Tesla sales banned in West Virginia - Senate president has an auto-dealer.

[GoodBytes]

Conflict of interest much on that decision?

Tesla cannot sale its cars without a dealership in West Virginia.

As the senate president signed a law that blocks them operating with direct sales. It must be noted the senate president has and operates his own auto dealership.

Today, West Virginia joined that group, when Governor Ray Tomblin signed into law a bill that prevents manufacturers from operating their own dealerships.

Similar laws have passed recently in New Jersey and Michigan. The ban in New Jersey was subsequently overturned. That was a big deal for Tesla, as the Garden State is one of the largest markets for the expensive cars it sells. West Virginia is a much smaller market, but it would have given Tesla access to customers in surrounding areas like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, and Washington D.C.

Tesla's direct sales are currently banned in five states and under attack in court in another six. May other states are rolling out proposed bills. It's worth pointing out that West Virginia Senate President Bill Cole is apparently a long time auto dealer. He abstained from voting on this measure. Cole owns a Nissan dealership, and has some experience with Tesla customers.

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/3/8340433/west-virginia-ban-block-tesla-sales

[79wjd]

Hasn't this already happened in California? (and soon to happen in NJ?)

 

I thought Tesla was already fighting against several states to allow them to sell their own cars (not through a dealership).

[Victorious Secret]

Right, auto dealers exist to protect consumer interest and all that crap... 

 

Sigh. 

[Carde]

Abuse of power and anti consumer.

 

How typical for a politician.

[GoodBytes]

Right, auto dealers exist to protect consumer interest and all that crap... 

 

Sigh.

The only reason why dealership exists is that auto makers didn't want to manage the sale part of their cars. They wanted to focus on making the car rather than managing sales and so on.

I think the only way for Tesla to be be done with this crap, is that GM or Ford offers the same thing, and a growing number of manufacture offers direct sales. Personally, I don't get why they don't do this already. Yes it is a new department, but they could keep it apart from the company, and not part of all the red tape and bureaucracy of the company. They increase profits this way as the dealership profits goes to them. And instead of locking their cars diagnostic system to computers that only dealership have, they can sale it at a high price for mechanics, and make more money that way. They can even add a subscription model to it, for support of new cars as they come out.

[Guest Kloaked]

Right, auto dealers exist to protect consumer interest and all that crap... 

 

Sigh. 

 

"Here at <dealership> we will lie straight to your face about your credit score so we can lowball you on a payment plan. Oh, and we'll try to sell you the most piece of shit car that we can make the most money off of! Now that sounds like a good deal!"

[kpreg]

Here's what I think: This isn't necessarily the government's wrong. The dealer ships are the man in the middle for your car purchase. The dealer buys from the manufacture and sells to you. Laws are in place to protect the dealerships, and for whatever reason tesla is just kinda bypassing that stage. Say Chevy sells a car to a dealer ship for 20k. The dealership (to make a profit) sells it for 23k. Tesla wants to keep the 3k and sell it stright up for 23k The laws are completly consumer friendly. Think of it like this: you take your tesla for a 200 mi. drive to your mother's house. Your tesla breaks down 100 mi away in a town with nothing but a few houses and a dealership. Instead of just driving your car into the dealership, getting it all fixed and being in your way, tesla will FLY A MECHANIC to your location and repair your car on the spot. That means several days delay and downtime. So no, these laws aren't anti consumer, they favor us more than you think. I love tesla to death but this is the one thing about them that I kind of cringe at.

Edit: apperently its too late,

Abuse of power and anti consumer.

How typical for a politician.

Edit 2- Sorry about the original tone, just edited. I was ineffectively communicating my original point and for those who read it I apologize. Edited April 3, 2015 by kpreg

[beebskadoo]

Another blatant example of how our political system is one giant corporation regardless of party lines. Get money out of politics and this would be solved.

[GoodBytes]

While I agree with your view, it must be noted that it is the consumer that should decide. I see no consumers going and asking the government for help. This is companies (dealership) that controls the government. This is like retail stores uniting and saying to the government that from now on, you should have 0 warranty on products, AND unable to exchange or return a product, because it hurts retailers and manufactures.

If the consumer sees it beneficial to purchase a similar car at at the same or similar price but get the service, than GREAT!

Should Dell, Lenovo, HP, and so on be blocked from selling their computers directly to the consumer, because it could hurt retailers? Right now, you have both, and while i have no data to support the following claim, I think it is obvious that for most consumers, it is done on retail level. (business are direct with business as they do mass orders that retailers can't possibly handle)

[Lord Sparklebottom]

(take this with a grain of salt, this a 15 year old speaking) But it feels like they are trying keep sure that the dealerships don't lose any money with the rising demand for Teslas.

If the people want to get the car the way that they want to, please just let them.

[Guest]

It's always me. Fuck you Tomblin, sick of your constant shit. 

[Speedyv]

Okay, before the flood of ill-informed tesla shitposts appear, I'm going to set one thing straight: This isn't necessarily the government's wrong. The dealer ships are the man in the middle for your car purchase. The dealer buys from the manufacture and sells to you. Laws are in place to protect the dealerships, and for whatever reason tesla is just kinda bypassing that stage. Say Chevy sells a car to a dealer ship for 20k. The dealership (to make a profit) sells it for 23k. Tesla wants to keep the 3k and sell it stright up for 23k The laws are completly consumer friendly. Think of it like this: you take your tesla for a 200 mi. drive to your mother's house. Your tesla breaks down 100 mi away in a town with nothing but a few houses and a dealership. Instead of just driving your car into the dealership, getting it all fixed and being in your way, tesla will FLY A MECHANIC to your location and repair your car on the spot. That means several days delay and downtime. So no, these laws aren't anti consumer, they favor us more than you think. I love tesla to death but this is the one thing about them that I kind of cringe at.

Edit: apperently its too late,

 

Please. The stealerships don't fix your car up in a jiffy. 

And who is to decide what is more beneficial for the consumer? I believe the consumer has the final say in that. 

How is not being allowed to sell a product to a consumer that wants a product not anti-consumer exactly?

 

You are looking at this in an one-dimensional point of view.

Have you thought of Tesla's implications on fuel sales? 

And you mentioned it yourself. The dealers just need to make money.

 

And this is coming from a person that has no interest in Teslas.

[xtroria]

West virginia, where you can buy and carry firearms easily but selling an electric car is prohibited

[KirbyTech]

West virginia, where you can buy and carry firearms easily but selling an electric car is prohibited

Well firearms are in the constitution maybe that's why? Still dumb selling an electric car is prohibited. I know where I live it is worse for the environment to run an electric car (coal and nulcar power plants).

[Gabriel]

This is so fucked up. He should be locked in jail for doing that. 

[mr moose]

Okay, before the flood of ill-informed tesla shitposts appear, I'm going to set one thing straight: This isn't necessarily the government's wrong. The dealer ships are the man in the middle for your car purchase. The dealer buys from the manufacture and sells to you. Laws are in place to protect the dealerships, and for whatever reason tesla is just kinda bypassing that stage. Say Chevy sells a car to a dealer ship for 20k. The dealership (to make a profit) sells it for 23k. Tesla wants to keep the 3k and sell it stright up for 23k The laws are completly consumer friendly. Think of it like this: you take your tesla for a 200 mi. drive to your mother's house. Your tesla breaks down 100 mi away in a town with nothing but a few houses and a dealership. Instead of just driving your car into the dealership, getting it all fixed and being in your way, tesla will FLY A MECHANIC to your location and repair your car on the spot. That means several days delay and downtime. So no, these laws aren't anti consumer, they favor us more than you think. I love tesla to death but this is the one thing about them that I kind of cringe at.

Edit: apperently its too late,

 

It's kind of Ironic that you label other posts as ill-informed in an ill-informed post.

[kpreg]

Please. The stealerships don't fix your car up in a jiffy.

And who is to decide what is more beneficial for the consumer? I believe the consumer has the final say in that.

How is not being allowed to sell a product to a consumer that wants a product not anti-consumer exactly?

You are looking at this in an one-dimensional point of view.

Have you thought of Tesla's implications on fuel sales?

And you mentioned it yourself. The dealers just need to make money.

And this is coming from a person that has no interest in Teslas.

Sorry for lack of clarity in my origional, but my point was that tesla seems to want to keep the dealers profits, which would result in loss of dealership jobs. My OP sounds a bit condecending now that I've reread to and I'll be editing shortly, sorry about the tone

It's kind of Ironic that you label other posts as ill-informed in an ill-informed post.

Would you mind elaborating? And I'm sorry about the tone of my OP and I'll be editing shortly, I was just trying to get my point across.

[lufihengr]

Sorry for lack of clarity in my origional, but my point was that tesla seems to want to keep the dealers profits, which would result in loss of dealership jobs. My OP sounds a bit condecending now that I've reread to and I'll be editing shortly, sorry about the tone

Would you mind elaborating? And I'm sorry about the tone of my OP and I'll be editing shortly, I was just trying to get my point across.

By making their own dealership, they are making more jobs no?

[kpreg]

By making their own dealership, they are making more jobs no?

Tesla won't have dealerships. They'll have small mall-sized stores were you can learn about tesla. They don't keep any inventory on those sites (or anywhere else for the matter) source(tesla) http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/tesla-approach-distributing-and-servicing-cars 

 

From the OP:

 

Conflict of interest much on that decision?Tesla cannot sale its cars without a dealership in West Virginia.As the senate president signed a law that blocks them operating with direct sales. It must be noted the senate president has and operates his own auto dealership.

[Zah]

To be fair, he did abstain from the measure.

[Zah]

Hasn't this already happened in California? (and soon to happen in NJ?)

 

I thought Tesla was already fighting against several states to allow them to sell their own cars (not through a dealership).

It happened in NJ because a law forbid direct sales of cars.  The senate then voted to allow no-emission vehicles to be sold directly to consumers this year.

[mr moose]

Sorry for lack of clarity in my origional, but my point was that tesla seems to want to keep the dealers profits, which would result in loss of dealership jobs. My OP sounds a bit condecending now that I've reread to and I'll be editing shortly, sorry about the tone

Would you mind elaborating? And I'm sorry about the tone of my OP and I'll be editing shortly, I was just trying to get my point across.

 

well your reasoning for having a dealer seems to rest on three points:

 

1.  that independent dealers are entitled to their profit.  The problem with this is that like all other business they are only entitled if they provide a service that consumers want to pay for. In this case the consumer isn't given the choice.

 

2.  That dealers provide a service better than the manufacturer can, except that there will be no difference between going to a factory owned dealership and a privately owned one. except maybe that the product will be cheaper for the consumer if there is no middle man and the dealership was factory owned.

 

3.  that factories shouldn't be allowed to sell direct to the public and take the profits,  If that's the case then we had better stop HP, Dell, Acer, Sony, Bose etc etc because they all sell direct from their website, they don't even have a shop presence.  

 

 

There is no evidence that a factory owned dealership (or outlet for any product) will be of a lower standard or quality when compared to an independent retail outlet.

[ivan134]

well your reasoning for having a dealer seems to rest on three points:

 

1.  that independent dealers are entitled to their profit.  The problem with this is that like all other business they are only entitled if they provide a service that consumers want to pay for. In this case the consumer isn't given the choice.

 

2.  That dealers provide a service better than the manufacturer can, except that there will be no difference between going to a factory owned dealership and a privately owned one. except maybe that the product will be cheaper for the consumer if there is no middle man and the dealership was factory owned.

 

3.  that factories shouldn't be allowed to sell direct to the public and take the profits,  If that's the case then we had better stop HP, Dell, Acer, Sony, Bose etc etc because they all sell direct from their website, they don't even have a shop presence.  

 

 

There is no evidence that a factory owned dealership (or outlet for any product) will be of a lower standard or quality when compared to an independent retail outlet.

Welcome to 'Murica where nonsensical arguments, devoid of any shred of logic somehow make their way into becoming law. I am yet to hear a sound argument for why Tesla needs to sell through delearships.

[Zah]

Welcome to 'Murica where nonsensical arguments, devoid of any shred of logic somehow make their way into becoming law. I am yet to hear a sound argument for why Tesla needs to sell through delearships.

Also, it probably has roots in older decades where things were more of an issue, and don't apply here in the modern times.  Unfortunately, change happens slowly.

[Yog]

Click bait much? Seriously, the whole tone of the post and the article is "EVIL POLITICIAN VOTES FOR OWN GAIN!!!!" But the guy didn't even vote. He abstained from voting because he felt it was a conflict of interest. I swear, this is why I pay no attention to politics anymore, because half of it is bickering over meaningless things and the other half is absolute utter lies.