Michigan Latest State To Ban Direct Tesla Sales 256
An anonymous reader writes As many expected, Michigan Governor Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed a bill that bans Tesla Motors from selling cars directly to buyers online in the state. When asked what Tesla's next step will be, Diarmuid O'Connell, vice president of business development, said it was unclear if the company would file a lawsuit. "We do take at their word the representations from the governor that he supports a robust debate in the upcoming session," O'Connell said. "We've entered an era where you can buy products and services with much greater value than a car by going online."
Of Course it did (Score:5, Insightful)
Direct sales, when no franchise has been offered, is no business of the state to regulate. Great Job everyone on voting for idiots who like to control everything.
Vote Libertarian in two weeks.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Queue up the "Somalia" thread here ...
Libertarian paradise...have you been? (Score:2)
It's awesome.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the middle east has nothing to do with though (the situation has a lot of explanation, the lack of authority is not one of them).
Re: (Score:2)
Rather than being bitter that people keep bringing up the flaws of your favorite ideology, why don't you think up ways to fix those flaws? We all got a rather thorough lesson about what happens when ideological purity trumps reality with Soviet Union, and are currently getting a repeat lesson with neoconservatives. Surely you don't want your ideology moving from "questionable" to "inherently evil" category in the annals of history?
Then again, an untested ideology is pe
Re: (Score:3)
You're looking at it wrong. You're looking at things from an ideological perspective.
Most voters are looking at things from an economic perspective. If keeping these people in power are going to keep them their jobs, they're going to vote that way. Even if they end up losing their job ten years later due to a collapse in their entire industry, money in the pocket now trumps any imaginary gains ten years in the future.
Sorry, that's just how the world works.
Re:Of Course it did (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a classic situation where there is a very narrow constituency who wants to have a particular law or program in place, but no comparable counter group opposed to the idea. Corn subsidies is another really good example.
Just watch this video to see if it makes sense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8JDx7FwdHk [youtube.com]
Or if you want something less dramatic but still more of the same... and tries to explain why this happens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGOj8kBpsD4 [youtube.com]
The same thing that got Coca-Cola to make their products out of corn syrup is what got this legislation passed to prohibit Tesla from direct sales.
Re: (Score:2)
Because employers being forced to pay more than someone is worth is a big problem in present-day America...
The Force is weak in this one (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense. Many people are not worth minimum wage. They are not worth anything at all as workers.
Re: (Score:2)
If they aren't worth anything, then why are they employed ?
Or are you suggesting that we should bring back slavery because some workers are, according to you, only worth having for free ?
Re: (Score:3)
Who decides what someone is worth?
If there is a minimum wage law, it means employers may be forced to pay someone more than what they think that person is worth.
If there is a maximum wage law, it means employers may be forced to pay someone less than what they think that person is worth.
Re: (Score:2)
Because employers being forced to pay more than someone is worth is a big problem in present-day America...
I see what you did there. Almost got me, with your uber-subtle sarcasm. Nicely done, sir.
Re: (Score:2)
Great Job (Score:5, Insightful)
Testla meets Free Market (Score:4, Insightful)
The US has 'socialized' markets; most everything innovative is state subsidized (i.e. socialized: paid with your tax money) and state-protected (aerospace, oil, pharma, bio). Everything that's truly innovative, as in the "High Praise the US of A Land of Opportunity" (sure...), --achieved by personal struggle and personal enterprise--, that's who that famous Free Market is for.
Tesla should just wait and be embraced by GM, so they, GM, could either obtain heavy subsidies for it, or kill it off, whichever suits them best. Or, Tesla might move elsewhere, where the market operates similarly, but they don't lie about it calling it 'Free'.
Great Job (Score:2)
The problem is that you now have the big players writing the laws to stifle competition. In this case, it's not the auto manufacturers, but the dealerships. The dealerships are not the mom and pop dealerships but the huge conglomerates. For example, the 5th largest which Warren Buffet just bought, the Van Tuyl Group does $8 billion in annual revenue. In my area there are a huge number of dealerships under the Del Grande Dealer Group [dgdg.com]. These are the guys who are paying off the politicians.
To get an idea of wh
Re: (Score:3)
On the contrary: This is the ultimate free market. Even the politicians are for sale. All Tesla motors need to do is raise some money, buy half the legislature, and ban the sale of non-electric cars. A kickstarter campaign would probably do it.
Re:Great Job (Score:5, Insightful)
If America was brave, terror wouldn't be the primary focus of the government.
Has become? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lunatic. American business is run by a bunch of socialist thugs.
Re:Great Job (Score:4, Insightful)
Lunatic. American business is run by a bunch of socialist thugs.
HAHAHAHAHA
It's not socialism, it's oligarchy. Socialism is where the wealth is redistributed to serve the people. The wealth is being redistributed upward in this system, there's nothing socialist about that.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop pretending it's some sort of aberration.
When you stop pretending your straw man represents some actual point of view. Libertarianism isn't entirely realistic, but then neither are the imaginary misrepresentations of it.
So can I buy it in the next state over? (Score:2, Interesting)
It would seem to me that Tesla could re-write their warranty to cover cars after they are re-sold. And if you have a neighboring state that decides to allow flexible temporary titling policies for a modest fee you could buy the car in a neighboring state, pay the neighboring state off and then title the car in Michigan. Traditional car dealerships provide almost no added value in the current market -- everybody builds their virtual car online and then hunts something close. About all a dealer is worth is
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So can I buy it in the next state over? (Score:5, Informative)
To be fair, dealers provide maintenance, repair, and recall services.
Those services are also provided by independent garages, usually at much lower prices.
That's a bigger factor in the history of these laws than the sales part.
No it wasn't. These laws were never, even in theory, about protecting the customer. They were about protecting existing dealer networks. Since Tesla never had a dealer network, these laws shouldn't apply to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Those services are also provided by independent garages, usually at much lower prices.
Not when the garages are not privy to manufacturer information or parts. To this day, there are some things that small garages have limited ability to perform that dealers can.
These laws were never, even in theory, about protecting the customer. They were about protecting existing dealer networks.
In theory, they were also about the consumer. In practice, not so much. What good is a warranty with no service location nearby to perform the work? At one time, the choices of cars were a lot more limited, consumers were stuck with a few manufactures. Things have evolved over time, so those issues are no longer as big a deal as they
Re: (Score:2)
The original impetus for franchise agreements was to enable the manufacturers to just produce vehicles, while pushing the task of finding buyers for them off onto the dealers. When some manufacturers later wanted to start direct sales, the franchised dealers, who are often socially or politically connected and powerful, fought for the exclusionary laws.
dumbass governors (Score:2)
There will be one state, or three, which will allow the sales of Tesla products. These states will reap the tax benefits. And I laugh heartedly at the Governor of Michigan, with broke-ass Detroit, turning away from what could be a spigot full of tax income.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a matter of fact, those states allowing fracking have reaped huge tax benefits and for the most part has helped out ordinary citizens of those states too.
If only it was as simple as you suggest... and perhaps Detroit might not be so broke as it currently is. If only Detroit could become a major oil producing region of America, as it might do them some good.
I'm not saying there are so consequences to the practice that needs to happen as well, where the economic costs of the practice certainly need to be
Scary (Score:5, Funny)
I don't know... the idea of buying a car from a company with a reputation for high quality seems awfully scary compared with going in to chat with a high school dropout who knows how to schmooze and is on commission. Personally, I'm grateful for the government's protection.
Map please... (Score:3, Interesting)
Could somebody please draw a map showing where Telsa's direct sales model has been banned? Seems like this story is on its way to running 50 times...
Here you go: (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.mojomotors.com/blog... [mojomotors.com]
http://www.autonews.com/articl... [autonews.com]
Tesla faces a catch 22 (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary. There are several dealerships (especially the mega auto mall groups in major cities) who want to sell Teslas. A couple of them have even been blunt to Elon Musk basically saying that he can't sell a Tesla without cutting them in for a piece of the action.
That is all that is happening here, where these dealerships in the big cities (it was a dealer in Boston who threatened Musk) just want to get a cut of all of the sales... including the on-line sales where the dealer doesn't have to do a
So buy it online in another state... (Score:2)
So buy the car and have it delivered to you in another state. Then move it to Michigan. Standard Operating Procedure. People buy cars all the time and then move from one state to another. People go to another state and buy cars. This Michigan law is merely fanfare, not a real issue.
Maybe you can't (Score:2)
For instance, in Tennessee, from the DMV website: [tn.gov]
In the case of an individual, Tenn. Code Ann. Sections 55-3-103(a)
Re: (Score:2)
Title and registration are two different things. Have you ever owned a car before?
Re: (Score:2)
Title and registration are two different things.
This.
You go out of state*, buy your Tesla and receive the title. You then either get a temporary operating permit to drive it home. Or load it on a truck. When you arrive in Michigan, you register the vehicle with the title documents in your possession.
*All done virtually. You do the paperwork wherever you want (in the Tesla showroom) but it is effective in whatever state you and Tesla agree on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What do you do though when they've legislated that cars not bought in the state or that are on some blacklist can't get registered?
You start shooting politicians until the problem is solved.
Re: (Score:3)
What do you do though when they've legislated that cars not bought in the state or that are on some blacklist can't get registered?
Then they definitely get smacked down for dicking with interstate commerce.
Re: (Score:2)
Translation (Score:5, Informative)
"Mr. Musk is a brilliant man, and Tesla is an innovative company. We can all respect that," says Jim Appleton, the president of the New Jersey Coalition of Automobile Retails. "But he doesnâ(TM)t get what it takes to do business in New Jersey."
Translation: Musk won't pay off all the useless parasites represented by Jim Appleton and all the corrupt government officials like Governor Rick Snyder the required under-the-table money to do business in their state.
Re: (Score:3)
Listen, if you are not even allowed to pump your own gas, your state deserves to be the pits.
Umm, like I have an idea? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla is opening up stores and has repair shops in many of them (where it can legally be done). They just don't see the point of paying somebody else for the privilege of opening such a store that they will also have to pay to have constructed that will get a cut of the profits simply because they are an existing businessman in that state (ordinary citizens need not apply BTW.... you need to already possess the dealership license or pay a huge deposit to the state government that mere mortals need not both
Re: (Score:2)
What advantage is there again for a dealership?
I get what you're saying, and you're right. But judging by the hundreds of dealerships around town here, I guess the point is to sell cars? As long as there are dealerships to sell the cars, who cares? GM isn't "to big to fail" because the dealership market is killing them. They're "to big to fail" because they sell a shit-ton of cars. Tesla's cars are great (I guess, never driven one myself), but they're fucking expensive. They're so expensive that they know that once they jump into the "normal" car
Re: (Score:2)
If Tesla can do this, then so will Ford and GM, and then you just killed a very large job market, seeing as how many dealerships employ 50+ employees
And if the demand existed for the cars, those 50 jobs would still exist. Just instead of being employed by "Joe's Car Emporium", they'd be employed by Tesla (for Ford, or GM).
So much for a free market (Score:5, Informative)
These outdated statues were originally designed to protect little dealerships from the threat of big auto opening their own dealerships if one of their indirect dealers refused to carry their lemons. So dealers under pressure from Detroit were forced to sell the crappy next to the good cars.
Today, prohibiting direct sales protects only the dealerships and harms the consumer. There’s no reason to prohibit a consumer from buying directly from the manufacturer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You'd sing a different tune if you went for a test ride. The "Ford/GM/whatever domestic shit they're peddling these days" dealerships are shitting bricks because their wares are junk. Nobody would buy a Corvette, Camaro or Charger if they could afford a Tesla, and those Teslas are coming down in price. Factor in the near-zero maintenance costs and the dealers who thrive on overcharging for service and it all makes sense.
interstate commerce? (Score:3)
I don't understand why this silliness isn't being slapped down by the feds.
What's needed is convenient proxy addresses (Score:2)
I mean virtual "physical home" addresses that you can rent, along with the suitable internet proxy server to make you appear to be from that state. Combine this with a "we will deliver your purchased goods to your real address for a nominal fee" service, wrap that all up in a bow, and voila: shiny new car !
What do they mean... (Score:2)
Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score:5, Informative)
I think this is more an auto-industry trying to screw with the very nature of the market itself with protectionist practices than it is anything else. American automakers have never happily sold non-petroleum-fuelled vehicles in any real quantity, and while Tesla's cars so far have been luxury, they're looking to ramp up economy of scale and pricing for mid-line products that could really threaten the status quo. Teslas might be more expensive to purchase initially, but their lower operating costs and lower maintenance costs make them attractive to those drivers that don't need to go more than a couple-hundred miles a day and plan to keep their cars for more than a few years.
I can state, definitively, that if a $30,000 electric car with a 150 mile range on a single charge became a thing I'd have to consider it. That's plenty for commuting and errands for my household, and since we already have a four door sedan with low miles as the out-of-town trip car, we wouldn't need extended range on something in the city. Having relatively clean maintenance would also be a plus.
Re: (Score:3)
But then my operating costs are almost zero anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately I have to agree with you at this stage. I have done enough super high mileage trips that it would require a second car permanently on stand by. That means double insurance, tax, storage and depreciation.
An average year sees our main car do c45,000km the trips are often 200km+ and to be skirting that close to the range limit that often puts me off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So yeah, unless the car has a 400 mile range (or a 5 minute recharge), electric won't work for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Where as I live in a semi-rural area on acreage. It is 7km to my local store and I have two young kids. This means that I do lots of middle distance drives - 20-30km multiple times a day and then longer ones multiple times a week. It's the price of where I live, but you make those decisions. Also I am on the road a lot for work so the drive to the office, plug in, drive home, plug in model doesn't work.
I would happily (well kinda happily anyway) sit at a charging station for 10 minutes if that gave me h
Re: (Score:3)
I have done enough super high mileage trips that it would require a second car permanently on stand by. That means double insurance, tax, storage and depreciation.
it means none of those things but storage cost. The insurance for the second vehicle is reduced, and often the insurance on your primary vehicle is reduced when you add another vehicle to your policy, even if you don't decrease the primary vehicle's mileage. And you get an older vehicle for the second car, and it costs you less to buy, less in depreciation, etc.
It still might not work out, but it doesn't cost twice as much.
Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't justify two cars, and if I own a car, it has to be able to drive 1000 miles in a day.
If you routinely have to drive so far then an electric wouldn't work for you.
However, if driving long distances is rare then an electric plus occasional rental (e.g. zip) ought to work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score:4)
If you're not carrying a logbook, then there are no legal limits on how far you can drive, at least not anywhere I've ever been. As far as that goes, if you *are* carrying a logbook, the limitation is on hours, not miles, but you're right that 800 miles would bust that limit.
I'm pretty sure this is true even if you are driving as an employee. As a wireline engineer there were no legal limits on how far or long I could drive, because I drove a passenger car. My truck crew were DOT drivers and they *did* have legal limits.
It's been 25 years, so it's possible details have changed, but I doubt the basic rules have changed that much.
Re: (Score:2)
That's really not very realistic. A couple of thousand mile trips a year would overshadow the cost savings an electric would bring. If you add in the half dozen or so trips in the 300 mile range that *might* be in the range of an electric but would be dicey, then it's really not very practical.
It also assumes that each trip has lots of lead time to arrange a rental. This would mostly be true for the very long trips, but rarely true for the short ones.
I'm always amazed by people who say "Sure, get an elec
Re: (Score:3)
It'll get to that point eventually. Tesla's currently installing superchargers across the country. You can get a half charge in 170 mile charge in 30 minutes (and it's free)
http://www.teslamotors.com/sup... [teslamotors.com]
That's not too bad. Having to stop for 30 minutes every couple hours is a bit less than desirable, but that's a significant improvement. If you plan your bathroom breaks and dinner around charging time, then several of those stops won't be so bad.
Re: (Score:2)
I could manage an added 20 or even 30 minutes in added stops but that's as much as I can put up with. If an electric could do say, 600 miles and charge in 30 minutes, then it would be doable; I could either stop a couple times for partial charges or once for 20+ minutes, since i
If you have a job that involves math, please quit. (Score:4, Informative)
1. 21 stops * 0.5 hours / stop != 17 hours /hour == 2.6 hours; 0.5 hours / 2.6 hours ~= 20% additional road time for the electric car, not 50%
2. 170 miles * 21 == 3570 miles. 3570 miles / 65 miles / hour ~= 55 hours (which is > 2days even if you drove straight).
3. 170 miles / 65 miles
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently your reading comprehension isn't quite there. Did I say we've arrived at the panacea? No, I didn't even say anything remotely like that. What I was saying is that it's a lot better than it was before.
And I don't think your math is quite there either. 170 miles * 21 stops = 3570 miles. Over 2 days, that's 1785 miles per day. Even on the summer solstice, you have only 16 hours of daylight (unless you are up in northern canada). So even if we don't count time to eat, use the bathroom, and get gas, y
Re: (Score:2)
My smart electric net cost was about exactly $16500, after rebates, including sales tax.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it has to be able to drive 1000 miles in a day
That's perfectly reasonable; you'd only need to drive at 65mph for nearly fifteen and a half fucking hours without ever stopping to get gas or take a piss. :p
Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as an electric car drives a 1000 miles in a day, you'll move the bar to a 1005.
Besides, your 1000 miles has already repeatedly broken,
http://www.popsci.com/cars/art... [popsci.com]
http://gas2.org/2012/06/14/ren... [gas2.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sir ( or fraulein ) , you might think if you want to have a car at all, and just fly and/or rent if and when needed. It will save you time and money and probably make a bunch of people generally safer around you.
I wouldn't call ABBA a complete and utter fail if disco has just never been my thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a single car that's electric, now granted it is a Tesla model S. I don't have any issue if I have to drive from the Bay Area to LA. I was planning to drive up to Seattle though sadly I couldn't get the time off of work. The rate they're building superchargers makes it easier and easier for long distance travel. If I need to go on a long trip that isn't covered, renting a car for the few times I need to is still cheaper than all the gas I'd be burning otherwise. I kept my old car for about six months
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You must not drive much. I drive 40-50 miles every day. I have a tremendous amount of storage and it's certainly fun to drive. I also never have to set foot in a gas station. I spend 5 seconds plugging in at night and 5 seconds unplugging in the morning to a full battery (or whatever level of charge I choose). I don't have to stand out in the weather and wait in line for fuel nor has the range been much of an issue. It's also a somewhat different driving experience with how smooth and quiet and responsive t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you need THAT much range, daily? The lowest end electric cars already beat your price (by a long shot if you count tax rebates), and are close to 2/3 of your range "requirement".
Re: (Score:2)
A 40 mile range, daily would do me.
But it wouldn't cover the days when I need 7 or 800 miles.
A Tesla with 300 mile range and charging stations properly placed for cross-country trips would be great. I'd jump on that in a minute, if it were $30k.
20 - 30 minute breaks for charging and meals would be fine by me.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that 150 miles is unreasonable. That's half of the range of a gasoline powered car on a single tank of fuel. I'd love it if a car could get a 300-mile range for $30,000, but I kno
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.nissanusa.com/elect... [nissanusa.com]
Not only is 126/101 city/highway not the 150 he specified, it's not range of the car - it's the approximate gasoline efficiency rating ("MPGe"). The range is 84 miles.
With an average range of 84 miles, the Nissan LEAF® takes you 2½ times that distance on a single charge.
Re:Here you go: (Score:5, Informative)
84 average, when new, at 70 degrees, and don't drive over 55 or the range drops quickly. On cold winter days chop a good 20-30% off that range. Expect 20-30% further degradation after 3-5 years of normal usage. There are a fair number of 3-4 year old Leafs that are under 66% capacity and getting replacement batteries (mostly under warranty), and those Leafs are mostly 2011's and 2012's that only started life with a 73 mile EPA range. It is a great little car with real limitations that should be soberly considered.
I expect that any car labeled a 150 mile car will be more reasonably a 100 mile car after a few years of aging and in non-southern winters. A buyer should count that degradation in if they plan on keeping the car for a decade or two. Thankfully battery prices are coming down, so a battery replacement after 5-10 years will be less daunting of an expense than originally feared.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know much about cold winter days, but the efficiency of my hybrid drops significantly on hot summer days.
Re: (Score:2)
I've considered converting an old pickup with batteries under the bed, but lead-acid would be the most likely battery, and the truck still runs too well to do that to it right now.
Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm certainly no fan of the Republican Party, but the PATRIOT Act and all its progeny were bipartisan.
And the surveillance state got out of hand under the Republicans, but it didn't get any better under the Democrats, so I'm not seeing any partisan moral high ground here.
Re:Cue party of hypocrites supporters (Score:5, Insightful)
It's more like "is there anything else we can try to save Detroit from the evil non-Detroit manufacturers". Sadly, there's no saving Detroit.
Re: (Score:3)
Hypocrisy but not that (Score:3)
Re:Already illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
Bans on direct sales of vehicles are nonsense, regardless!
The idea that forcing a "middleman" to exist, by the sake of legislation requiring it (because you know.... creates jobs!), is utterly flawed.
Manufacturers would, most likely, encourage (to the point of helping fund) local distributors/dealers regardless of any laws demanding it. When you sell enough volume of a product - it starts making sense to get other entities to help sell it for you.
Tesla Motors helps illustrate the need to REPEAL any existing law preventing them from doing direct sales!
They don't (yet) do enough volume to find it beneficial to sell through a dealer network. So why not accept that at face value, and let them do business the way they believe is most beneficial? Chances are, if they sell enough vehicles, they'll eventually WANT to work with established dealers to carry their brand. Teslas will eventually start showing up in appreciable numbers on the used car lots of existing dealerships anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
The question that should be raised here is not demanding a repeal of this law, but to question why the government thinks it has authority or purpose for regulating this activity in the first place? In the federal government, Article I, Section 8 explicitly states what Congress has the authority to regulate or control (like setting up laws for copyright, regulations for the military, controlling immigration policy, etc.) and the implication is if Congress doesn't have that authority explicitly granted by t
Re: (Score:2)
Article I Section 8 gives also gives them the right to regulate interstate commerce. Tesla is trading from California to Michigan. Even beyond that, the 10th amendment puts the power into the states to handle things not enumerated to the federal government. Michigan chose to regulate this for better or worse, so it's out of the rights of the people. And yes, Michigan citizens can and should question why these protectionist regulations exist.
Re: (Score:2)
You miss the whole point of Article I, Section 8 in your reply. It is there to tell the federal government to stay out of making these kind of regulations in the first place.
I won't go into the argument about what the interstate commerce clause actually says and what the Federal Papers said it was supposed to do, because that is pointless so far as to fan a whole major sub-thread on that topic alone. At least you acknowledge there is something that the federal government might be able to do to Michigan so
Re: (Score:2)