• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    Tesla Increases Lobbying Efforts To Break Into Michigan


    • Tesla Continues Their Effort To Change Michigan Law, Allowing Them To Do Direct Sales In the State

    Last year, the State of Michigan signed a bill that banned an automaker from doing direct sales. This meant an automaker like Tesla couldn't sell any of their vehicles in the state. The move was widely applauded by the likes of GM and the Michigan Automobile Dealers Association. Tesla wasn't impressed by this and since then has been working on trying to change this.

     

    But it hasn't been going well. While the company has been trying to educate lawmakers and state officials, it seems everyone in the state doesn't want to bring up the debate.

     

    “There doesn’t seem to be much interest from not only the dealers, but manufacturers like GM that want to continue to shut us out of the market entirely,” said Jim Chen, Tesla’s vice president of regulatory affairs to The Detroit News.

     

    “We’re an American company that is building cars in the United States that is using over 55 Michigan suppliers — that is spending over $120 million in parts and components from Michigan suppliers to build American-made cars. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to sell in Michigan?” Chen went on to say.

     

    Terry Burns, executive vice president of the Michigan Automobile Dealers Association says Tesla is welcomed to the state, but they have to go through dealers.

     

    “They’re an automotive manufacturer, and the Michigan law says that manufacturers need to use dealers in order to sell vehicles. That’s Michigan law. We would welcome Tesla here. But we would think that as with all the other businesses that come into Michigan, they would want to follow the law,” said Burns.

     

    Interestingly enough, the state senate introduced a bill back in April to allow direct sales of three-wheeled “autocycles” to consumers in Michigan. A key automaker who stands to benefit from this is Elio Motors. In response, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a statement that criticized the move.

     

    "Automobile manufacturers have an economic incentive to respond to consumer preferences by choosing the most effective distribution method for their vehicle brands," FTC officials wrote.

     

    Tesla plans to continue their lobbying efforts in the state.

     

    “We have the majority of next year to lobby, discuss and debate the merits of what we think is a co-existence of our business model in the state of Michigan," said Will Nicholas, Tesla’s government relations manager.

     

    Source: The Detroit News

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    Someone is crying over spilled milk.

     

    I do think those laws are very much out dated for requiring dealerships myself though.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    To be fair, it really is not crying over spilled milk more than it being sentencing Socrates to drink Hemlock because he was 'corrupting young minds'...

     

    You do know what Socrates said in his final speech dont you?

    Anyhoo, hopefully Telsa does not share the same fate as Socrates, however, Isee the same zealousness as with those Athenians as with these Michiganders...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    They're not anymore kit cars than anything else that comes from Michigan...

    But...Ive gotten 2 warnings regarding my posting style regarding childish biases so Im just gonna leave my post at that...

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think Tesla, in interest of furthering sales, might just end up having dealerships.

     

    It moves the trouble of dealing with short-term demand fluctuations- such as cyclical buy habits and what it does to inventory to the dealers.

     

    But having just one price, and one price for all is very succulent...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    sure, let em sell their kit cars there!

    Nothing 'kit car' about them...weird to think they aren't sold in some states.  I seem them daily on the streets here in Phoenix/Scottsdale, and the parking garage for my office tower has at least 4 of them, maybe more. 

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Uh..... 

     

    Tesla would be the first automaker to have a kit car become MT's 2013 Car of the year and Consumer Report's Highest rated sedan ever (it's not longer a top pick...but highest rated tho).

     

    Kit cars or not, built in a backyard garage or not, lacking absolute luxury or not, they have changed the game forever.

     

    If anyone has a $100,000 or more burning hole in the pocket caused by buying an electric vehicle, you can be sure they bought a Tesla.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Last year, the State of Michigan signed a bill that banned an automaker from doing direct sales. This meant an automaker like Tesla couldn't sell any of their vehicles in the state. The move was widely applauded by the likes of GM and the Michigan Automobile Dealers Association. Tesla wasn't impressed by this and since then has been working on trying to change this.

     

    So the UAW and traditional dealers are still scared.  

    Edited by Scout
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It is not that they are scared but the fact that they want a level playing field.

    ​The standing MFG's have been forced to work with the dealer system by law from the start. They have at times tried to challange this system and were stopped by the goverment.  Now that they are loaded with the dealers they can not shead them unless they want to go out and buy them out at a major expense.

    ​What they fear is not Tesla but China. If you kill the dealer network China could fload all sorts of retailers with cheap cars from overseas and not be stuck building a dealer network the others can not get rid of.

    ​Hell I China wanted to their MFG could just sell from Sams Club, Best Buys or whom ever they want.

     

    Tesla makes lots of headlines and has made progress but they are still a blip on the radar. They have only sold around 90,000 sedans and and a handful of roadsters. The X model is still late and counting with what has been discribed as many complex systems that will cause them more grief than needed. The doors have been discribes as working with the speed of two arthric stage hands pulling up a curtain and the car will hold challanges even Toyoata would struggle with As for the 3 model it is no where close to being here. They sold themselves as an American car but now appear to be considering thje 3 for production in China even with space still open at their plant in Fremont. Cost I think Elon is finding going to be tougher to keep down than he expected.

     

    Tesla I think will have advanced the EV cause well in the public eye but like many Silicone Valley makes they will have to change or they will vanish like many before.

     

    It has been recomended by Merrill Lynch that they should consider becoming a suplier of EV systems and parts to the other brands and drop the cars. This would be a smart move as even like the Gold Rush of 49 it was the people who supplied the tools and provisions that made money not so much the gold Minners. I even Believe the Fremont name sake was one of them. As long as they build cars no one will buy their systems but as a supplier others who can not make their own would show much interest. Then dealers are not an issue for them.

     

    I am not a Tesla deciple but I do want them to not fail. If they fail they could do a lot of damage to the EV models remaining as many people still do not understand or trust the models. This is a slow grow segment that was the Chicken or the Egg in getting started. Tesla spured the others into investing more as they showed that one could sell a more expensive EV sedan. This helped them invest knowing they could add models at a higher price and not lose their shirt on each one. That is where Tesla contibuted.  But with the potential of a very expensive X model with things that could be issues that did not need to be, Aslo a 3 model that will be every bit as late and possibly from China their future is still very much at risk. Someone like VW can  make a major mistake and survive someone like Tesla makes one mistake like a failed X model with issues and it could damage them beyond what they can survive.

    ​Also note why they struggled to get the X and 3 models going they still need to address the S model updates. They need more than software changes as a redesign should be done soon as the car is aging and more competitors are coming. They could become yesterdays news to those with $100K buring in their pockets.  

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ^ I agree with what you have stated Hyperv6, I also think Tesla should be a powertrain supplier. They could make more money and resolve the whole dealership issue.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    " “We’re an American company that is building cars in the United States that is using over 55 Michigan suppliers — that is spending over $120 million in parts and components from Michigan suppliers to build American-made cars. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to sell in Michigan?” Chen went on to say."

     

    I thought this little line within the reading was pretty awesome.

     

    While they are asking for a level playing field they also realize they're doing this to a company not yet profiting. It screams more "fear" that just wanting a level playing field at this point. Had Tesla been making tons of money and actually stealing sales from the D3 I could see it a little different. but at this point we're talking about a company that's relatively small being banned form one state because they decide to sell their vehicles differently than they do.

     

     

    Hyper, you made very good points. :thumbsup:

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The bottom line is that it's about money.  The dealer laws were established in the early 1900's and are antiquated.  The Tesla model is cheaper, and the NADA is screaming it's not fair.  Perhaps not, but just because something has been so for a long time does not make it rite.  NADA is near the top of all time political donations, and dealers account for about 15 percent of all retail sales in the US.  So Musk has an uphill battle against an established way of doing things.  Not because one way is better than the other.  But because one side is dug in and crying about whats fair.  

    4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The bottom line is that it's about money.  The dealer laws were established in the early 1900's and are antiquated.  The Tesla model is cheaper, and the NADA is screaming it's not fair.  Perhaps not, but just because something has been so for a long time does not make it rite.  NADA is near the top of all time political donations, and dealers account for about 15 percent of all retail sales in the US.  So Musk has an uphill battle against an established way of doing things.  Not because one way is better than the other.  But because one side is dug in and crying about whats fair.  

     

    This.

     

    Super bump.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Jaguar, Land Rover and Mini are pulling out from Detroit too...

     

    (I cant post links with my tablet, but I assure you, it is for realz what Im sayin')

     

    One could have the same assumption of Tesla going down the road of irrelevance along with Mini and quite possible Jaguar by pulling outta Detroit....but when Land Rover is also amongst that list, and Ive also heard rumours that other biggish names also question their presence in Detroit, it leads ME to believe that 'tis the Detroit auto show that is one step in the direction of irrelevance....

     

    And Im sure many others feel the same way about Detroit' auto show and how Detroit may not be as important as it once used to be...so....Im sure Tesla is just fine in skipping Detroit...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    How is it fair to force HOW somebody sells their product? Why is making somebody build a dealer and pay people to sell their product fair?

    You don't force any other industry to go through a "dealer network" so why does a car have to be different?

    3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The dealer franchise system is an antiquated artifact of the past.  The traditional automakers are applying pressure to force out an innovative upstart...nothing new...

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Mr. Tesla's name is being sullied by this blowhard.  He needs to STFU.

     

    You manage to sully Ford in nearly every post you make.

    May I suggest the same.

     

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    How is it fair to force HOW somebody sells their product? Why is making somebody build a dealer and pay people to sell their product fair?

    You don't force any other industry to go through a "dealer network" so why does a car have to be different?

     

     

     

    Perhaps you missed it the first time I typed it, so I will bold font it for you.....

    -3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Mr. Tesla's name is being sullied by this blowhard.  He needs to STFU.

     

    You manage to sully Ford in nearly every post you make.

    May I suggest the same.

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    How is it fair to force HOW somebody sells their product? Why is making somebody build a dealer and pay people to sell their product fair?

    You don't force any other industry to go through a "dealer network" so why does a car have to be different?

     

     

    Perhaps you missed it the first time I typed it, so I will bold font it for you.....

    Maybe you didn't realize the question I asked.. What about that is actually fair? Just because those are the rules doesn't mean they are actually fair. That basically makes it impossible for a new automaker to join the battle.

    IMO, I think they could retain the bull$h! dealer network thing but I think they could allow direct sales for small companies. Maybe put a cap on either sales or revenue/net income/profit that will only allow they to sell so many vehicles before needing to form a dealer network. This will allow a smaller company to start up with waaaay less necessary costs to get their feet under them.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Mr. Tesla's name is being sullied by this blowhard.  He needs to STFU.

     

    You manage to sully Ford in nearly every post you make.

    May I suggest the same.

     

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    How is it fair to force HOW somebody sells their product? Why is making somebody build a dealer and pay people to sell their product fair?

    You don't force any other industry to go through a "dealer network" so why does a car have to be different?

     

     

     

    Perhaps you missed it the first time I typed it, so I will bold font it for you.....

     

    Sir, that is for your benefit, because you are so rabid and you cut and paste too many posts right off the PR machine.  Truth be told, I love all three domestic automakers, but I am not going to cut them slack if they eff up, imo.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    Mr. Tesla's name is being sullied by this blowhard.  He needs to STFU.

     

    You manage to sully Ford in nearly every post you make.

    May I suggest the same.

     

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    How is it fair to force HOW somebody sells their product? Why is making somebody build a dealer and pay people to sell their product fair?

    You don't force any other industry to go through a "dealer network" so why does a car have to be different?

     

     

     

    Perhaps you missed it the first time I typed it, so I will bold font it for you.....

     

    Sir, that is for your benefit, because you are so rabid and you cut and paste too many posts right off the PR machine.  Truth be told, I love all three domestic automakers, but I am not going to cut them slack if they eff up, imo.

     

     

    I can say the same exact thing.

     

    Sir

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    And I hope Tesla flips the establishment on it's old ear. No one company has the right to tell another company how to sell their product. The tactics being used by the old guard are typical of companies that are scared of change. To them I say, suck it up buttercup. Change is coming. You can adapt or get left behind.

    Edited by surreal1272
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Fair game, let them play by the same playground rules. And I am curious how much price increases when dealerships and sales persons are involved.  Who do they think they are, wanting their own set of rules, as they themselves would love nothing more to see than GM and Ford go belly up.

     

    Efff Tesla and Efff Musk.

     

    And btw, in a few years there will be many more BEV and hybrid and PHEV solutions from GM and Ford, and everyone else.

    I will not shed one single tear if Tesla folds in the interim.

    And I hope Tesla flips the establishment on it's old ear. No one company has the right to tell another company how to sell their product. The tactics being used by the old guard are typical of companies that are scared of change. To them I say, suck it up buttercup. Change is coming. You can adapt or get left behind.

     

     

     

    Yeah, thanks, but I don't believe any 'company' is telling any other 'company' how or what to sell.  Not sure where in Hades you got that from.

     

    The 'old guard' companies are simply hedging their bets by selling EVERYTHING and more power to them.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. svz-07
      svz-07
      (37 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Last May, Joshua Brown was killed in a crash when his Tesla Model S in Autopilot collided with a tractor-trailer. After an investigation that took over half of a year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released their findings today. 
      In a report, NHTSA said they didn't find any evidence of defects with the Autopilot system. The agency also stated that they would not ask Tesla to perform a recall on models equipped with Autopilot.
      In a statement, Tesla said "the safety of our customers comes first, and we appreciate the thoroughness of NHTSA’s report and its conclusion."
       
      NHTSA's report revealed that neither Autopilot nor Brown applied the brakes to prevent or lessen the impact of the crash. However, NHTSA cleared the Automatic Emergency Braking system as it's “designed to avoid or mitigate rear end collisions” but that “braking for crossing path collisions, such as that present in the Florida fatal crash, are outside the expected performance capabilities of the system.” 
      Speaking of Brown, NHTSA's report said that he did not any action with steering or anything else to prevent this. The last recorded action in the vehicle was the cruise control being set to 74 mph. NHTSA notes that in their reconstruction of the crash, Brown had seven seconds to from seeing the tractor trailer to the moment of the impact, giving him possible chance to take some sort of action.
      This brings up a very serious concern of how much confidence owners give the Autopilot system. Despite Tesla having statements such as that Autopilot “is an assist feature that requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times," and that "you need to maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle” while using it," various videos showing Model Ss narrowly avoiding crashes have caused people to think that Autopilot was fully autonomous - which it isn't.
      “Although perhaps not as specific as it could be, Tesla has provided information about system limitations in the owner’s manuals, user interface and associated warnings/alerts, as well as a driver monitoring system that is intended to aid the driver in remaining engaged in the driving task at all times. Drivers should read all instructions and warnings provided in owner’s manuals for ADAS (advanced driver assistance systems) technologies and be aware of system limitations,” said NHTSA.
      Tesla, to its credit, has been updating Autopilot to make drivers pay attention when using it. These include increasing the warnings for a driver to intervene when needed, and turning off the system if a driver doesn't respond to repeated requests.
      Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Report in PDF), Tesla

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Last May, Joshua Brown was killed in a crash when his Tesla Model S in Autopilot collided with a tractor-trailer. After an investigation that took over half of a year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released their findings today. 
      In a report, NHTSA said they didn't find any evidence of defects with the Autopilot system. The agency also stated that they would not ask Tesla to perform a recall on models equipped with Autopilot.
      In a statement, Tesla said "the safety of our customers comes first, and we appreciate the thoroughness of NHTSA’s report and its conclusion."
       
      NHTSA's report revealed that neither Autopilot nor Brown applied the brakes to prevent or lessen the impact of the crash. However, NHTSA cleared the Automatic Emergency Braking system as it's “designed to avoid or mitigate rear end collisions” but that “braking for crossing path collisions, such as that present in the Florida fatal crash, are outside the expected performance capabilities of the system.” 
      Speaking of Brown, NHTSA's report said that he did not any action with steering or anything else to prevent this. The last recorded action in the vehicle was the cruise control being set to 74 mph. NHTSA notes that in their reconstruction of the crash, Brown had seven seconds to from seeing the tractor trailer to the moment of the impact, giving him possible chance to take some sort of action.
      This brings up a very serious concern of how much confidence owners give the Autopilot system. Despite Tesla having statements such as that Autopilot “is an assist feature that requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times," and that "you need to maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle” while using it," various videos showing Model Ss narrowly avoiding crashes have caused people to think that Autopilot was fully autonomous - which it isn't.
      “Although perhaps not as specific as it could be, Tesla has provided information about system limitations in the owner’s manuals, user interface and associated warnings/alerts, as well as a driver monitoring system that is intended to aid the driver in remaining engaged in the driving task at all times. Drivers should read all instructions and warnings provided in owner’s manuals for ADAS (advanced driver assistance systems) technologies and be aware of system limitations,” said NHTSA.
      Tesla, to its credit, has been updating Autopilot to make drivers pay attention when using it. These include increasing the warnings for a driver to intervene when needed, and turning off the system if a driver doesn't respond to repeated requests.
      Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Report in PDF), Tesla
    • By William Maley
      Almost a week after the state of Michigan signed into law a series of bills that allow for the testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads, General Motors announced today that it would begin testing them immediately. The plan will see GM beginning to test vehicles on road the company's technical center in Warren, MI. In due course, the testing will move to the metro Detroit area. During a press conference today, CEO Mary Barra said Detroit would be GM's primary test area for snow and cold-weather driving.
      “Revolutionizing transportation for our customers while improving safety on roads is the goal of our autonomous vehicle technology, and today’s announcement gets us one step closer to making this vision a reality. Our autonomous technology will be reliable and safe, as customers have come to expect from any of our vehicles,” said Barra in a statement.
      Along with this, General Motors is assigning the Orion assembly plant to build the next-generation autonomous testing vehicles. They'll be based on the Chevrolet Bolt EV and come equipped with LiDAR, cameras, sensors and other hardware required for full autonomy. The vehicles will be used in Detroit, San Francisco, and Scottsdale, Arizona. Currently, GM has 40 test vehicles operating in San Francisco and Scottsdale.
      Source: General Motors
      Press Release is on Page 2


      GM to Start Autonomous Vehicle Manufacturing and Testing in Michigan

      DETROIT — On the heels of the signing of the SAVE Act legislation to support autonomous vehicle testing and deployment in Michigan, General Motors will immediately begin testing autonomous vehicles on public roads. GM also announced it will produce the next generation of its autonomous test vehicles at its Orion Township assembly plant beginning in early 2017. 
      “Revolutionizing transportation for our customers while improving safety on roads is the goal of our autonomous vehicle technology, and today’s announcement gets us one step closer to making this vision a reality,” said General Motors Chairman and CEO Mary Barra. “Our autonomous technology will be reliable and safe, as customers have come to expect from any of our vehicles.”
      Testing is already underway on GM’s Technical Center campus in Warren, Michigan, and with the passage of the SAVE Act legislation will now expand to public roads on the facility’s outskirts. Within the next few months, testing will expand to metro Detroit, which will become GM’s main location for the development of autonomous technology in winter climates. 
      Workers at the Orion Township assembly plant will build test fleet Bolt EVs equipped with fully autonomous technology. The plant currently manufactures the Chevrolet Bolt EV and Sonic. The new equipment will include LIDAR, cameras, sensors and other hardware designed to ensure system safety, leveraging GM’s proven manufacturing quality standards. 
      The test fleet vehicles will be used by GM engineers for continued testing and validation of GM’s autonomous technology already underway on public roads in San Francisco and Scottsdale, Arizona, as well as part of the Michigan testing fleet.
      Since the beginning of 2016, GM has taken significant steps in its development of autonomous vehicle technology.
      In January, the company announced the formation of a dedicated autonomous vehicle engineering team and a $500 million investment in Lyft to develop an integrated network of on-demand autonomous vehicles in the U.S. In March, the company announced the acquisition of Cruise Automation to provide deep software talent and rapid development expertise to help speed development. 
      In June, GM began testing autonomous Chevrolet Bolt EVs on the public roads in San Francisco and Scottsdale. The company has more than 40 autonomous vehicles testing in the two cities.

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Almost a week after the state of Michigan signed into law a series of bills that allow for the testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads, General Motors announced today that it would begin testing them immediately. The plan will see GM beginning to test vehicles on road the company's technical center in Warren, MI. In due course, the testing will move to the metro Detroit area. During a press conference today, CEO Mary Barra said Detroit would be GM's primary test area for snow and cold-weather driving.
      “Revolutionizing transportation for our customers while improving safety on roads is the goal of our autonomous vehicle technology, and today’s announcement gets us one step closer to making this vision a reality. Our autonomous technology will be reliable and safe, as customers have come to expect from any of our vehicles,” said Barra in a statement.
      Along with this, General Motors is assigning the Orion assembly plant to build the next-generation autonomous testing vehicles. They'll be based on the Chevrolet Bolt EV and come equipped with LiDAR, cameras, sensors and other hardware required for full autonomy. The vehicles will be used in Detroit, San Francisco, and Scottsdale, Arizona. Currently, GM has 40 test vehicles operating in San Francisco and Scottsdale.
      Source: General Motors
      Press Release is on Page 2


      GM to Start Autonomous Vehicle Manufacturing and Testing in Michigan

      DETROIT — On the heels of the signing of the SAVE Act legislation to support autonomous vehicle testing and deployment in Michigan, General Motors will immediately begin testing autonomous vehicles on public roads. GM also announced it will produce the next generation of its autonomous test vehicles at its Orion Township assembly plant beginning in early 2017. 
      “Revolutionizing transportation for our customers while improving safety on roads is the goal of our autonomous vehicle technology, and today’s announcement gets us one step closer to making this vision a reality,” said General Motors Chairman and CEO Mary Barra. “Our autonomous technology will be reliable and safe, as customers have come to expect from any of our vehicles.”
      Testing is already underway on GM’s Technical Center campus in Warren, Michigan, and with the passage of the SAVE Act legislation will now expand to public roads on the facility’s outskirts. Within the next few months, testing will expand to metro Detroit, which will become GM’s main location for the development of autonomous technology in winter climates. 
      Workers at the Orion Township assembly plant will build test fleet Bolt EVs equipped with fully autonomous technology. The plant currently manufactures the Chevrolet Bolt EV and Sonic. The new equipment will include LIDAR, cameras, sensors and other hardware designed to ensure system safety, leveraging GM’s proven manufacturing quality standards. 
      The test fleet vehicles will be used by GM engineers for continued testing and validation of GM’s autonomous technology already underway on public roads in San Francisco and Scottsdale, Arizona, as well as part of the Michigan testing fleet.
      Since the beginning of 2016, GM has taken significant steps in its development of autonomous vehicle technology.
      In January, the company announced the formation of a dedicated autonomous vehicle engineering team and a $500 million investment in Lyft to develop an integrated network of on-demand autonomous vehicles in the U.S. In March, the company announced the acquisition of Cruise Automation to provide deep software talent and rapid development expertise to help speed development. 
      In June, GM began testing autonomous Chevrolet Bolt EVs on the public roads in San Francisco and Scottsdale. The company has more than 40 autonomous vehicles testing in the two cities.
    • By William Maley
      Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed into law today a full suite regulations regarding the testing, use and eventual sale of autonomous vehicles in the state.
      “By establishing guidelines and standards for self-driving vehicles, we’re continuing that tradition of excellence in a way that protects the public’s safety while at the same time allows the mobility industry to grow without overly burdensome regulations,” said Synder in a statement. 
      The new law will allow vehicles without steering wheels or brake pedals to travel on public roads, companies to operate autonomous ride-hailing services, and sell autonomous vehicles of the public once they have been certified and tested. This law also establishes the Michigan Council on Future Mobility. Part of the state's department of transportation, the council will be tasked with developing policies and standards on autonomous vehicles, along with regulating connected vehicle networks and data sharing.
      Michigan's autonomous vehicle legislation has fewer restraints than states such as Nevada, Florida, and California.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Detroit News, Roadshow

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)