're welcome). ;-)
Logically, anyone can see that Electric cars are now unnecessary. So Tesla "magic" cars that do not use fire for propulsion (like god intended) are not needed or welcome here.
We are also nearly ready to completely revamp our tax code to make thing more fair from everyone from lawyers to hair dressers. Visit http://www.nctaxcut.com to see how much you will save! The median income in NC is about $47,000 so try that first. Then pretend you only make $37,000 year. Then just for giggles pretend you make $470,000 per year, to really see the saving stack up.
Be sure to meet Phil Berger while you are there. ( He looks familiar to me, but I can't quite put my finger on who he reminds me of.)
against the free market , guess who's going to win this one?
http://www.stateintegrity.org/north_carolina
http://clclt.com/theclog/archives/2010/05/13/nc-more-corrupt-than-even-sc-and-louisiana
http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2010/05/09/the-most-corrupt-states.html#slide5
No... it's not that the multimillionaires who own auto dealerships can't stand a new entrant with a novel product that makes their look expensive, dirty and lame. It's that they're worried about the integrity of the market place.
We've always known this, but you can't walk into a factory and buy a car unfortunately.
Just means that citizens of that state will leave the state buy the car, then come back.
Problem solved.
RED ALERT: Did anti-Obama campaign contributions dictate which Chrysler dealers were shuttered?
http://directorblue.blogspot.ca/2009/05/red-alert-did-campaign-contributions.html
So the auto manufacturers created the franchise system, essentially to get around the laws. This is little different from McDonalds. The manufacturers pretty much control the operations, and in return offer kickbacks. The only way around this is the used market. It is probably, in the current climate, inefficient. It is probably one factor that makes american car makers less competitive, having to support the dealer network. OTOH, it is good for the manufacturer and consumer because you can go to any dealer who sells new fords and know you will get basically the same thing as any other dealer.
The thing is we probably should not change laws for an individual, which is what Tesla is asking some states to do. If there is good reason to make the change, then make the change general. What is happening is that in some states the law is changing so that only Tesla or a company very similar to Tesla will benifit. THis is probably a not good thing.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I don't think this would survive a court challenge. US federal law governs these activities, not state law. The Interstate Commerce Act has been in effect since the railroad industry in the 19th century.
Many states already have these laws on the books. The idea was to protect the jobs in independent dealerships from 'unfair' competition from manufacturer owned showrooms after the War because....gotta protect jobs at all costs, like the Luddites! Every time you guys support some protectionist "working man" legislation, this is the result: big businesses leverage it to keep out competition. Amazon is doing it right now with the internet sales tax.
As a former NC resident I can vouch for how collusive the car dealerships are there. People were going out of state to buy cars in areas with real competition.
I thought Texas had a law similar which Tesla were complaining/campaigning against.
I do wish they'd hurry up and start making their space cars (why else would Musk invest in the company, but to get cars he can drive on whatever planet he ends up on with SpaceX)
...especially ones who make lots of campaign contributions. For example, the state tried unsuccessfully to require anyone selling on eBay to obtain an auctioneer's license.
Not that this is limited to NC by any means. God forbid anyone should step on the toes of health insurers, real-estate hucksters (sorry, my mistake, Realtors (tm) (c) (R)), taxi operators (jitney laws)...
This is what happens when cousins marry.
As someone who doesn't drive, I don't understand the intensity of the reactions I've seen about Tesla cars. Especially the ones against these cars. It's just a car that uses batteries. Apparently they are very good cars, but why these reactions? Do people not like Elon Musk? Do they like exhaust fumes? Are the politicians in the pocket of the oil industry? I don't understand that, since gas for cars is actually a small part of what uses oil.
Mostly random stuff.
A few months back, NPR's Planet Money did an episode on the car dealership business and how entrenched they are with the government. It goes back for decades. It's worth a listen.
"Episode 435: Why Buying A Car Is So Awful"
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/02/12/171814201/episode-435-why-buying-a-car-is-so-awful
The dealers are not giving us free charging through supercharger, they are not giving warranty on batteries. Why the hell should they make money from Tesla cars when they only act as a middle men unless they provide something good for customers. If they decide to pass this bill anyway then dealers should be forced to sell the car at a lower price than what Tesla sells.
A US state cannot arbitrarily ban a good or service from another state in Article 1, sections 9 & 10. Only the federal government has this power to regulate interstate trade. This was one fears during the early years of United States that states might shut out each other, so it was banned.
Wow, that headline screams Atlas Shrugged!
I see at least two of the Slashdot Tea Party Contingent® can't explain how this is in favor of Freedom® and Small Government®.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
Car dealers already take in skimpy profits on new-car sales, as consumers are able to use the internet to find out what dealers pay for a car, plus the sales-based quarterly/yearly bonus money that the manufacturer gives them. So increasingly the negotiations are up-from-cost rather than down-from-sticker.
So the parts and service departments are where most of the money is made. But guess what? New cars don't need much service, used ones last a long time too, and parts are also available over the internet. A future with many electric cars also suggests that parts & service will see declining revenues.
Younger generations aren't into cars the way older ones were, so the "superconsumers" are going away. Add all this up and I just don't see how the industry will support anywhere near the number of car dealers that it did in decades past. Getting rid of Pontiac, Hummer, etc. removed some capacity but there's still a long way to shrink.
"If you're not passionate about your operating system, you're married to the wrong one."
> State laws imposing restrictions on manufacturers in favor of dealers aren't new
No shit. We have similar here in MA in relation to Alcohol, but one step worst. Instead of forcing sales through retail outlets, it forces the retail outlets to buy from licensed distributors.
So if Tesla started making wine, it would have to be bought buy a distributor before a liquor store here in MA could buy it and offer it for sale. Really nice racket. Now they are scrambling to make sure they get a similar middleman installed for the upcoming pot legalization.
God forbid they don't find a way to give their big donors a taste of the action. To think people might profit without cutting in the people who made donations to political parties. Such a travesty cannot be allowed!
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I didn't see anything in the post stating that Tesla cars are Electric. So it goes even deeper than sales force competition, now we're talking about pressure from the Gasoline Industry....
So believe me, this is an incredibly minor incident, compared to the other B.S. that's been foisted on us by Art Pope and his cronies in the legislature and (since 2012) the governor's mansion. (I have friends who have protested in Raleigh and were arrested for trespassing as a result.) And oh yeah, nobody has explained how any of this will create jobs in a state that consistently has an unemployment rate that's 2% greater than the US average.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
See if it's available on Netflix or something, but go watch a movie called "Tucker" -- it's the (mostly) true story about a guy with a lot of good ideas about making a good car, who started up right after WWII -- and the Big Three colluded with government to put the guy out of business.
50 Tucker Torpedos were built before the factory was shuttered, and of that number about 43 survive to this day -- he built a great car (i.e, mousetrap), but the world wasn't able to beat a path to his door before he was forced to close.
Frankly, I'm surprised that Musk has been able to survive this long, and Big Oil just hasn't shut him down. Of course, Big Oil owns most of the battery tech, and the Big Three aren't quite the powerhouses they used to be, plus Musk is starting out with enough cash to buy his own Senators, and I'm sure he's not as naive as Preston Tucker was.. So perhaps Tesla has a chance.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Couldn't tesla sell the cars to 3rd party dealerships in N. Carolina?
Surely, they don't have that rigid of a business model as to not to.
Oh, I would be so happy if the internet killed car dealerships! Yes, there are some industries hurt by the internet age that I mourn, like local book stores. But if car dealerships just die, I won't miss them at all. I won't miss their loud, stupid advertisements on TV, but I especially won't miss the ugly way in which they use valuable real estate in populated areas. American cities would work so much better if they used space more wisely and became generally denser. Car dealerships are one of the most important plagues that is keeping that from happening. Fuck them and their useless sprawling parking lots. There is nothing socially redeeming about them at all. I hope that car companies in the future make a move like Apple, and have something like a Mazda store in the local mall. It would basically be a showroom in which the cars are presented like jewels, with salespeople and mechanic "geniuses" that could chat up customers, as well as curious mallgoers who got hypnotized by the shiny things. They could have a back exit to a portion of the mall's underground parking lot where they have a few more cars that can go out for a test drive. Their maintenance and repair could be done by an authorized mechanic shop with a contract. That needs some land, but much less than a dealership. Really, there is no reason for traditional parking lot car dealers to live, and many great reasons for them to die.
but banning tesla is just more crony capitalism.
why? why should I not be allowed to support the candidate I believe in? why should my money be pooled and given to politicians I dont agree with??
For the same reason your money shouldn't go (solely) to a candidate *I* agree with. Because the debate should be about ideas and leadership, not who has the biggest bankroll. It is well established that special interest funding causes politicians to listen disproportionately to certain parties. If you fund a specific candidate then he is (potentially) obligated to you but he has to govern everyone. Why should he listen to your needs more than any other constituent just because you happened to fund the winning candidate?
Money gives people a disproportionate voice in the political system. I think the Supreme Court erred greatly when it said that money = speech. One should not prohibit people from spending money on political activities but one should not give someone a bigger voice simply because they have access to more money either. While I don't think you can take money completely out of the equation, we don't have to let it dominate the conversation the way we have either. Our congressional representatives spend virtually all their time fundraising instead of thinking about how to make this country a better place. As soon as they win one election they start fundraising for the next. That cannot possibly be good for the country as a whole.
And yet, here's the "Anti-Dog-eat-dog rule" come to life.
We learned about this dealership stuff in one of my MBA classes. Even my pro-business professor expressed veiled distaste for it.
I think the whole dealership model is dated anyway. In the 70's, 80's and even 90's, there was no massive internet proliferation. They needed these dealerships with their commercials and their physical presences to get the word out and sell vehicles.
Now? Facebook.com/honda, etc.
Research Triangle area is practically the Silicon Valley of the south. ...and they're trying to Ban Tesla.
I have family in the Research Triangle area. Believe me when I say that the presence of some smart people and high tech companies hasn't reduced the dumb redneck population in the area very much. As my uncle puts it "there is a high Bubba factor around here".
Oil! Burger! Eagle!
So it outsold the 7-series (top end full-size full-luxury sedan), the S-class (top end full-size full-luxury sedan) and the Audi A8 (full-size full-luxury sedan), which even BMW, Mercedes, and Audi would admit make up a small fraction of their overall sales, and this is a win?
Yes. Next question.
The Tesla S is a luxury car and a very unique one at that. It's not remotely certain that Tesla will succeed and what sort of sales to expect. Outselling some very nice vehicles from MUCH better funded and established companies is very much a positive for Tesla.
When you outsell the 5-series, the E-class, and the Audi A6, then you'll have something to talk about, as all three manufacturers sell an order of magnitude more of those.
Let me know when Lincoln manages to do that. When Ford can't do it, it might be a bit unreasonable to expect Tesla to do it as well.
Being an industry insider, I'm sometimes a little rough on Tesla, but if there's one reason I'm rooting for them, it's because I want someone to lay waste to the antiquated car dealer model in place in the US.
I just went into a [shall remain nameless] dealer over the weekend for the first time in a decade, and I'd forgotten how absolutely awful it is.
Public funding does not create a "level playing field". It creates a strong bias toward incumbents.
There ALREADY is a strong bias toward incumbents. Re-election rates pretty much never drop below 90% for House seats and rarely below 75% for Senate seats. Public funding could not possibly make this situation significantly worse than it already is.
Even the current limits on campaign contributions have greatly increased the percentage of politicians that get re-elected, while also greatly increasing the number of millionaires in congress, since they can just use their own money.
The data I linked to above does not agree with your assertion. Re-election rates haven't changed appreciably since 1980 and there ALWAYS have been a large number of wealthy candidates. George Washington was among the richest Americans of his day and adjusted for inflation was the wealthiest president ever with an inflation adjusted net worth of over $500 million. Jefferson, Jackson and Madison were in the top 5. Mitt Romney by way of comparison would have been the 2nd or 3rd richest ever had be been elected.
To make a long story short, Tesla would basically have to sell their cars via an existing dealer. Sure, they would call it Tesla but it would be a dealership owned by someone who has connections with the politicians.
It's one of those typical BS scenarios: for the consumers "protection", these wealthy connected folks have a monopoly - or rather an oligopoly on selling cars.
Doesn't this mean the state is violating the constitution of The United States of America by preventing out-of-state manufacturers from selling legal goods to their residents? Isn't regulation of interstate commerce STRICTLY the domain of Congress, much like inter-state sales tax? (which incidentally means state sales taxes on internet sales from vendors out of state is a violation of the Constitution as well)
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
They will be really screwed when Telsa takes orders online and they get 0 taxes for sales to people in their state.
------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
Capitalism, the conservative definition - The free competition of business... except when we don't like it.
No.
You don't.
Please refund your education costs paid for by us taxpayers: you've wasted every single fucking penny.
Is this the skroogle microsoft told us about ?
You're black!
That is basically company owned dealerships, they have existed for a long time and the decent ones were a FAR better deal if you just wanted a good car for a fair price with good service.
BUT it ties the car company to the vagaries of the local car market including having to worry about brick and mortar store issues like location.
For a very common large scale car maker, it is barely do-able. For a niche market? There is in Holland 1 Ferrari dealer. But that is not the issue because people in the market for such a car don't have an issue traveling a bit in their luxury car and are in any case likely to be living in the west part of Holland (the store used to be in Utrecht, which is almost dead center for the economic heart of Holland).
But it is FAR FAR easier to serve all you need to serve with a web site and a service van. If Tesla has to open a shell company in every state, in every country in every county/province, that is a LOT of shell companies. And why should it? Amazon doesn't have to do it. Why should car dealers not face pressure from web stores? Especially since dealers COULD have a unique location issue, fixing your car.
This is clearly bought law. The US has the right to bear arms. Stop killing kids with your guns and kill yourselves some politicians instead. Or are the guns you carry just to compensate for your small penisses. Come on US, show us why you got more guns then citizens.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Didn't North Carolina recently make Christianity the official state religion?...Thus, violating a few federal laws that trump state laws, such as the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment and maybe Article 6, Section 3? Truly, this is a backwards state.
Let's see...an all-electric drivetrain with reliable motors, regenerative braking, and you don't have to change the oil, just make sure the joints are lubricated and the battery is topped off.
I imagine that maintenance is much simpler due to the fact that the components are much less complicated, and if anything breaks, it's more of an issue of replacement rather than repair. I can only guess that even if a handful of consumer had enough problems to replace the entire vehicle, overall Tesla will still be a very profitable company, given that their vehicles do not look like they would have the numerous points of failure that traditional ICE powered vehicles have.
As far as the battery is concerned, the best model I have seen yet involves a company leasing you the battery for a flat monthly rate, and if the battery needed to be replaced, the company would recover it and make sure all its components get recycled. Add to that, any battery replacements would be for the latest current technology, so you should expect to see performance improvements with each battery upgrade.
Tesla is currently using Li-Po batteries, so the environmental impact is significantly less than the older technologies (NiCad, lead-acid), and it is actually profitable to recycle these batteries, as the recovered Lithium will only increase in value as demand for these batteries increase. Granted, they tend to be a bit more worrisome with regards to exploding, but considering where we are now with ICEs and gasoline, explosions and/or fires from a battery are small change by comparison.
Why would anyone be surprised or offended that dealer associations lobby to protect their business interest? Think Tesla's $45,000 PER CAR subsidy from the the State of California came about from thin air? Years of lobbying and federal pressure created that business advantage for Tesla. This isn't "Southern politics" so much as business as usual. Everyone acts in their own self interest, get over it.
Pretty sure that Virginia is doing the same thing: law requires that dealers sell cars, not manufacturers. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_23091404/virginia-dmv-denies-tesla-request-run-its-own-dealership
They hate the environment. They hate enviornmentalists. They hate nature, unless they're expliuting it. They hate change.
And ALL of these things are combined in electric cars.
They gotta hate it, they haven't any rational explanation for their actions otherwise.
"We the people implore the federal government to nullify these antiquated state laws."
Someone missed civics class in high school. The President simply does not have the authority to do such a thing. The only thing that could overturn the laws would be a constitutional amendment, but this issue doesn't really rise to that level. Go petition the North Carolina state legislators, they're the ones who actually have the power to change North Carolina state law. The dealerships have already figured that out.
I think this can be solved quickly.
Tesla might make it simple for people to order their cars and have them delivered to locations in neighboring states near the border. It can be small businesses in Tesla-rented parking lots. NC residents can then pay sales tax to those states for purchasing it there and the appropriate level of use-tax difference to North Carolina when registering the car in NC.
I lived in a comparatively liberal enclave (Raleigh) in NC. It seemed like pretty good town except for it's near absence of a downtown and totally car centric character. But there were signs of regression.
The change over to more balkanized schools was the worst.
But earlier, the fact that the rechristening and the (tiny) reawakening of downtown was spurred by taking a pedestrian mall and turning it back into a ^&*(ing road (albeit a pretty one with wide sidewalks).
Seeing this kind of stupidity at the state level, sigh. At least I'm out.
The reason the Supreme Court said that money = speech is that the primary use of money in politics is to fund political communications, primarily in the form of TV advertising these days.
Money enables publishing. It is not speech. Restricting spending for political ends to be the same for everyone does not restrict anyone's speech. They can still say whatever they have to say. They just can't say it say it (excessively) more than anyone else.
But the answer isn't to somehow mandate that people pay for others to communicate things that the payer disagrees with, nor to prohibit a person from paying to spread a message he does agree with.
I pay for things all the time that I disagree with. I'm sure you do as well. I very much would prefer my tax dollars not go to pay for the wars in the Middle East. Limiting political advertising to equal (and hopefully sane) levels is no different. Furthermore just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it doesn't need to be said. I fund the salaries of Congress, many of whom I greatly disagree with but I'm ok with that.
Conventional Car dealerships in Minnesota are trying to use a similar law to block sales of Teslas here too.
It's not, which is self-evident from the fact that Massachusetts has a law that is pretty much like it.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Not that I have anything personal against electric cars - much to the contrary, despite the fact that battery production releases insane amounts of pollution (thereby effectively negating the "green" effect of electrics vs internal combustion)
[citation needed] [not to mention the insane amount of pollution involved in mining and refining petroleum, much less burning it]
However, considering the lack of supporting infrastructure, abysmal battery life, and crazy-huge charging times, I just don't see them being adopted en masse anytime soon, short of an unlikely, major technological breakthrough.
Most of the time, you're going to be charging it at home, overnight. For that, charging stations are unnecessary if you're staying in-range.
An eight-year warranty isn't "abysmal battery life." I'll agree with the lack of charging infrastructure for long trips (the Tesla Supercharger stations are nowhere to be found in the Midwest, for instance), but even a Nissan Leaf would handle 100% of my daily routine driving. It's the non-routine long trips that kill the deal for me (I have a Leaf budget, not a Tesla budget). For now, that means I drive a Honda Fit instead. Once the Fit is paid off, depending on gas prices, I'll crunch the numbers and see if a Leaf would work out as a daily driver, keeping the Honda for the long trips.
The Supercharger setup comes very close to solving the long-trip problem, though. When you have 200+ miles of electric range and get get 150 more miles for half an hour at a Supercharger (with time to stretch your legs, get a snack, etc.), it's a lot less of a problem.
If I were in the market for a high-end luxury car, the Model S would be at the top of my list.
Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
A few months ago I purchased a Tesla model S. The process was completely unlike purchasing other cars at a dealership. I just went to the web site and selected what I wanted. The showrooms I visited were just that, showrooms. Nobody was trying to push me to buy the car and the people working there patiently answered questions. Most of the people in the showroom were not likely to buy one but they still patiently answered questions and treated everyone with respect. I think this is due in part to the fact that the show rooms are just that, show rooms. They can't sell you a car, the best they could do is point you online to order one.
When I got my car everything was taken care of. All the paperwork was done and a few weeks later the plates arrived in the mail. A part for my car that was not available when I got my car was fed-exed to me. They also threw in some additional charging adapters that they normally charge for.
As for service it is night and day. I managed to break one of the roof rack clips on my model S. This required that the entire roof panel next to the glass roof be replaced. If that were on my Toyota Prius that would easily be a $300 part and $300 for labor. Tesla charged me $100 for the part (which given what it was is more than reasonable) and $175 labor. Elon Musk stated that they hope to not make a profit on service. I also had service install some 3rd party rim protectors (http://www.alloygator.com) where they charged me $25/wheel, which is quite cheap for the type of car it is.
I always cringe whenever I take my Prius in to the Toyota dealership since they're always trying to push unneeded services, or god forbid I run into one of the sales leaches.
The fact that Tesla is outselling the other cars in its class without any real advertisement or dealerships is amazing. Their commitment to the owners goes above and beyond anything I have seen before.
For example, if I take my car in for service the loaner car is a top of the line model S. If I want, I can just keep the loaner car and just pay the difference in price. No dealership would do something like that.
All in all, my experience dealing with Tesla has for the most part been amazing and a welcome change from dealing with dealerships.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
If you have the cash. Walk on the lot around the time the next model year is coming out, point to a previous-year (current calendar year) car sitting on the lot, and offer a below-invoice amount of money, cash (you did look that up, right?). For almost no work they get rid of it that morning to make space for the next year's cars. You will get way below the list price.
Also, do this on the last day of the month when they're desperate to add another car to their sales number. That can be worth a few more grand.
You don't get those advantages of pressure working for you when you order online.
Sell cakes with the constitution printed on them..give away a free car with every cake.
My wife's VW Jetta had constant problems with the DSG transmission as long as the car was in warrantee. Every time we took it in the dealer would say something like they put the wrong firmware version in and it destroyed the clutch but here is a new software load lets see how it goes. It went on for years with VW funding all this work which the dealer was creating.
Its no wonder that Tesla don't want to have to deal with the fuckers.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
But the goal of the ban is the same: protect local businesses by keeping money local instead of flowing out of state/city/county/country.
Services like this one https://www.usaa.com/inet/pages/car_buying_services_products will negotiate with many dealers at once, within your state or anywhere else you specify. This particular service is for ex-military, but there are others. Current marketing trends have already moved well beyond the local dealer, who for years was always the "richest man in town".
I guess I'm not seeing where the unfair competition is coming from? So Tesla sells direct and everyone else doesn't and that apparently gives them an advantage somehow...why is that an issue that government or any regulating body should care about?
So, I'm going to extend this by analogy so it's really simple to understand, maybe someone can forward it to the cronies in NC. I'm going to start selling cars. I'm going to get a crack design team to come up with the best designs and build stuff that people will really like, but I'm only going to have a one day work week and sell them on Tuesdays, the rest of the week I'll be closed. Then I'll demand regulations be put in place to force the other car companies to stop selling cars on days other than Tuesday because it gives them a huge competitive advantage over me.
The point...why should the government care that other auto companies decided not to sell direct to the public? Tesla comes along and proves that it's a workable arrangement so the automakers go complaining about unfair advantage. What's stopping you from selling direct? Nothing is. They just don't like having to adapt to change, so they go to the cronies and try to put a stop to it. Just like the music companies when iTunes first hit the scene. Just like the movie companies when Netflix hit the scene. Just like the cable companies when the DVR hit the scene.
Get over it. Life and innovation happen. Sticking your head in the sand and trying to pass laws to stifle your compeition is not the answer. It just makes you look like a shortsighted moron.
This would quite *literally* be a textbook case of a state imposing itself upon interstate trade. This was banned by .... the early 1800's?
They don't really understand, or even read it.
They choose a bit here and there, have their PR flacks craft a statement, then hand you a shit sandwich.
If you have to eat it you complain, if the guy you disagree with has to eat it then you vote the crap feeder in again.
If people truly cared about fairness they would not elect or reelect such people.
No brain, no pain.
This is a page right out of Atlas Shrugged. Other companies using the government as a tool to stop competition.
Like we buy everything else?
(except politicians)
I wonder if that State's legislators have ever read the Commerce Clause of the Constitution,or read the federal case law on interstate commerce. If a product is dangerous (i.e., fireworks) or illegal (i.e. prostitution, gambling etc.), or controllable (i.e.tobacco, alcohol) then they can enact laws about it in their state. But if it's interstate commerce I really don't think they can ban it under federal law. They don't have to like it, but I don't think they can ban it.
North Carolina is not a huge state. People with the funds to buy a Tesla can probably figure out a way to travel to a neighboring state to buy one. Now if the state prohibits the REGISTRATION of them, that would be a real problem.
What's government for , anyways, except to regulate the market.. It won't do to dismantle the constitution and restrict human rights in the "Land of the Free", unless the PTBs also apply Soviet - style "corrections" to trade and commerce. I mean, after 200 years we're much smarter than the Founding Fathers... Maybe Ben Franklin And George Washington should have thought things through instead of slap-dash following the highest moral code as a guide for the constitution.. Instead, they should have got blind drunk and read Karl Marx, and perhaps sought help from the beast himself, and implemented a good old form of communism instead . We'd have been much better equipped to have perpetual war, and could have invaded many more countries without a word of protest.. and instead of the expense of over a century of food stamps, we could have saved millions by just imprisoning dissenters and throwing away the key. Well, it's OK, they're finally getting it now....
So suddenly this Red State likes government intervention into the free market.
15 years ago, autobytel.com, a dot com startup that did Internet based sales of new cars, was undone by similar laws in many states which undermined their business model by forcing them to partner with local dealers. Tesla has already been sued by the Massachusetts Automobile Dealers' Association after they opened their first showroom in the Bay State. Turns out MA already had a similar law on the books. The suit was thrown out on the grounds that the dealers association had no standing. Tesla has never granted a sales or service franchise to anyone anywhere in the world, thus it is not possible for any existing dealer to have been subjected to "unfair" competition against them. I'm rooting for Tesla in this case. A victory by them would allow the other manufacturers to begin to unravel the convoluted dealer based sales model and replace it with a more customer friendly (and yes, profitable) direct sales model.
Direct to consumer isn't always the best solution for a lot of industries. Too much choice creates confusion for the customer and diffusion on the part of the business's efforts. In the publishing industry, traditionally, it's always been the buyers of bookstores and bookstore chains that were the customers of publishers, because the retail buyers knew their markets better (locally and regionally). With a product as widely diverse as literature, it was up to the buyers to pick and choose what would best sell in their markets (romances, sci-fi, self-help, history, etc.) while the publisher concentrated on making widely diverse products available at different scales. If a publisher would have had to focus on things at the retail level, most of the literary market would never have even seen the light of day in favor of more commercial literature to the exclusion of other works just by virtue of the economies of scale. Granted, the bookselling market has done just that to itself with the rise of megabookstores, but it's begun to swing the other way thanks to the internet and Amazon (whose model isn't without its own problems, either).
My TL;DR point is that large manufacturing companies cannot have the granular focus to take full advantage of local markets. Bob's Rural Chevy dealership is going to sell more pick'emup trucks than Dan's Urban Chevytopia. Bob is not going to order many high-end sports cars because he knows most people in town can't come close to affording them, and Dan is hoping people are smart enough not to want a 3-axle workhorse that requires two parking spaces when the cheapest parking rate in the tri-state area runs 800 bucks a month.
And if the manufacturers did end up trying this, most of those D2C storefronts would need an entire infrastructure of administration right down to the real estate, which is probably the last thing anybody would think a car company could handle.
Why is it that Replublicans are always moaning about the free market being attacked and our freedoms being taken away, except when they're the ones doing it? they would happily stop gay people from being allowed to get married or even employed. They would happily round up all illegal immigrants and drop them in the ocean. They would probably drop nuclear bombs all over the middle east if the oil supply wasn't going to be damaged and Israel wasn't in danger of being hurt. And clearly they would happily destroy a company that doesn't catch favour with their big oil sponsors. What Republicans really are bemoaning is the fact that they don't have the freedom to strip people who aren't like them of their liberties.
Who is John Galt?
To the long and ever-growing list of subsidized goobermint moochers.