Soooo.... The VADA lawyer's position is: Public Opinion should not have a role in determining Public Interest?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Virginia Hearing, 4/25 -- Represent!
- Thread starter bonnie
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Soooo.... The VADA lawyer's position is: Public Opinion should not have a role in determining Public Interest?
chickensevil
Active Member
I wish. There are some really detailed notes being taken by other members who came far more prepared than I. We should get some excellent digents from the others later on. Just trying to give you all a few tidbits here and there during dull moments.
Speaking of tidbits... For whatever it's worth I at least forced then to publically address a rebuttal to my direct statements toward bad car buying experiences at various dealerships and I also called out the Goldman Sachs posting from above.
First off, man, I can't believe what I said made them actually feel forced to bring me up by name again. I don't know if that's cause I had the weaker statements or what, cause everyone was awesome with their comments.
But to the first one, their defense was basically that there are 17M US car sales a year and I am just one voice toward bad dealers out of millions of sales... So you can't take my opinion as a characterisation of the entire industry... Of course there are a few bad eggs. And then made reference to one of the other members who is in finance as their employment and asked rhetorically did the Witness have bad experience after 2008 with finance... Really? That's your defense?
The second call out was directed toward the GS report their second witness, who has apparently had a negative opinion of Tesla for a long time... And the Tesla Lawyer pointed out her biases (good attempt on him) anyway she said that the GS report is basically wrong and I can try to go into details on this later. But also called out the other example used commonly the trial in Brazil by GM to do online sales / direct sales as wrong as well. She spent time punchig holes in both of these... Basically to argue that direct sales won't work at scale.
chickensevil
Active Member
I think his argument is that Tesla organized us to fight for them so if Tesla is going to do that then so will we. Of course that isn't entirely true. We actually knew about the hearing before any emails was sent by Tesla and people were working to see if they could go or if it would be helpful to go. All the email from Will did was to tell us that yes they would love to have us if we can make it. So this argument annoys me to no end.
The reality is that every single one of you has experience buying both from a dealership and direct from a manufacturer (and Hodginator who has experience by EVs by both methods). So in reality, you could say you're testifying on both models. And one is clearly better than the other.
Sad for them that they're having to debase themselves like this...
I think it would be pretty funny to hear "Bingo!...Oh, sorry, he said 'We're not evil' and finished my card."I'd set up 'meeting bingo' cards ahead of time, where when key phrases are said, you can each mark your bingo cards. First one to get bingo (silently, of course) gets a free drink or something.s
Some good candidates:
Little League Team
Part of community
California company
Local jobs
Recall
China
Hodginator
Member
I am still gathering my thoughts after this hearing. I was glad that we were able to testify. Swearing us in was definitely a scare tactic that truly backfired on the VADA. It definitely defines the character of their lawyer to try to intimidate the public at a public hearing.
I will follow-up with other hilights soon, but I wanted to take a moment to wish Mr. Small a quick recovery. Mr. Small fell while going to his car after the hearing and hit is head on the pavement. We quickly called 911 and he was speaking to us when they put him in the ambulance. I wish him all the best and a speedy recovery.
I will follow-up with other hilights soon, but I wanted to take a moment to wish Mr. Small a quick recovery. Mr. Small fell while going to his car after the hearing and hit is head on the pavement. We quickly called 911 and he was speaking to us when they put him in the ambulance. I wish him all the best and a speedy recovery.
If they make good on their little tantrum to bring in friends, family & employees to testify on their behalf, they'd better prep them for 1) being sworn in, and 2) cross-examination. They've set the precedent.
Assuming they can find people to do that. 'You want me to do WHAT? But I work here, they'll eat me up alive! Hell no!'.
Mr. Small is a Tesla owner or?
In any case, speedy recovery!
Mr. Small is our hearing officer. He's the one we're trying to convince the merits of our case and then he presents his findings to the commissioner.
I found both expert witnesses for VADA today to be lacking. The first one was effectively shut down by the Tesla lawyer when he proudly proclaimed that dealerships cannot make money if there isn't sufficient profit margin built the difference between a wholesale price and the retail price. Tesla's position is that the wholesale price and the retail price is the same, therefore no profit could be made. And he stepped right into that. Further, his position that since EVs like the Porsche Panamera E-hybrid and the BMW i8 are currently being sold by profitable auto dealerships, then Tesla's case is not unique. But of course, none of these profitable dealerships sell and service only battery electric cars. PHEVs conceivably can require service of both powertrains. The 2nd expert witness, Maryann Keller said a whole bunch of words but really didn't say anything at all. I'm actually puzzled at trying to figure out a counter since she really did not have any good points. Basically her position is that it selling over the Internet or direct hasn't worked in the past and therefore can't work in the future. That vehicle sales are a complex transaction and can't be delivered by Fedex. She seems to really not understand that many of us ordered our vehicles online and it was delivered by UPS vehicle delivery. She is someone that has made a whole bunch of anti-Tesla and pro-dealer franchise statements in the past. Tesla lawyers tried to paint her as someone that failed at making Internet sales of vehicles at Priceline work and therefore feels that no one can make Internet sales of vehicles work.
Anyways, there is going to be a round 3 of hearings where Ms. Keller is to be cross examined. They have definitely said enough to hang themselves as again, as they really haven't presented any coherent arguments. Many of their arguments go against their purported interest in establishing a Tesla dealership. A lot of their arguments are circular and really work against each other, but I'm not sure that the Tesla legal team is doing enough to demonstrate that which may be a symptom of how cumbersome the process itself ends up being. Multitudes of falsehoods are propagated and we are unable to correct them. Sigh.
I found both expert witnesses for VADA today to be lacking. The first one was effectively shut down by the Tesla lawyer when he proudly proclaimed that dealerships cannot make money if there isn't sufficient profit margin built the difference between a wholesale price and the retail price. Tesla's position is that the wholesale price and the retail price is the same, therefore no profit could be made. And he stepped right into that. Further, his position that since EVs like the Porsche Panamera E-hybrid and the BMW i8 are currently being sold by profitable auto dealerships, then Tesla's case is not unique. But of course, none of these profitable dealerships sell and service only battery electric cars. PHEVs conceivably can require service of both powertrains. The 2nd expert witness, Maryann Keller said a whole bunch of words but really didn't say anything at all. I'm actually puzzled at trying to figure out a counter since she really did not have any good points. Basically her position is that it selling over the Internet or direct hasn't worked in the past and therefore can't work in the future. That vehicle sales are a complex transaction and can't be delivered by Fedex. She seems to really not understand that many of us ordered our vehicles online and it was delivered by UPS vehicle delivery. She is someone that has made a whole bunch of anti-Tesla and pro-dealer franchise statements in the past. Tesla lawyers tried to paint her as someone that failed at making Internet sales of vehicles at Priceline work and therefore feels that no one can make Internet sales of vehicles work.
Anyways, there is going to be a round 3 of hearings where Ms. Keller is to be cross examined. They have definitely said enough to hang themselves as again, as they really haven't presented any coherent arguments. Many of their arguments go against their purported interest in establishing a Tesla dealership. A lot of their arguments are circular and really work against each other, but I'm not sure that the Tesla legal team is doing enough to demonstrate that which may be a symptom of how cumbersome the process itself ends up being. Multitudes of falsehoods are propagated and we are unable to correct them. Sigh.
tinm
2020 Model S LR+ Owner
Did the VADA's witnesses have to get sworn in? I sure hope so.
Congrats to all who participated in this hearing. Really inspiring! We're watching these Virginia proceedings and developments closely here in New Mexico because our fight is coming in a few months. And as someone else already said, it is not really a state-by-state issue. On the dealers side, this is a national/industry issue, very well coordinated at the national (read: NADA) level. As one political operative in New Mexico told me recently, the head of the NM Automotive Dealers Association doesn't sneeze without getting permission from NADA first. And you know this is the way it is nationwide. The dealers are coordinated, they're taking notes, they're watching all of this stuff closely.
What happens in Virginia affects every other state in the long run.
Congrats to all who participated in this hearing. Really inspiring! We're watching these Virginia proceedings and developments closely here in New Mexico because our fight is coming in a few months. And as someone else already said, it is not really a state-by-state issue. On the dealers side, this is a national/industry issue, very well coordinated at the national (read: NADA) level. As one political operative in New Mexico told me recently, the head of the NM Automotive Dealers Association doesn't sneeze without getting permission from NADA first. And you know this is the way it is nationwide. The dealers are coordinated, they're taking notes, they're watching all of this stuff closely.
What happens in Virginia affects every other state in the long run.
Interview with Ms. Keller. NADA-commissioned study defends dealer franchise model | Search Autoparts
One of the commenters is spot on - if the dealership experience is so clearly superior to buying direct, why are they worried about loss of protectionist laws?
One of the commenters is spot on - if the dealership experience is so clearly superior to buying direct, why are they worried about loss of protectionist laws?
Clearly NADA is coordinating - my link above references a study they commissioned.
int32_t
Tesla Spotter
That's a red herring. Who cares if it doesn't work at scale? That's Tesla's problem! Let them try, and if it doesn't work, <shrug>.
Of course it will work, and that is the problem.
chickensevil
Active Member
I suppose the angle is that if Tesla fails then who is going to be there the pick up the pieces. Because one of their arguments continues to be that we need dealers to protect us from companies that go out of business. So when Tesla fails... They want to continue to hold on to a failed business??? Something like that...That's a red herring. Who cares if it doesn't work at scale? That's Tesla's problem! Let them try, and if it doesn't work, <shrug>.
Of course it will work, and that is the problem.
Techmaven said it best, their arguments are a bunch of circular reasoning that falls in on itself and their own comments undermine what they are trying to claim they want to do... The whole thing Is a mess and out of the whole 8 hours or so, we only got about 1 hour for all 5 of us to try and steer certain points forward.
They spend all this time on things that are unrelated to the issue at hand... Sigh.
Posted: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:30 pm
At hearing, auto dealers say they could handle a Tesla franchise
By JOHN REID BLACKWELL Richmond Times-Dispatch
An administrative hearing on whether electric car manufacturer Tesla Motors Inc. should be allowed to open its own automobile dealership in the Richmond area has lasted for 16 hours, and it isn’t over yet.
On the second full day of testimony Monday, the Virginia Automobile Dealers Association presented its case for why Palo Alto, Calif.-based Tesla should be required to do what other auto manufacturers do in selling cars through the traditional network of independent dealers rather than directly to consumers.
During the eight-hour hearing at the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles headquarters in Richmond, three dealership owners in Virginia testified that they want to sell Tesla’s vehicles and think they can make money doing so, despite Tesla’s argument that independent dealers would not make a profit on the company’s battery-powered cars.
“I currently have two pieces of land (in the Richmond area) where I could put a Tesla dealership, but I would be interested anywhere in the state,” said Dave Perno, president of Priority Automotive, which has Toyota, Nissan and Volkswagen franchises in the Richmond area.
Perno described himself as a big fan of Tesla cars, calling them “marvelous” and “neat.” He said he bought Tesla Motors stock several years ago.
“Tesla is going to change the automobile business, because of the engineering itself,” he said.
Perno and the other dealers — Liza Borches, president and CEO of Charlottesville-based Carter Myers Automotive Group, and Gardner Britt, general manager of Ted Britt Ford in Fairfax — said they believe the public interest would be served best if the company used independent dealers.
Six Virginia residents who own Tesla cars also testified Monday in support of allowing the company to open its own store in the Richmond area.
Tesla has high customer satisfaction ratings, and customers do not have to worry about haggling over the price, said Jonathan Fair, a Prince William County resident who bought a Tesla car last year.
“I am sure they (Tesla) have room for improvement, but I am not sure how dealerships can put themselves above the level that Tesla has set,” Fair said.
Tesla, founded by tech industry tycoon Elon Musk, first gained notoriety for its premium-priced electric cars. The company saw a surge in customer orders recently after it announced its more moderately priced Model 3, which has a starting price of $35,000.
Tesla sells its cars online, but the company has run into resistance trying to open retail stores in some states because of laws aimed at keeping the retail side of the business under the control of local owners.
A longstanding Virginia law prohibits automobile manufacturers from owning dealerships in Virginia, unless the DMV commissioner finds that there are no independent dealers in a community that could sell a company’s cars “in a manner consistent with the public interest.”
Tesla opened its only retail store in Virginia in February 2015 near Tysons Corner. The company was able to open that location only after going to court and reaching a legal settlement with the DMV and the dealers association.
The auto dealers group has filed a lawsuit in Fairfax County Circuit Court claiming that Tesla and the DMV have violated a legal settlement in which Tesla agreed to operate only one dealership in the state. The lawsuit seeks to stop Tesla from opening a second store.
Tesla has made it clear that it has no intention of using independent dealers.
On the first day of the DMV hearing on March 31, Tesla’s vice president of business development, Diarmuid O’Connell, testified that he could think of no scenario in which an independent dealer would make a profit on the company’s cars.
At that hearing, Tesla also had two auto industry experts testify that the company’s business model is not compatible with selling its cars through independent dealers.
On Monday, the VADA had two other auto industry analysts testify to rebut that argument.
The analysts also said independent dealers serve an important public interest by providing services to customers in local communities that automobile manufacturers might not provide, such as maintaining and repairing vehicles even when a manufacturer is in financial trouble.
“One benefit of the independently owned dealers is they don’t go out of business just because the manufacturer has,” said one of the analysts, Patrick Anderson, CEO of Anderson Economic Group in Michigan.
The DMV hearing is being held before an appointed hearing officer who will prepare a report on the evidence for DMV Commissioner Richard Holcomb, who then will determine whether to grant Tesla’s request for another store.
After eight hours of testimony on Monday, the hearing was continued. Tesla plans to present other witnesses at the next hearing. A date had not been set for that hearing, but it will likely be in mid-May.
[email protected]
(804) 775-8123
At hearing, auto dealers say they could handle a Tesla franchise
By JOHN REID BLACKWELL Richmond Times-Dispatch
An administrative hearing on whether electric car manufacturer Tesla Motors Inc. should be allowed to open its own automobile dealership in the Richmond area has lasted for 16 hours, and it isn’t over yet.
On the second full day of testimony Monday, the Virginia Automobile Dealers Association presented its case for why Palo Alto, Calif.-based Tesla should be required to do what other auto manufacturers do in selling cars through the traditional network of independent dealers rather than directly to consumers.
During the eight-hour hearing at the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles headquarters in Richmond, three dealership owners in Virginia testified that they want to sell Tesla’s vehicles and think they can make money doing so, despite Tesla’s argument that independent dealers would not make a profit on the company’s battery-powered cars.
“I currently have two pieces of land (in the Richmond area) where I could put a Tesla dealership, but I would be interested anywhere in the state,” said Dave Perno, president of Priority Automotive, which has Toyota, Nissan and Volkswagen franchises in the Richmond area.
Perno described himself as a big fan of Tesla cars, calling them “marvelous” and “neat.” He said he bought Tesla Motors stock several years ago.
“Tesla is going to change the automobile business, because of the engineering itself,” he said.
Perno and the other dealers — Liza Borches, president and CEO of Charlottesville-based Carter Myers Automotive Group, and Gardner Britt, general manager of Ted Britt Ford in Fairfax — said they believe the public interest would be served best if the company used independent dealers.
Six Virginia residents who own Tesla cars also testified Monday in support of allowing the company to open its own store in the Richmond area.
Tesla has high customer satisfaction ratings, and customers do not have to worry about haggling over the price, said Jonathan Fair, a Prince William County resident who bought a Tesla car last year.
“I am sure they (Tesla) have room for improvement, but I am not sure how dealerships can put themselves above the level that Tesla has set,” Fair said.
Tesla, founded by tech industry tycoon Elon Musk, first gained notoriety for its premium-priced electric cars. The company saw a surge in customer orders recently after it announced its more moderately priced Model 3, which has a starting price of $35,000.
Tesla sells its cars online, but the company has run into resistance trying to open retail stores in some states because of laws aimed at keeping the retail side of the business under the control of local owners.
A longstanding Virginia law prohibits automobile manufacturers from owning dealerships in Virginia, unless the DMV commissioner finds that there are no independent dealers in a community that could sell a company’s cars “in a manner consistent with the public interest.”
Tesla opened its only retail store in Virginia in February 2015 near Tysons Corner. The company was able to open that location only after going to court and reaching a legal settlement with the DMV and the dealers association.
The auto dealers group has filed a lawsuit in Fairfax County Circuit Court claiming that Tesla and the DMV have violated a legal settlement in which Tesla agreed to operate only one dealership in the state. The lawsuit seeks to stop Tesla from opening a second store.
Tesla has made it clear that it has no intention of using independent dealers.
On the first day of the DMV hearing on March 31, Tesla’s vice president of business development, Diarmuid O’Connell, testified that he could think of no scenario in which an independent dealer would make a profit on the company’s cars.
At that hearing, Tesla also had two auto industry experts testify that the company’s business model is not compatible with selling its cars through independent dealers.
On Monday, the VADA had two other auto industry analysts testify to rebut that argument.
The analysts also said independent dealers serve an important public interest by providing services to customers in local communities that automobile manufacturers might not provide, such as maintaining and repairing vehicles even when a manufacturer is in financial trouble.
“One benefit of the independently owned dealers is they don’t go out of business just because the manufacturer has,” said one of the analysts, Patrick Anderson, CEO of Anderson Economic Group in Michigan.
The DMV hearing is being held before an appointed hearing officer who will prepare a report on the evidence for DMV Commissioner Richard Holcomb, who then will determine whether to grant Tesla’s request for another store.
After eight hours of testimony on Monday, the hearing was continued. Tesla plans to present other witnesses at the next hearing. A date had not been set for that hearing, but it will likely be in mid-May.
[email protected]
(804) 775-8123
SCW-Greg
Active Member
I haven't read through all 4 pages above, but is it worth mentioning significant consumer surveys that counter the whole car buying experience - including a preference to complete the whole transaction online?
Americans hate car shopping so much they'd rather give up sex and do taxes
Car Buyers Want Better Digital Experience, Most Ready to Complete Entire Process Online, Accenture Study Finds | Accenture Newsroom
Here's a Good Indication of How Much People Hate Car Dealerships
Car Shoppers Want Online Buying From Start to Finish, Survey Says | Edmunds.com
Autotrader has a recent survey out, but it looks like it got subverted by NADA.
Americans hate car shopping so much they'd rather give up sex and do taxes
Car Buyers Want Better Digital Experience, Most Ready to Complete Entire Process Online, Accenture Study Finds | Accenture Newsroom
Here's a Good Indication of How Much People Hate Car Dealerships
Car Shoppers Want Online Buying From Start to Finish, Survey Says | Edmunds.com
Autotrader has a recent survey out, but it looks like it got subverted by NADA.
OregonHill
Member
Tesla commissioned a poll in CT that showed, "75 percent of Connecticut residents want to be able to directly buy vehicles." I wonder if such a poll will be conducted with VA residents before the next hearing date.
Tesla poll says state residents to buy directly
Lanny
Tesla poll says state residents to buy directly
Lanny
Buckster
Member
I also testified and was personally attacked and questioned about the number of cars I've collected over the years, to include the Harley. Their lawyer wanted to know how much maintenance I did on the cars myself to include my '57 Chevy. Then he started to attack my business and that of my own firm. Wanted to know how I did during the 2008 financial crisis before the Tesla attorney finally objected. Their attorney must have 'googled' me because he knew all about the business, my SEC/FNRA registrations, etc. Think they were just trying to discredit us and make it appear that we were the exception and that the masses who have put down reservations for the Model 3 for example would require an "independent dealer" to sell/service their vehicles----what a farce!
Hey @Buckster, Thanks a million for your braveness and willingness to tell your story despite the attempts by the VADA attorney go fishing for ways to discredit your testimony by bringing up things that are totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. You and the others have personally witnessed that the Dealers Associations are playing for keeps. Be proud. I hope to shake your hand one day.
Lanny
Similar threads
