Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    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

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Lobbying costs money. Those palms don't grease themselves.

    The Germans (VW group in particular) now have to push forward on electrics precisely because they no longer have any cred when it scones to diesel.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    They're still behind, and they really have to spend marketing EVs while at the same time cleansing TDI.

     

    And the missions E is the closest thing to a direct a Tesla competitor, but it's going to be a full 7 years late.

     

    Not exactly a vehicle expected to do much.

     

    There are other jurisdictions, such as regimes that the U.S. Federal government constantly pursues action against in the WTO for manipulating currency markets and unfair trade practices...

     

    And yet Tesla has to contend with these same unfair rules at the state level.

     

    Let the chips fall where they may, but I'm not going to hope that a Porsche beats a 7 year old car. It damn well better, especially since there is no indication of whether if it'll actually beat the Model S on price.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Lobbying costs money. Those palms don't grease themselves.

    The Germans (VW group in particular) now have to push forward on electrics precisely because they no longer have any cred when it scones to diesel.

    Who is spending more to lobby though? Tesla to get in or the others that are trying to keep them out though? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Probably Option #2. But who cares? Either way, Tesla's wasting money.

    Once again: I don't have a dog in the fight. I just look at who's doing what and why, and who has the means and motivation to get it done.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Germans? The same pack of losers who cheat on emissions and whose vehicles boast electrical systems that barely last after the three year lease period?

    Ooooooh scary.

    He sounds like a frightened boy here.  Beating him widdle chest.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Probably Option #2. But who cares? Either way, Tesla's wasting money.

    Once again: I don't have a dog in the fight. I just look at who's doing what and why, and who has the means and motivation to get it done.

     

    And so are the D3 in trying to keep a company our of "their state" when they don't even have anything to compete with Tesla. To me, that says they're scared of Tesla. Why else pay millions upon millions to lobby to keep a company out of your state which you don't even compate with. Is somebody buying a Tesla going to turn down an F150 Platinum or Navigator(closest things price-wise to compete with a Model S). I could see GM a little more scared for reason because they have the new CT6 which will be right in the price range of the Model S. But other than that, they don't even compete with eachother so why does GM/Ford/FCA( I don't actually know other than GM because I heard they are "leading the efforts") even care about Tesla?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Competition is competition. You try and elbow all of them out. Doesn't matter if they're good or bad-if they're getting business it means someone else isn't. And that someone could be you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Then maybe they should make something comparable to actually take business from Tesla. As of now.. It seems like pissing money away just for "pride", "home turf", "because they can".  

     

    It isn't "Competition is competition" if you don't have anything that actually is cross shopped a Tesla.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So what you're saying is that people buy Teslas, or nothing?

    Then it becomes a discretionary purchase-people buy it because it's a symbol, not a car. There is a time and place for that with most consumer goods. But when it comes to cars, not so much. Bugatti has only built 450 Veyrons the last decade or so. And Pagani Zondas probably only number in the dozens or low hundreds.

    No-the Tesla needs to sell. And it needs to sell based on its merits as a car-the trendies will only be able to buy so many. See also: Dodge Viper.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Absolutely. Teslas or nothing. You got it.

     

    You can honestly tell me that most drivers of Teslas even thought of a different vehicle instead of their Tesla? That's the kind of car that people either want or don't want it. There is no shopping around. People get in their minds that they want a Tesla and will buy one before even driving one.

     

    Prius is also a status symbol now, It's still selling quite well for the absurd cost for such a small vehicle.

     

    Viper is a terrible example as HAS COMPETITION and it is WORSE than its competition in everything other than strictly performance, interior, ride, overall handling package, manual only. Z06 does all of those better, just one example. Tesla as NO COMPETITION and the closest thing to a direct competitior will be out in another 5 years over at Porche.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    *reads latest C/D*

    *checks out Aaron Roninson's excellent piece on how he fears Tesla has bitten off more than they can chew*

    *remembers the Lutz article*

    ...and for 132 grand you too can have a Tesla SUV with gullwing back doors.

    Money. Wasted.

    Tesla's in trouble. Discretionary purchases can't float a carmaker.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I just don't pull stuff outta my cornhole (too often). Robinson in particular laid it out pretty clearly: he's rooting for Tesla to succeed, but he's been around the business long enough to see the stumblingblocks that can take you down. And he's seen the Model X and some of the engineering rabbit holes they've fallen down. Also, he brought up Department of Energy loans, but we've done that one to death in here :D

    I won't even touch what Pete DeLorenzo has to say about Tesla. Suffice to say it ain't too positive.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As long as they continue to win praise from multiple automotive publications, it's pretty uniformed to say they lack great product.

     

    And they're selling more vehicles than they can even produce. The backlog is immense.

     

    They have no issue with sales or winning industry accolades. And they already paid their DOE loans, so whoever is saying they didn't is a liar.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

    How is it prolonging the issue when they have paid it back? Isn't that the goal when one gets a loan?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I just don't pull stuff outta my cornhole (too often). Robinson in particular laid it out pretty clearly: he's rooting for Tesla to succeed, but he's been around the business long enough to see the stumblingblocks that can take you down. And he's seen the Model X and some of the engineering rabbit holes they've fallen down. Also, he brought up Department of Energy loans, but we've done that one to death in here :D

    I won't even touch what Pete DeLorenzo has to say about Tesla. Suffice to say it ain't too positive.

    Given that DeLorenzo has no love for EV tech in general, anything he says will have a slant to it and certainly has to be taken with a grain of salt.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How loans with zero balance prolonging anything?

     

    Lutz is a great product guy, but his greatness ends there in the automotive manufacturing world, and he has been extremely wrong on the subject of hybrids and EVs.   

     

    Are there issues at Telsa?  Yes, but none that are insurmountable.  Tesla also has an interesting side bar in the energy business with PowerWall.  I think there is the potential for even more money than car building with PowerWall

     

    Personally, I think Tesla is simply aiming to be bought up by another manufacturer ones their stock price normalizes.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

     

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

     

    But you're only presenting one side of the argument. 

     

    Did you actually do the due diligence to check counter-arguments?

     

    I mean, I don't myself have the utmost time at this present moment. Pretty intense work and school stuff.

     

    But it goes also with the issue of popular sources. There's inherent biases present.

     

    Atleast by looking at their financials, and doing all the ratio analysis - you'd get to core measures of performance that can be tracjed and compared over time.

     

    Do all that, then tell us what is more telling. If you can't, then you're not presenting the whole picture. This is kind of like a controversy...multiple sides, multiple viewpoints, different issues.

     

    Yeah, let's have someone make an academic paper of sorts looking at Tesla's future. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How loans with zero balance prolonging anything?

     

    Lutz is a great product guy, but his greatness ends there in the automotive manufacturing world, and he has been extremely wrong on the subject of hybrids and EVs.   

     

    Are there issues at Telsa?  Yes, but none that are insurmountable.  Tesla also has an interesting side bar in the energy business with PowerWall.  I think there is the potential for even more money than car building with PowerWall

     

    Personally, I think Tesla is simply aiming to be bought up by another manufacturer ones their stock price normalizes.

    This. Mostly.

    Lutz had his issues ("let's bring this foreign jobbie over here! It'll sell GREAT!"). It's why I also look for other perspectives on this kinda thing. The adman and journo also have misgivings.

    Logically, it would make the most sense for Tesla to be sold when the time is right, or maybe one of those "strategic partnership" things. But I don't think Elon is gonna roll that way.

    The loans? Ok, ok, I see where y'all coming from.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well....I got but one small link...Road and Track online.

     

    http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/news/a27567/two-thirds-of-early-tesla-model-s/

     

    It really does not say much....just a couple of sentences that counter EL K's thought process, albeit with no further proof of why they feel this way...but it is a counter thought process...

     

    From the link:

    "By all accounts, Tesla has been a major success. It's sold nearly 100,000 units of its Model S sedan, has a Model X SUV ​on the way, and despite overblown reports that it loses money on every car sold, it shows no signs of going bankrupt any time soon. In the world of automotive startups, no other company has come close to that kind of success."

     

     

    Keep in mind that the link is addressing  the first early production Model S'...

    And Im sure the writers that wrote this took into consideration the amount of money it will take to repair these issues, and how Tesla does not hold anything back with their customers and Tesla actually gives them loaners...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tesla "loses money on every car sold" because they are bringing production online for 3 vehicles plus the battery factory plus all of their R&D at the same time.  That is a HUGE amount of initial investment.  The legacy manufacturers hide those huge investments in gigantic volumes.... imagine if GM had to bring up 3 car lines simultaneously while only selling the Suburban (44k ytd).  Even at the Suburban's fantastic margins, they'd lose money on every car also. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

    I dunno man. I've cited one of the greatest auto execs, an experienced journo, and an adman who's been in the biz a billion years. They all see issues from the various perspectives they are looking at.

    And the DoE loans are just prolonging the issue.

    But you're only presenting one side of the argument.

    Did you actually do the due diligence to check counter-arguments?

    I mean, I don't myself have the utmost time at this present moment. Pretty intense work and school stuff.

    But it goes also with the issue of popular sources. There's inherent biases present.

    Atleast by looking at their financials, and doing all the ratio analysis - you'd get to core measures of performance that can be tracjed and compared over time.

    Do all that, then tell us what is more telling. If you can't, then you're not presenting the whole picture. This is kind of like a controversy...multiple sides, multiple viewpoints, different issues.

    Yeah, let's have someone make an academic paper of sorts looking at Tesla's future.

    This car is kinda weird in the sense that you have to read the proverbial tea leaves with the collected opinions of both car people and tech people. And I admit that I'm firmly on the car side of that ledger in my biases.

    But this means that I have the longer history of info to draw on when I put forth my opinions. The car biz has existed in its present form since 1907 and the Ford assembly line. The tech biz as we perceive it has only existed since, what, the 4004 processor in the mid-70s?

    This means that the tech biz is now roughly where the car biz was in the 50s. And that means it's ambitious, powerful, arrogant, and about to butt heads with governments over what government's think it should be like. Also, they think the money will never run out and folks will always buy the latest and greatest. And none of that is necessarily bad.

    But the reality is the reality here. The old boys are learning the tricks. And they already have the car-buying down pat, for the most part. It makes me chuckle when Fapper disses Cadillac over CUE yet folks will let body panel gaps and down-rent interiors slide in the Model S (and make no mistake, those issues exist).

    As for research papers and stuff... there can be biased integrated into research. I remember a scandal involving East Anglia a few years ago that lit up the MT forums pretty good...

    Edited by El Kabong
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tech industry?

     

    No I was squarely talking about financial analysis. And Tesla is an automaker. Use information from the other defunct electric car makers.

     

    Many of which they started around the same time the ICE powered carmakers did.

     

    Again please proceed with a valid financial assessment, look at receivables, all kinds of ratios, analyze their stock price and stuff.

     

    Check who's the ownership - Is Mush a shareholder with considerable influence? Like really based on available shares and what the company constitues a majority/influential shareholder?

     

    C'mon don't just rely on people that have opinion that is not grounded on anything more that superficial facts.

     

    Go do the entire analysis. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You mean compare a 1909 Studebaker to a 1909 Model T? Well, why not include a Stanley so you have steam power included as well? :o

    I don't think you can compare those examples to today, regardless of whether the propulsion methods are the same or not.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well then I'll just say your argument is based off of selective and insufficient evidence. 

     

    You can't just pick and choose like this. Because you said yourself, you have no horse.

     

    By default you have to present the whole picture. If you're not willing to do it, you're not going anywhere with your ahem "analysis/discussion of the evidence presented"

     

    Yeah, let's make a poll. All in favour - Ye or Ne. I'd make a poll, but anyone who has participated in this topic can vote thorough a post. Majority rules. Do we have a satisfactory quorum?

     

    Should EL K write an academic paper about this topic?   :CG_all:

     

    I vote YE

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A pundit is a guy too lazy to do hard research.

    I barely had enough motivation to do research when I HAD to do research. Now I just read what people write, get a handle on the people, and let 'er rip. There's a bit of IQ involved... But research is at a minimum.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A pundit is a guy too lazy to do hard research.

    I barely had enough motivation to do research when I HAD to do research. Now I just read what people write, get a handle on the people, and let 'er rip. There's a bit of IQ involved... But research is at a minimum.

     

    Then you have capitulated your....analysis because it's incomplete.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is no capitulation of anything. I have stated my opinion, based on what I've seen and read. I'm quite comfortable standing beside my opinion, based on what I've seen and read. If I was the guy actually making the decisions at Tesla I'd give it a more thorough going-over, but even from where I stand I coulda told Musk that gullwing doors on an SUV was a moronic idea. Even Lambo will use conventional doors on the Urus.

    Wasted. Money.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    Then you have capitulated your....analysis because it's incomplete.

     

    Im sorry guys...Im still on this Star Wars thing...

    And yes Suave...I heard Darth's voice when I read your post...

    tumblr_mgsmvlgyb01qm8o2po3_250.gif

     

     

    Its very hard for me to get off of it...until I see Episode 7 I guess...

     

    Continue on with this analysis paper...and I vote Ye...so, stop being lazy...use the force if you have to. :D

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is no capitulation of anything. I have stated my opinion, based on what I've seen and read. I'm quite comfortable standing beside my opinion, based on what I've seen and read. If I was the guy actually making the decisions at Tesla I'd give it a more thorough going-over, but even from where I stand I coulda told Musk that gullwing doors on an SUV was a moronic idea. Even Lambo will use conventional doors on the Urus.

    Wasted. Money.

     

    And I am not saying it's invalid to think that it was waste. Heck even I think it was too much bravado and not enough common sense - it probably delayed the X too much.

     

    But again, not sufficient. 

     

    But what does Gull-wing doors have to do with lobbying to sell vehicles in a state where the nearest competitors (they are selling cars after all) oppose to their sales model.

     

    Insufficient, not invalid, remember?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    Then you have capitulated your....analysis because it's incomplete.

     

    Im sorry guys...Im still on this Star Wars thing...

    And yes Suave...I heard Darth's voice when I read your post...

    tumblr_mgsmvlgyb01qm8o2po3_250.gif

     

     

    Its very hard for me to get off of it...until I see Episode 7 I guess...

     

    Continue on with this analysis paper...and I vote Ye...so, stop being lazy...use the force if you have to. :D

     

     

     

     

     

    Then you have capitulated your....analysis because it's incomplete.

     

    Im sorry guys...Im still on this Star Wars thing...

    And yes Suave...I heard Darth's voice when I read your post...

    tumblr_mgsmvlgyb01qm8o2po3_250.gif

     

     

    Its very hard for me to get off of it...until I see Episode 7 I guess...

     

    Continue on with this analysis paper...and I vote Ye...so, stop being lazy...use the force if you have to. :D

     

     

    I'm perfectly fine with people thinking I'm the evil empire in this kind of context - after all, I laugh like Charles Heston...

     

    Goes without saying, is Tesla the Rebels?!!! Huh?! And the rest of industry the Empire?!

     

    Oh my gawd such intense analysis and such.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah, the gull wings were dumb.

    And based on what I've seen they admitted as much after the fact.

    That's the thing though: you've got rookies building cars with limited funds. Mistakes will be costly, but rookies will inevitably make mistakes.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Rookies who've probably gotten gull-wing doors into lowest price point for a vehicle.

     

    Think about it. In terms of real dollars, this is the cheapest SUV to get gullwing doors.

     

    It's certainly advancement in design and engineering.

     

    Probably not cost-effective solutions for the customer, but again, why should GM be afraid of an automaker that you think is making mistakes?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "This is the cheapest SUV to get gullwing doors" is not exactly a ringing endorsement. It's like the product planners all sat around and said "let's show the old guard how it's DONE!" Which is precisely the problem when you get down to it.

    GM shouldn't fear Tesla. I strongly suspect they don't. But they definitely want their customers.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If the Model X comes equipped like the Escalade or whatever the Germans/British have at that level then it's a start. But I'm guessing it'll still lack range and the ability for backseat customers to get out in a crowded parking lot.

    And let's not mince words: it looks hella weird.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Problem is though....the customers that want a Tesla, Model X included, these guys, they want nothing that GM offers...including Cadillac V Series cars and Corvettes and 'Slades...even the new CT6...hybrid

    Meaning...GM may want Tesla's customers, Tesla's potential customers dont want GM...

     

    PS: The Model X most certainly is hella weird, but...its a TESLA...and THAT is what counts...

     

    Tesla has made itslef a name...GM wishes it had that name and that mojo me thinks...

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    GM wants the customers. So does everyone else. It's nothing personal on anyone's part, or at least I don't perceive any of that in what I read and see. Lutz and Robinson both like Elon, or at least the concept of what he's doing (DeLorenzo hates everybody just on principle).

    And hey, a little mojo has taken Tesla a long way. I said that several pages ago. They've done a lot better than DeLorean or Tucker or Bricklin. But they're losing focus with the lobbying and product planning, and they're walking a fine line.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Oh...I know GM wants Tesla's customers...(and eveybody else for that matter, like you said), but GM is also lobbying...on the same issues as Tesla is lobbying...but on the other side of the issue as what Tesla is lobbying...

    That kind of game is dirty...its business, I understand....its still dirty.

     

    I heard a rumor that Ford, Chryco and GM had something to do with Tucker's demise....is GM trying to repeat history?

     

    Losing focus Tesla is?

     

    I wasnt aware of that....if gullwing doors on the Model X is one of these lack of focus dilemmas, it may not be so bad...because Tesla also has acknowledged a need in the market place for electric SUVs...hence the Model X to begin with....OK....gullwing doors may be a gimmick....everybody sells cars on gimmicks...

     

    Mercedes Benz has LCD screens all over the place now and calls that luxury.

    BMW is toying with Nintendo Wii ideologies with hand gestures in the air to change a radio station instead of just using a damned knob...

    Ford has ecoboost...

    I may not have anything on GM as gimmicky as I type this as Im drawing a blank for GM, which may be a good thing for GM if GM is producing and selling cars without the use of gimmicks, but it seems to me, like Delorenzo always rants about....it really should be about the product... 

    Therefore...if GM truly is producing cars without gimmicks, then they will not have a problem selling cars in the near future and GM will soon have mojo of their own. So....there is no need for GM to be wanting Tesla's customers, in due time, they will have customers breaking down the doors for their products...

     

    About those gullwing doors...why such a fuss over them?

    And in my opinion, it has worked as many people are talking about them, for or against...

    Its not as if this hasnt been done before...M-B, DMC, and to a certain degree (scissor doors)...Lambo. Nothing new or shocking.

    Have those kinds of doors failed in the market place? Maybe for DMC...certainly not for M-B.

     

    Remember, some sort of blingy gimmick is necessary...M-B is going all LCD screens for their interiors...its funny how we havent made pages and pages of denouncing M-Bs funny ideas...and in my honest opinion, Tesla has as much hoonage as M-B does.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Gullwing doors are expensive and impractical. That's why Benz got rid of them on the latest AMG coupe. The money saved by using conventional doors could have been better used elsewhere.

    The general consensus is that Tucker ran out of money. A rear-mounted flat-six helicopter engine was an interesting idea, but only the Germans made that kind of configuration work. Kinda.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I kinda see the AMG coupe with no gullwings as an attempt to NOT confuse that car with the M-B's own SLS...and to NOT be seen as trying too hard to compete with Porsche in copying the shock and awe approach of Lambo...(sincere thought process)

     

     

     

    Yes its complex...maybe Tesla wants to be seen with this as an engineering feat that they have mastered...

    OK OK...my argument is falling apart here...not that Im trying to win it or anything...just shooting the shyte with you...(not so snicere thought process...like I said...just shooting the shyte)

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well if that's the case then all automakers ought to be hounded for lobbying at all for the entirety of their history.

     

    Because lobbying has nothing to do with building cars after all. 

     

    Especially lobbying to fight CAFE...

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well if that's the case then all automakers ought to be hounded for lobbying at all for the entirety of their history.

     

    Because lobbying has nothing to do with building cars after all. 

     

    Especially lobbying to fight CAFE...

    To add to that, their lobbying would not be so expensive if the others weren't trying so hard to keep them out.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Double standards.

     

    They don't work as solid footing for an incomplete argument. Especially why you allow others to make an informed conclusion and yet they refuse.

     

    For reasons as to which are held dearly close, because they're not rational.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Yeah, it doesn't seem super space efficient.
    • So three major problems with this car, one, terrible Jellybean external shape, not impressed at all with the style. Second is the buttonless dash having everything via a touch screen and rotary knob, terrible safety issue as your eyes will be off the road more than on trying to find the right option in the right menu. Third is the center pack clearly cuts into valuable leg space based on their own picture. This is a hard pass.
    • Great Masculine shape, really digging the style they did here.
    • First seen at the Shanghai Auto Show (see article: Polestar 4 - The New Breed of Electric SUV Coupe), Polestar brought the Polestar 4 to the New York International Auto Show for North Americans to see in person. Polestar calls the Polestar 4 an "electric SUV 4-door coupe". Outside of that marketing speak, the Polestar 4 is a slightly lifted four-door hatchback about 190 inches in length, or roughly 2 inches shorter than a Toyota Camry.  Built without rear glass, the Polestar 4 makes use of a rear camera for visibility astern. Polestar 4 features a plethora of standard content, including 20-inch 5 V-spoke black diamond cut alloy wheels, panoramic glass roof, adaptive cruise control, 360 parking camera with 3D view, energy saving heat pump, front-illuminated Polestar logo, e-latch doors, power-operated tailgate with soft close, Polestar digital key, wireless phone charging, and 8-way electrical driver seat and 6-way electrical passenger seat. The fastest production car the brand has ever developed to date, Polestar 4 can accomplish a 0-60 mph sprint in 3.7 seconds and in top spec can produce 544 horsepower. Long-range single-motor variants have 272 horsepower and a targeted EPA range of over 300 miles. All long range variants have a 102 kWh battery capable of 200 kW charging on a DC Fast Charger and 11 kW on home level-2 charging. Google built-in is ... built in and includes Google Assistant, Google Maps and Google Play. Polestar continues to offer a leading connected in-car experience. As with all other Polestar cars, regular over-the-air updates allow for new features and improvements to be sent remotely to all vehicles. Pricing starts at $54,900, with orders opening in April for deliveries in the latter half of this year.   View full article
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings