Slashdot Mirror


New Jersey Auto Dealers Don't Want to Face Tesla

cartechboy writes "It feels like this story is becoming repetitive: X state is trying to ban Tesla stores, or the ability for an automaker to sell directly to a consumer. Either way, it's all aimed at Tesla. Now it's New Jersey's turn as a hearing today could end up banning Tesla stores in the state. Naturally Tesla's displeased with this and is crying foul. A rule change that is expected to be approved today would require all new-car dealers to provide a franchise agreement in order to receive a license from the state. Obviously Tesla (the manufacturer) can't provide a franchise agreement to itself (the distributor). The proposed rule would also require dealers to maintain a 1,000 square foot facility, the ability to show two cars, and service customer cars on site. Tesla doesn't meet that last requirement at any of its galleries, and most of the Tesla stores are located in shopping malls which mean they are smaller than 1,000 square feet. Tesla's arguing the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission is overstepping its bounds. Will Tesla be able to defeat this new rule in New Jersey as it has overcome issues in many other states?" (Also covered by the Wall Street Journal.)

28 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Feds... by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's a perfect example of why the federal Constitution has an interstate commerce clause. States are interfering with interstate commerce to protect local businesses. Time for some federal legislation to shut this down.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Feds... by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      A company based in CA selling cars in NJ most certainly is interstate commerce.

    2. Re:Feds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh look another moron that doesn't understand what in there state commerce clause means.

      Oh look another moron that doesn't understand the difference between their and there.

    3. Re:Feds... by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Interstate commerce means any work involving or related to the movement of persons or things across state lines. If you make a car in CA and take it to NJ, that's clearly interstate commerce, and the Federal Government is granted constitutional authority to regulate it. Maybe you are confused about what it means?

    4. Re:Feds... by Spazmania · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure he meant to say "the interstate" rather than "in their state." What on earth did you think he meant to say?

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    5. Re:Feds... by daninaustin · · Score: 5, Informative

      You overstate it. It was originally meant to prevent states from taxing commerce moving through their state. Of course the courts have rewritten it out of whole cloth to mean that the feds can regulate anything they want, but in this case there is no way they will intervene. Car dealers are powerful in most states and it's perfectly rational (but bad) that they manipulate the govt into propping up their businesses. Maybe Tesla has deep enough pockets to fight it in the legislatures, but i doubt it.

  2. Don't get it by Tanktalus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The right wing should be opposed on free-market principles. The left wing should be opposed on environmental grounds. So which politicians should be in favour of this regulation again?

    1. Re:Don't get it by Valdrax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The right wing should be opposed on free-market principles. The left wing should be opposed on environmental grounds. So which politicians should be in favour of this regulation again?

      The pragmatists & cynics who need local, wealthy donors to bankroll their campaigns.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    2. Re:Don't get it by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Free market principles? How about plain old freedom?

      How about the enlightenment principle that government can't simply make up whatever laws it wants. There is no such thing as liberty if a local dictator can tell you what lightbulb to make or how to sell cars.

      Why not force the regular car dealers to also bundle horse buggy whips with all car purchases to protect the horse-buggy-whip establishment.

      This is another uber ridesharing story with different players. North Korea only has one dictator at a time. In the US we have thousands, spread across 4+ levels of government.

    3. Re:Don't get it by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Common mistake. You have been used to the "truth in labeling law" "truth in advertising law" etc for so long, you have assumed it applies to everyone. Sorry my dear friend, the politicians are exempted from those laws. They can label themselves "free market loving libertarian right wingers" or "mother earth worshiping tree hugging beer-can-recycling post-cosumer-waste-reconsuming environment loving left wingers". But there is absolutely no guarantee the politician you find under those labels are truly what the label says.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    4. Re:Don't get it by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Free market principles? How about plain old freedom?

      Contrary to some economists' arguments, free market originated from freedom. We didn't become a capitalist country, because it was an efficient way to run economy. We've developed the free markets, because we were free — one's only obligations were those, that were spelled out in the contracts one entered into voluntarily (plus family relations and patriotism).

      Sadly, those freedoms have been chipped at for over 100 years now... Today we must feed all the hungry (without subjecting them even to the "indignity" of the Pauper's Oath — forget about disenfranchising), we must pay for other people's education. And shelter. And healthcare. And telephone service...

      Freedom, you say?..

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    5. Re:Don't get it by MrDoh! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Surely even the start of the nation, throwing Tea into the harbor was a protection racket with Hutchinson not wanting legitimate trade cutting into his smuggling operation. It's not just the last 100 years, it's been there from the start, then with slavery, and continues today with this sort of control. No, those freedoms haven't really ever existed.

      --
      Waiting for an amusing sig.
  3. hehe by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you can't beat 'em, ban em.

    Since we are constantly regaled how awful the Tesla is. - They all burn up, they are stupid, They are too expensive, I can't drive the Trans American Highway in one, electric cars suck - why don't we just let the free market do what it always does, eliminates bad products.

    I'm pretty sure at other times, car dealership owners are all about the free market, competition, and the heartbeat of America.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  4. Violates the ZOI Rule by Ichijo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The proposed rule would also require dealers to [have] the ability to show two cars...

    The number two is ridiculous and can't exist.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  5. Why can't they make an independent dealer company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The solution is to bitch publicly like this for now, but the reality is they need a workaround. They need to set up a separate company much like Coke had a separate bottler. Have them do local service and be the jiffy lube of Tesla and join/kiss ass of all these regional moderately powerful/rich douche bags.

  6. Rename it .... by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... the Bohr.

    Because so many states are disallowed.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  7. bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why can't the Governor of New Jersey act as a bridge between the two parties?

  8. Many members of Congress own car dealerships by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many members of Congress own car dealerships or are closely associated with those who do.

    Being protected monopolies, they are very profitable.

    Surely you've noticed that all the products of technology get cheaper every year except cars?

    1. Re:Many members of Congress own car dealerships by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Surely you've noticed that all the products of technology get cheaper every year except cars?

      After adjusting for inflation, a 1970 VW Beetle with optional AC is about the same price as a 2014 Nissan Versa or Chevy Spark (both come standard with AC).

      That's 34 years of technology (including air bags, ABS brakes, and traction control) for almost exactly the same price as a 34 year old car.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  9. Re:So what? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when does the quality of customer service become the purview of law? There are no dishonest dealings going on. Customers enter into these purchases fully aware of the requirements of ownership. No one expects Walmart to provide a service center for the electronics they sell, nor a seamstress for their clothing.

    This is protectionism and corrupt politics as can only be done at the local level pure and simple.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  10. Re:Why dealerships get a free ride by mojo-raisin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're making it more complex than it is.

    You can get parts for anything and still get it fixed. If there is a market. You have no point.

    There are no laws that require dealers to stock 20 years old parts. You have no point.

    Tesla doesn't ban service on their cars. You have no point.

    If many Teslas are sold, there will be a market for parts. You have no point.

    If you buy a Tesla and there are a million of those Teslas sold, you will be able to get service. Even if it's not from Tesla. You have no point.

  11. Re:Why can't they make an independent dealer compa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Laws in Texas for example:
    http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/OC/htm/OC.2301.htm#2301.4671

    (c) Except as provided by this section, a manufacturer or distributor may not directly or indirectly:
    (1) own an interest in a franchised or nonfranchised dealer or dealership;
    (2) operate or control a franchised or nonfranchised dealer or dealership; or
    (3) act in the capacity of a franchised or nonfranchised dealer.

  12. "Network" movie: the world is a business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The right wing should be opposed on free-market principles. The left wing should be opposed on environmental grounds. So which politicians should be in favour of this regulation again?

    The pragmatists & cynics who need local, wealthy donors to bankroll their campaigns.

    From the movie:

    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM, and ITT, and AT&T. And Dupont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today [in 1976]. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state? Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations inextricably determined by the immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business Mr. Beale. It has been since man climbed out of the slime.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk&t=2m15s

  13. Mischaracterization by ildon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a complete mischaracterization of what's going on. It's not that they don't want to compete with Tesla, it's that they want a cut. Right now, it's illegal for automakers to own car dealerships in most states, because when cars were in early adoption the state government didn't want to allow a situation where a car manufacturer pulled out of a state completely because it was unprofitable, leaving the citizens of that state unable to buy cars easily. So dealerships are independent from the manufacturers. Tesla is bypassing this 100 year old, out of date system, because it no longer makes sense, but the dealers aren't afraid of electric cars, they just want to make Tesla "play by the rules" and let the dealers sell (or not) the Tesla cars, so that they an make a profit off them like they do every other car manufacturer.

    1. Re:Mischaracterization by David_Hart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is a complete mischaracterization of what's going on. It's not that they don't want to compete with Tesla, it's that they want a cut. Right now, it's illegal for automakers to own car dealerships in most states, because when cars were in early adoption the state government didn't want to allow a situation where a car manufacturer pulled out of a state completely because it was unprofitable, leaving the citizens of that state unable to buy cars easily. So dealerships are independent from the manufacturers. Tesla is bypassing this 100 year old, out of date system, because it no longer makes sense, but the dealers aren't afraid of electric cars, they just want to make Tesla "play by the rules" and let the dealers sell (or not) the Tesla cars, so that they an make a profit off them like they do every other car manufacturer.

      If you follow the logic a bit further, what the dealers are truly afraid of is that if Tesla gets an exception, the other manufacturers will also want the same exception. Once Manufacturer's own showrooms and sell online they will be able to undercut dealerships, putting them out of business. Either they stand up for the current rules that created their business market or it dies.

  14. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  15. Re:I don't get it. by green1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or you know, you could look at what Tesla actually does...

    It's a combination of the fact that Teslas require only a minute fraction of the service of a normal internal combustion engine car, and that Tesla already provides better service than any dealership in existence. They have service centres all over the place (who cares if it's in the same place as the store if it's no further away) and you don't even have to go to the service centre because they will either send a mechanic to your doorstep, or pick up the car from your home or office for you (and replace it with a loaner if service will take longer than you can wait)

    So why would I want to force their stores (best located in high foot traffic areas like malls) to be co-located with their service centres (best located in low rent areas like industrial parks) when it doesn't do anything to help me as a consumer? The only thing that it would do is either increase costs (paid in the end by the consumer) or decrease convenience (again at the expense of the consumer)

    This law doesn't look at what the most advantageous model is for the consumer, it looks at what the existing business model is of the dealerships and forces everyone in to that mould effectively prohibiting any improvement to it.

  16. Tesla is making everybody else look bad by macpacheco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real story here is Tesla success is making everybody else look bad.
    They are a threat to much more than the car dealers. They are a threat to the innovate at a snails pace mantra of Detroit. They are a threat to big oil companies. Electricity is about 1/4 the cost of gasoline mile per mile (even comparing a Model S with a Prius, even considering the Model S is a large premium sedan, versus the Prius being a mid size). And they got this far in less than two years of Model S sales. Give them another 5 years and the auto industry will be undergoing an earthquake of innovation with Tesla at the forefront and few companies with enough agility to try to follow.
    It won't take long until a few of those state representatives don't get re-elected for their Tesla actions.
    Tesla adoption is spreading like wildfire. If Tesla had twice the li-ion battery supply, they would be delivering twice as much.