Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can someone explain this part to me?
FTA:"Dealers say the franchise system, in which automakers rely on a network of independent dealers to sell cars, offers an extra layer of accountability for consumers"
It's not just being debated, they snuck the legal language into a bill generally related to off road vehicles and it passed the Senate already. This is crap politics at its finest. It's sickening whether you like Tesla as a business or not because its a clear indication that if a business or group of businesses (I believe its been dealer associations in many of these Tesla cases) wishes to keep a new comer from competition, they can simply pay a politician to write laws to that effect.
It is political scumbaggery. Now that we are in the 21st century, dealers are more pointless than ever and they know it. Because of this they (ADA) must heavily line the pockets of congress and in return their existence is legally protected. This results in injustice to companies such as Tesla who have every right to free enterprise but are denied such.
Can someone explain this part to me?
FTA:"Dealers say the franchise system, in which automakers rely on a network of independent dealers to sell cars, offers an extra layer of accountability for consumers"
Of course it does. When something goes wrong, you get the car to a nearby (usually/hopefully) dealership for service.
Luckily, for a Houstonian, there is a Tesla service center rather close to the showroom at the Galleria mall (seen the showroom, but never darted in), but good luck for most Americans finding convenient service.
Anyway, funny that people are canning on dealers for this when I can remember not long ago that many were saying the auto biz should be bailed out any and all costs to save jobs.
I cannot think off the top of my head of a similar set up whereby a consumer product is effectively sold through a third party, ie franchised car retailers.
I cannot think off the top of my head of a similar set up whereby a consumer product is effectively sold through a third party, ie franchised car retailers.
Conversely, It seems like half the retail field is bought from the manufacturer or distributor and then sold by the retailer...Best Buy or Amazon, Target, etc all buy from the manufacturer and resell the product.
I understand that some companies have factory stores and outlets, but a large portion of what we buy comes from either franchise models or otherwise are resold. Gyms, Restaurants, Pet Supplies Plus, Napa Auto Parts, are all franchised exlusively.
Conversely, It seems like half the retail field is bought from the manufacturer or distributor and then sold by the retailer...Best Buy or Amazon, Target, etc all buy from the manufacturer and resell the product.
I understand that some companies have factory stores and outlets, but a large portion of what we buy comes from either franchise models or otherwise are resold. Gyms, Restaurants, Pet Supplies Plus, Napa Auto Parts, are all franchised exlusively.
For as many companies that move product through a "supplier" or third party, there are more that sell directly. The amount of companies that choose to sell product using a certain means is not in question, the issue is the MANDATE that dealers must exist. Dealers are UNNECESSARY. Laws SHOULD NOT exist to protect them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.