Elessar78 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 It's nothing any new business person hasn't faced. It isn't because his product is "green" or that the opposition are a bunch of cavemen. It's a business and they're protecting their turf. Eventually, if it's a good product that people will want, it will get in their hands. In some ways, inaccessibility adds to the exclusive quality of the product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 please no bad in Colorado. My wife has been lusting over a Tesla Model X for weeks now LOL. we are going to pre-order as soon as they're available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 please no bad in Colorado. My wife has been lusting over a Tesla Model X for weeks now LOL. we are going to pre-order as soon as they're available. I can see why. Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive Model X is offered with optional Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive. The second motor enables more than all-weather, all-road capabilities: it increases torque by 50%. When outfitted with AWD, Model X Performance accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in less than 5 seconds, outperforming the fastest SUVs and many sports cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 No,there was no vote to partially repeal(just on someone seeking a exemption from the laws we all are under) ,nor totally repealing. 1) That is a partial repeal. If the law doesn't apply to X, then it's been repealed for X. 2) So your point is, the GOP chose not to even have a vote on repeal. (Gee, that was my point, too.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 1) That is a partial repeal. If the law doesn't apply to X, then it's been repealed for X. 2) So your point is, the GOP chose not to even have a vote on repeal. (Gee, that was my point, too.) 1 No, a exemption is not a partial repeal 2 they chose to let them live under the same law as everyone else, Yes can you think of downsides to repeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 The other question I have is, do the manufacturers actually want these laws to go away? Do they want to take on the responisbility of managing their customer's service needs day in and day out? I know dealers are universally hated but dealer service customers are a big time pain in the ass group and that's a lot of extra headaches to deal with. Something tells me none of them are very interested in selling dircet to customers and managing/employing the personnel needed to service the cars. Besides that, dealerships are one of the few small businesses we have left in this country. Are we so sure that turning all sales responsibility over to the giant multinational car companies and eliminating a whole hell of a lot of competition will truly be cheaper for the consumer in the long run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 The thought has occurred to me to wonder, if these laws were eliminated, would we then see car companies trying to argue that all of their cars are sold in South Dakota, and therefore are exempt from all consumer protection laws (and sales tax) in the other 49 states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 24, 2013 Share Posted August 24, 2013 The thought has occurred to me to wonder, if these laws were eliminated, would we then see car companies trying to argue that all of their cars are sold in South Dakota, and therefore are exempt from all consumer protection laws (and sales tax) in the other 49 states. All else being equal, it would take about 5 minutes for them to start to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/08/26/tesla-models-s-porsche-jaguar-california/2700289/ The swoopy electric sedan outsold all models from other luxury brands Porsche, Volvo, Lincoln, Land Rover and Jaguar during the first half of the year in the Golden State, reports the California New Car Dealers Association, based on new-vehicle registrations. With 4,714 new Teslas registered over the six months, it even topped some established conventional luxury models like Lexus GS, at 2,298, and Audi A6, at 1,619. All that is impressive for a new model costing more than $60,000 and upwards of $100,000. Its even more impressive for a car that can only be fueled from an electric plug. Unlike the Chevrolet Volt, the Tesla has no backup gas engine, but has far greater range than other electric cars, rated at up to 265 miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Stage three of the Gandhi protocol. A decade later, Tesla now officially a threat to the auto industry It’s funny, electric car company Tesla has been building its business for a decade now, but it’s just in recent months that the auto industry seems to be taking Tesla’s innovations as an actual threat to their businesses. That’s because it’s only been in 2013 that Tesla has shown how it can make a small profit and use its popular electric car to compete with competitors in the auto biz. But reacting to a threat when it’s finally arrived, versus skating to where the puck is going isn’t necessarily the best way to run a business. The tech industry is littered with late-movers like Blockbuster or Kodak. Full article: http://gigaom.com/2013/08/26/a-decade-later-tesla-now-officially-a-threat-to-the-auto-industry/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 The law against direct sales by auto manufacturers once made sense, but dealers are now locked into their markets and don't need to be defended. In this case there are no Tesla dealers to be undercut and Tesla (like Apple) has figured out that if they are going to be able to convince the undecided new car buyer to purchase their product, the best way to do it is with highly trained staff in an environment that they control rather than a dealer who would be just as happy selling a chevy truck. Texas resistance to Tesla has more to do with doing what it can to hurt the success story of a green energy company that Obama has supported than anything else. Remember Romney calling Tesla "a loser"? First, I'll say that I've always admired the Tesla vehicles and I want one. Second, let's talk a bit about Musk. He's not trying to solve our transportation problems or our oil/gasoline consumption problems. He has invented a vehicle that will serve as a status symbol among the petite bourgeoisie... as in the owners of newly purchased BMW, Merc & Audi vehicles, typically upper-middleclass... and he wants to do it his way, creating a unique, exclusive product. I don't necessarily have a problem with that and I'm certainly not attempting to be dismissive of the greatness of this vehicle. It is one of the finest vehicles ever made. But... if Musk truly wanted to cause a massive shift in the car market as a "game changer," he would have designed a vehicle in the $30K range for the everyday man. He would have taken the Henry Ford route and designed the Model T at a price that everyone could afford. What have you got against the free market and a good business plan? This isn't 1908. Tesla correctly concluded that the people most likely to be early adopters of their technology are well off and produced a product to appeal to them first. As manufacturing costs go down they are working to produce cheaper cars for the average consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 anyone know how many states allow Telsa to circumvent the rules? 10 last time I looked special people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Add New Jersey to the list. http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-57620197-48/new-jersey-joins-arizona-and-texas-in-tesla-sales-ban/ For everyone that complains about democrats hurting business, this is exhibit 1 about how big business interests create crony capitalism. This is nothing but a special interest group lobbying state officials to hurt the consumer and a new company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Telsa is nothing but a special interest group itself. not that we will turn down the battery manufacturing plant though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 I'm certainly not one to be found often quoting Milton Friedman, but what he says here certainly seems to apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Telsa is nothing but a special interest group itself. not that we will turn down the battery manufacturing plant though No. Its a company that is trying to deliver cars to consumers in a more efficient manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 No. Its a company that is trying to deliver cars to consumers in a more efficient manner. Yes...by way of a special exemption to the rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Yes...by way of a special exemption to the rules No. By way of removing the special interest law that was created by big business to help big business, i.e. corporate welfare. Thanks for demonstrating that you believe that "your welfare" is "good welfare" and "others welfare" is "bad welfare." And nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Yes...by way of a special exemption to the rules Rules established by an industry more interested in self protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Yes...by way of a special exemption to the rules Since when did selling things to people become "a special exemption to the rules"? Maybe they should claim that they're exempt, because it's against their corporate religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Since when did selling things to people become "a special exemption to the rules"? Maybe they should claim that they're exempt, because it's against their corporate religion. Is telsa lobbying to change the rule for everyone or just Telsa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Is telsa lobbying to change the rule for everyone or just Telsa?Is it Tesla's job to advocate for Ford? Seems that the corporate board of Ford is the body with the fiduciary responsibility to the Ford shareholders.This same type of system exists with the alcoholic beverage industry, where manufacturers are forced to sell through distribution companies which are supposed to be independent of retailers and manufacturers, yet those distributers favor their bigger clients at the expense of smaller companies. Think about just how independent those beer distributors are the next time you see one of their trucks unloading with a 30 foot Bud Lite ad smeared all over the trailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Is it Tesla's job to advocate for Ford? Seems that the corporate board of Ford is the body with the fiduciary responsibility to the Ford shareholders. certainly not, they are simply lobbying for their own special interests Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 certainly not, they are simply lobbying for their own special interests Which in turn will apply to all. You spoke forever about compelling need before government action the other day, so what is the compelling need for the rules that are currently on the books that favor established corporate entities? I thought you were a free market capitalist why do you favor rules that curtail competition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Which in turn will apply to all. You spoke forever about compelling need before government action the other day, so what is the compelling need for the rules that are currently on the books that favor established corporate entities? I thought you were a free market capitalist why do you favor rules that curtail competition? you would need to ask the ones that made the rule. I would not oppose dropping the rule for all(not just telsa) the compelling need was in reference to denying a fundamental right, which despite Telsa's whining this ain't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.