Tesla vs. Car Dealers: the Lobbyist Went Down To Georgia

McGruber writes The Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC) newspaper's Jim Galloway has an update on the behind-the-scenes battles over who can sell you a new car: "Traditional car dealers are in the midst of a legal fight to push Tesla, the fledgling California electric car company, out of Georgia. Never mind that metro Atlanta is one of the hottest markets for electric vehicles in the nation. Signs point to a parallel battle in the General Assembly. Last week, the National Automobile Dealers Association began trolling for sympathetic lawmakers. While Georgia dealers say they have "no plans" to revisit an anti-Tesla bill that failed last year, Tesla is preparing a defense. It has already hired one of the top lobbying firms in Atlanta."

The Georgia Automobile Dealers Association wields considerable influence in the state Capitol; the AJC determined that the Georgia Auto Dealers Association (GADA) had made over $600,000 in recent campaign contributions to state lawmakers. Despite those contributions, a bill to boot Tesla from Georgia mysteriously died during last year's legislative session. While no legislator would claim credit for killing the bill, Galloway noted that Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, who presides over the Senate, drives a Nissan Leaf.

Comments

I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[JBMcB]

An industry is using government regulation to stifle competition? Holy cow NO!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[Anonymous Coward]

many of these rules exist because of scummy tactics by the automakers long ago.

Re:I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that the independent franchise dealer model doesn't work for electric cars and the existing dealers know it. Traditional dealerships make their living on repairs/maintenance and electric cars just don't require that much of either. If existing dealers were allowed to sell Tesla they would still be pushing the gas cars for the same reasons.

Re:I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[AaronW]

There is a lot less periodic maintenance required and maintenance is far easier. The recommended maintenance is every 12K miles. The maintenance includes a wheel alignment, changing the wiper blades, cabin air filter, tire rotation, inspections and any software updates (though the car periodically allows the user to install them when they're downloaded over the air). The electric motor is lubricated for 12 years, according to one of the techs I spoke with at the factory. Many of the items that need maintenance are just not there or need less periodic maintenance. Many things can be diagnosed remotely without even having to bring the car in. My car was one of the early ones that received a defective 12v battery because the battery manufacturer decided to subcontract it out to China who subcontracted it out to Viet Nam. Tesla contacted me about replacing the battery within a couple of days of a weak battery being detected.

Sure, you still have tires (which can be rotated or replaced just about anywhere), a cabin air filter, wiper blades, suspension, etc. but these are not the money makers. The number of moving parts is a fraction of what it is in an ICE car.On top of that, much of the maintenance is far easier since many parts are far more accessible without a big engine in the way. Even things like brake pads will last far longer on an EV. There are no spark plugs, no fuel filters, engine air filters, oil changes or belts to change. There's minimal chance of laking oil seals and no smog related work. There's no catalytic converter, oxygen sensors, fuel pumps, fuel injectors, etc to deal with. And if you do need to do something like pull the electric motor, it is a far easier process. They install the entire drive train in the Model S in under 4 minutes since it's all in a single module, including the motor, differential, inverter, rear axels, etc. Removing it is not the huge job it is in an ICE car.

Re:I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[Jeremi]

That's a niche product, so there are few producers of that stuff. Why would you expect to find stock at different prices unless there's something wrong with it? They don't produce a lot of excess stock.

It's more than just a result of being "niche" -- the same thing happens with Apple products. In order to become an authorized resaler, the stores have to sign an agreement to only sell the products at the manufacturer-specified price. It's done to prevent dealers from getting into price wars with each other, but by the same token it means that the consumer can't get a better deal by shopping around.

Re: I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

[Dastardly]

My Prius is 9 years 130000 miles the brakes only just recently show measurabe wear since most braking is handled by the electric motor except hard braking and under 6 mph.

Re:NADA is very powerful.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because even if it's legal, doesn't mean its feasible given the current state of affairs. Here's what would happen:

1. GM says they are going to sell direct in the few states that allow it
2. Immediately following that action, dealers in ALL states take action such as pushing other brands they sell more or even stopping sales of GM vehicles to punish GM for this action.
3. Gm loses a large chunk of its , and goes out of business.

There's a reason most dealerships "partner" with multiple makers, it's to be able to leverage the makers against each other. The only way breaking the model works is if its made legal everywhere and most makers go for it.

Re:Another State Incentive

[Firethorn]

In all cases I know of, they'd still get the tax revenue - you pay sales tax in the state where you first register the vehicle, not where you actually buy it.

Re:Another State Incentive

[dbitter1]

I have a Tesla, and I assure you I paid my share of state AND city taxes.