Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
William Maley

Industry News: Tesla Gets Sued By Dealer Associations In Two States

Recommended Posts

William Maley

Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

October 22, 2012

Earlier this month, we reported that four states; Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and Oregon were complaining about Tesla and their stores.

"Tesla's factory-owned stores present unfair competition for rival dealerships, are inconvenient for consumers needing repairs and, if left unchallenged, ultimately threaten the franchise system," said a report in Automotive News.

Tesla didn't see a problem with their stores.

"We do what we're capable of doing, and we do whatever they let us do. It's unique for each location. If we can't be a dealer in a mall, we won't do reservations on-site. We tell people where to go on our Web site to make a reservation. We just want to locate in high-traffic locations and interact with people when they are specifically not thinking of buying a car. We have no motivation to change the laws or how the car industry does its business," said George Blankenship, Tesla's vice president of sales.

Now, two states have filed suits against Tesla. According to Automotive News, New York and Massachusetts' dealer associations have filled lawsuits against Tesla. Massachusetts dealer association is asking the court to shut down Tesla's store in Boston. New York's dealer assocation has filled suit against Tesla and the New York Department of Motor Vehicles, stating that the two "violated state franchise law by seeking, in Tesla's case, and granting, in the department's case, a dealership license for a Tesla store in Westchester, N.Y."

"The big question for a lot of the states is do they have the kind of statute that addresses the issue of who's allowed to be licensed to sell cars for their particular state.Tesla is a good poster child because they're setting up all over the place," said Mark Schienberg, president of the Greater New York Automobile Dealers Association.

Tesla still stands behind their defense of saying their stores are just a place to look at the vehicle. If you want to purchase a Tesla, you can do that on their website.

"They claim they're operating under the guise of a nonsales showroom, and we call that out as an outright scam," said Robert O'Koniewski, executive vice president of the Massachusetts dealer association.

Earlier this afternoon, Tesla CEO Elon Musk posted a piece on the Tesla Motors blog defending their retail strategy.

"Automotive franchise laws were put in place decades ago to prevent a manufacturer from unfairly opening stores in direct competition with an existing franchise dealer that had already invested time, money and effort to open and promote their business. That would, of course, be wrong, but Tesla does not have this issue. We have granted no franchises anywhere in the world that will be harmed by us opening stores.

Regrettably, two lawsuits have nonetheless been filed against Tesla that we believe are starkly contrary to the spirit and the letter of the law. This is supported by the nature of the plaintiffs, where one is a Fisker dealer and the other is an auto group that has repeatedly demanded that it be granted a Tesla franchise. They will have considerable difficulty explaining to the court why Tesla opening a store in Boston is somehow contrary to the best interests of fair commerce or the public.

It is further worth noting that these franchise laws do not even exist in the rest of the world, where almost three quarters of premium sedan sales take place."

Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), Tesla Motors Blog

William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see these as legal challanges by the estabilshed core who are afraid of the change this will bring.

Some like myself love going to a dealership and test driving before I decide if I want to buy. Others love the web and will buy with no consideration to the drive. They look at auto's as an appliance and as such look to have a very different buying experiance.

In time, these franchises are going to have to change yet for the time being we will see these stupid lawsuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with paying MSRP if everyone else is paying MSRP too. It keeps residuals up.

The fact Apple never slashes prices and only sells desirable goods means that I'm able to enjoy a product that retails for 50% more at the same cost over the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..if left unchallenged, ultimately threaten the franchise system," said a report in Automotive News.

GOOD!!!

Tesla didn't see a problem with their stores.

Nor do I.

+1 of total agreement. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree - the dealer franchise system is hardly something to avidly protect. Let it be challenged so it will adapt. The consumer wins.

Share this post


Link to post
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.
Reply to this topic...

×   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.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Social Stream

  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      Back in 2017, the NHTSA released a report on the safety of Tesla's Autopilot system after the fatal crash of a Tesla owner in 2016. That report claimed that the use of Autopilot, or more precisely the lane-keeping function called Autosteer, reduced crash rates by 40%. 
      In that original crash, the owner repeatedly ignored warnings to resume manual control of the vehicle.  Critics questioned whether Autopilot was encouraging drivers to pay less attention to the road.  The NHTSA report appeared to put those concerns to rest.
      Later, when a second driver died in an Autopilot related accident, Tesla CEO Elon Musk pointed to the NHTSA study and the 40% increase in safety claim. Now, 2 years after the original report. According to a report by Arstechnica, a third party has analyzed the data and found the 40% claim to be bogus.
      Originally the NHTSA data on Autopilot crashes was not publically available when Quality Control Systems, a research and consulting firm, requested it under a Freedom of Information Act request. The NHTSA claimed the data from Tesla was confidential and would cause the company harm if released.  QCS sued the NHTSA and in September of last year, a federal judge granted the FOI request.
      What QCS found was that missing data and poor math caused the NHTSA report to be grossly inaccurate.  The period in question covered vehicle both before and after Autopilot was installed, however, a significant number of the vehicles in the data set provided by Telsa have large gaps between the last recorded mileage before Autopilot was installed and the first recorded mileage after installation.  The result is a gray area where it is unknown if Autopilot was active or not.  In spite of this deficiency, the NHTSA used the data anyway.
      In the data provided only 5,714 vehicles have no gap between the pre and post Autopilot mileage readings.  When QCS ran calculations again, they found that crashes per mile actually increased 59% after Autopilot was installed.
      Does that mean that a Tesla using Autopilot makes a crash 59% more likely?  The answer to that is no for a number of reasons.  First is that the sample size QCS had to work with is a very small percentage of Tesla’s total sales.  Secondly, the data is only representative of vehicles with version 1 of Tesla’s Autopilot, a version that Tesla hasn’t sold since 2016.
      Tesla stopped quoting the NHTSA report around May of 2018, possibly realizing something was fishy with the data. They have since taken to their own report stating that cars with Autopilot engaged have fewer accidents per mile than cars without it engaged.  This has some statistical fishiness to it as well.  Autopilot is only meant to be engaged on the highway and due to the higher rate of speed all vehicles have a lower rate of accidents per mile.
      We may just have to wait until more data is available to find out if Tesla Autopilot and systems similar to it make crashed that much less likely.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Back in 2017, the NHTSA released a report on the safety of Tesla's Autopilot system after the fatal crash of a Tesla owner in 2016. That report claimed that the use of Autopilot, or more precisely the lane-keeping function called Autosteer, reduced crash rates by 40%. 
      In that original crash, the owner repeatedly ignored warnings to resume manual control of the vehicle.  Critics questioned whether Autopilot was encouraging drivers to pay less attention to the road.  The NHTSA report appeared to put those concerns to rest.
      Later, when a second driver died in an Autopilot related accident, Tesla CEO Elon Musk pointed to the NHTSA study and the 40% increase in safety claim. Now, 2 years after the original report. According to a report by Arstechnica, a third party has analyzed the data and found the 40% claim to be bogus.
      Originally the NHTSA data on Autopilot crashes was not publically available when Quality Control Systems, a research and consulting firm, requested it under a Freedom of Information Act request. The NHTSA claimed the data from Tesla was confidential and would cause the company harm if released.  QCS sued the NHTSA and in September of last year, a federal judge granted the FOI request.
      What QCS found was that missing data and poor math caused the NHTSA report to be grossly inaccurate.  The period in question covered vehicle both before and after Autopilot was installed, however, a significant number of the vehicles in the data set provided by Telsa have large gaps between the last recorded mileage before Autopilot was installed and the first recorded mileage after installation.  The result is a gray area where it is unknown if Autopilot was active or not.  In spite of this deficiency, the NHTSA used the data anyway.
      In the data provided only 5,714 vehicles have no gap between the pre and post Autopilot mileage readings.  When QCS ran calculations again, they found that crashes per mile actually increased 59% after Autopilot was installed.
      Does that mean that a Tesla using Autopilot makes a crash 59% more likely?  The answer to that is no for a number of reasons.  First is that the sample size QCS had to work with is a very small percentage of Tesla’s total sales.  Secondly, the data is only representative of vehicles with version 1 of Tesla’s Autopilot, a version that Tesla hasn’t sold since 2016.
      Tesla stopped quoting the NHTSA report around May of 2018, possibly realizing something was fishy with the data. They have since taken to their own report stating that cars with Autopilot engaged have fewer accidents per mile than cars without it engaged.  This has some statistical fishiness to it as well.  Autopilot is only meant to be engaged on the highway and due to the higher rate of speed all vehicles have a lower rate of accidents per mile.
      We may just have to wait until more data is available to find out if Tesla Autopilot and systems similar to it make crashed that much less likely.
    • By William Maley
      Tesla isn't done with price cuts it seems. Bloomberg reports that the automaker has dropped the price of all Model 3 models by $1,100 - bringing the base price to $42,900. The reason cited by Tesla was the end of a customer referral program that ended up costing them more than they realize.
      The program gave new owners six months of free supercharging if they were referred by a friend. Those who referred a number of people got rewarded with various prizes such as getting the next-generation Tesla Roadster.
      This is the second price cut for Model 3 this year. Last month, Tesla instituted a $2,000 price cut on their lineup to soften the blow of the Federal Tax Credit being cut from $7,000 to $3,750.
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Tesla isn't done with price cuts it seems. Bloomberg reports that the automaker has dropped the price of all Model 3 models by $1,100 - bringing the base price to $42,900. The reason cited by Tesla was the end of a customer referral program that ended up costing them more than they realize.
      The program gave new owners six months of free supercharging if they were referred by a friend. Those who referred a number of people got rewarded with various prizes such as getting the next-generation Tesla Roadster.
      This is the second price cut for Model 3 this year. Last month, Tesla instituted a $2,000 price cut on their lineup to soften the blow of the Federal Tax Credit being cut from $7,000 to $3,750.
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Before January comes to a close, Tesla has announced some more changes for the Model S and X. Instead of using 100D and P100D to designate models, Tesla will be using the naming system found on the Model 3. This is how it will break down.
      100D = Extended Range P100D = Performance P100D with Ludicrous Mode = Performance with Ludicrous Mode There will also be base models known as the Model S and Model X. They'll get the same 100 kW battery as in the extended range models, but range will be locked to 310 Miles (Model S) and 270 miles (Model X). You can pony up $8,000 to gain the extra range (335 for the Model S, 295 for the Model X).
      Earlier in the month, Tesla dropped the 75D and made the 100D the new base model (which in turn raised the base price by $15,000 or more).
      Source: Tesla
      Hat tip to @dfelt for tipping us to this story

      View full article
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×