
Elon Musk: To the People of New Jersey - zipop
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/people-new-jersey
======
grellas
Paternalistic meddling with free consumer choices is always fraught with
peril.

Sometimes it is necessary to protect important principles in society. You
can't discriminate based on race - that limits choice but who would support
the contrary? You can't defraud people in selling products - ditto. You can't
buy land to build a smokestack plant in a quiet residential neighborhood -
ditto. Many other examples might be cited. In all such cases, the law
intervenes to limit private choices. And there are few who would not applaud
most such limits. Private choice is not the end all and be all of a society.

Yet, in a free society, private choice should be the overwhelming norm and it
should require surmounting very large barriers before legal meddling can limit
the choices people can make to serve their own best interests.

Unfortunately, in old-line industries, this idea got flipped and, for years,
private choice succumbed to whatever a combination of big government, big
corporations, and big unions dictated to the public. Back in the day, writers
such as John Kenneth Galbraith even used to celebrate the idea of a "new
industrial state" in which the old private competition would yield to ever
increasing concentrations of power among government, industry, and labor, who
would in turn find ways to "cooperate" with one another in ushering in a more
enlightened form of carving up markets and their benefits than mere freedom
and competition might provide.

Well, the bureaucratic edict in New Jersey is a relic of that old thinking,
perhaps perversely and cynically applied to buy off lobbyists and influencers
but rationalized nonetheless by the old paternalistic thinking that the
consumer is ultimately best served by having his betters making his buying
choices for him rather than being allowed to make them for himself.

Other than in this cynical sense, there is no possible way in which this
outrage can possibly be characterized as "protecting" the consumer.

Perhaps the main contribution made by the tech revolution since the 1970s is
that it ushered in an era of huge freedom in how people managed their private
lives. The internet in particular has been a huge liberating force and so
young people especially have come to take it for granted that they can freely
make all sorts of choices without having to feel burdened or restricted by the
heavy hand of the law. Of course, exceptions can and do remain because abuses
can pop up in all sorts of ways without any legal restraints. But, that said,
the _overwhelming presumption_ today is that, yes, I can do pretty much what I
feel is best for me unless there is a very good reason why I should be
restricted from doing so.

And that means, if I live in New Jersey, I should be able to find a local
Tesla outlet in which I can buy my electric car if I want. The thought that
some politician or bureaucrat should be able to dictate serious limits on that
choice is repugnant to anyone who thinks that way. And, in my view, rightly
so.

Unfortunately, where the old political pull persists, the law can be abused to
protect old-line market players under some guise or other that is a mere
pretext for guarding them from competitors who might offer something better
and wind up dislodging them in a free market. Legal regulation is not to be
rejected out of hand, of course. Maybe the old-line taxi services ought not to
have their business cherry-picked by new market entrants who do things
differently. Maybe there ought to be some limits in an urban context on
absolute free space-letting if this creates nuisances or the like. The line
can sometimes be tricky to draw and can require careful and fair-minded
judgments given the interests at stake. But how often do we have situations
where nothing of the kind happens and instead the issues are decided, in
essence, by who pays off whom and who has what degree of political or
bureaucratic pull that can be used to protect systems and structures that are
far inferior to what the new competition might offer.

I believe that, in these sorts of cases, the tech impetus will ultimately
prevail and push things toward broader and freer areas of choice for
consumers. Even with this rear-guard action in New Jersey, Teslas can be
bought direct from the manufacturer just a short distance away or via remote
ordering. And tech-inspired sales and distribution methods in this and a broad
swath of other fields will mean that those seeking to limit consumer choice by
protecting local turf through bureaucratic pull will be fighting what will
ultimately prove to be a losing battle. As consumers, we are not bottled up
anymore. If we don't like something that is really stupid, we can more and
more work around it using other solutions.

And so we can, I think, basically see that what the local commission is trying
to do in New Jersey is much more a last gasp for the old ways as opposed to
being a harbinger that will limit Tesla (or any similar new-wave competitor)
from accomplishing its goals. Tesla is right to oppose and fight it (and
presents a compelling argument for its view). But the action stands out as so
bizarre precisely because it is so out of step with the tech impetus that
rules our day. It will stand legally (courts are loathe to intervene in such
matters). But the longer-term political winds are against it, in my view, and
it will prove a temporary obstacle at most as the modern tech impetus
advances.

~~~
mathattack
New Jersey has a lot of these strange laws. They also force you to have full
service at the gas station. The lobbies force the issue.

~~~
vampirechicken
The last time I was in NJ, the full-service gas there was the same price as
the self-serve in suburban NY. Maybe that's changed, but given the hug number
of commuters in NJ, I conclude it likely that holy hell would have been raised
of full-serve was significantly more expensive.

~~~
oh_sigh
States impose different taxes on their gas. Presumably if NJ allowed self-
pump, those prices would be slightly lower.

However, in the grand scheme of things, the eliminating the payroll costs from
the gas price in NJ would barely have any impact.

At a normal gas station which is neither busy nor desolate, an attendant may
be able to serve, let's say, 30 cars an hour. If they each get $20 worth of
gas, and the total cost of the employee per hour is $20, then the prices would
go down only a fraction of a percent if he was eliminated.

~~~
andymcsherry
$20 / ($20 * 30) = 3.3%

~~~
oh_sigh
Woops! I downgraded my estimates and never updated my text :(

------
skore
> _An even bigger conflict of interest with auto dealers is that they make
> most of their profit from service, but electric cars require much less
> service than gasoline cars. There are no oil, spark plug or fuel filter
> changes, no tune-ups and no smog checks needed for an electric car. Also,
> all Tesla Model S vehicles are capable of over-the-air updates to upgrade
> the software, just like your phone or computer, so no visit to the service
> center is required for that either._

Gotta hand it to Musk - that's some smooth salestalk in what is supposed to be
just voicing a public opinion against shady politics. I was halfway through
the third sentence when I caught myself thinking - "indeed, that does sound
like such a better dea--- Hey wait a minute!". Musk, you sneaky bastard! Never
missing a chance to remind me why I want a dang tesla.

He is right _and_ it's a terrific salespitch. That's the best kind of right.

~~~
stcredzero
_An even bigger conflict of interest with auto dealers is that they make most
of their profit from service_

I am old enough to remember what owning a car was like when things were
changing away from mechanical devices one could understand and tinker with and
becoming nondescript hunks of plastic you had to buy from a manufacturer. (I'm
talking about the ignition system, as one specific example.) There was always
a bit of a sinking feeling for me along with a sense that the world was being
dumbed down and manipulated for profit. As programmers and technical people,
we should be able to see many parallels!

That said, dumbing down the world in some ways is not necessarily a bad thing
and can be exceedingly positive. One might miss the twisty, dusty country road
in leisure time, but curse it when it's raining and the road has turned into
an impassable morass. Reliable, boring, convenient transportation is great
sometimes, like when you're driving someone going into labor to the hospital.

Maintenance free electric cars that drive themselves will be one of those
positive simplifying things.

~~~
mikestew
Yeah, I remember those times, too; perhaps less nostalgically than you do.
Take your ignition system example. Sure, one could dig in there and replace
and adjust the points. But you did it because you had to, you had to do it
regularly, and it would be adjusted correctly exactly once: after you did the
job. From there, the points immediately started wearing and it would not be
exactly right until you did it again. Solid-state ignition, please.

Synchronizing three Weber carbs? Oh, yeah, good times. Good times that
involved poisonous mercury to boot. Port fuel injection, please.

Don't get me wrong, there was a time I liked working on cars, too. So much so,
I was a professional ASE-certified mechanic for a while. I also like my Scion
xB that in 70K miles we've done nothing to except insert gas, change the oil,
and put a set of tires on it. I don't miss _having_ to slap new points and
plugs in it before a weekend trip.

And for the Tesla tie-in, our Leaf is about as much of an appliance as you're
going to get in a car. There's something to be said about a car whose
maintenance schedule doesn't fill a page.

> Reliable, boring, convenient transportation is great sometimes, like when
> you're driving someone going into labor to the hospital.

Or great even for something as simple as getting to work in the morning. I've
owned my share of Triumphs and Fiats. I enjoy my dumbed down existence that
doesn't involve a late-night session under the hood because I have to be at
work the next day.

I mean, I see your point. But if most folks are like the cranky, older version
of me now, if they wanted finicky transportation that needs constant
maintenance they'd buy a horse.

~~~
FD3SA
I heartily believe there's a market for both. Compare a Macbook Pro with a
custom built Linux desktop. The MBP is very user friendly, plug n play, and
has very little customization capacity. The custom Linux desktop is an
absolute tinkerer's paradise, with everything from hardware to software being
open for customization.

The car equivalent of these used to exist for daily drivers, but are now
relegated mainly to closed course competition vehicles (much to my delight).
The Radical SR is probably my favorite one, consisting of a modular vehicle
that can be built from a kit shipped in boxes of parts [1].

There is extreme pleasure to be had from driving both a Tesla, and a Radical
SR. But both have very different uses, and very different performance and
maintenance criteria.

For those interested:

[http://www.radicalsportscars.com/uk/](http://www.radicalsportscars.com/uk/)

~~~
jasonlingx
> Compare a Macbook Pro with a custom built Linux desktop. The MBP is very
> user friendly, plug n play, and has very little customization capacity. The
> custom Linux desktop is an absolute tinkerer's paradise, with everything
> from hardware to software being open for customization.

It's not fair to say Macs are less customizable or less of a tinkerer's
paradise just because they are more user friendly.

~~~
nileshtrivedi
I think it's fair to say that. In my opinion, Linux wins on kernel
configuration options alone. Would you like a tickless kernel? Soft real-time?
Hard real-time? A different scheduler, may be?

~~~
fleitz
It's pretty easy to boot Linux on a Mac.

------
nlh
His best line:

> _The rationale given for the regulation change that requires auto companies
> to sell through dealers is that it ensures 'consumer protection'. If you
> believe this, Gov. Christie has a bridge closure he wants to sell you!
> Unless they are referring to the mafia version of 'protection', this is
> obviously untrue._

Nicely done, Elon. Nicely done.

~~~
xal
Could you explain the reference please?

~~~
mullingitover
Gov. Christie's office ordered the most heavily trafficked bridge in the
country (if not the world) closed for political revenge. He is desperately
trying to throw his staff under the bus to avoid accountability for this. It's
a very delicate subject for him right now, and Musk bringing it up is cruel
and yet at the same time (imho) totally fair play.

~~~
abvdasker
To be fair, 2/3 toll lanes were closed, not the whole bridge.

------
bfe
Just last week, Elon argued against a different legal monopoly, for national
security launch services by the Boeing-Lockheed joint venture. [1]

It's amazing how much building a new company in a supposedly free market
requires arguing against politicians who claim to champion free market
economics, but who actually use government to give cushy monopolies to
incumbents with big lobbying budgets.

"Crony capitalism" isn't an accurate term for this; it's more like economic
central planning by way of lobbyists instead of communist bureaus.

1\. [http://www.spacex.com/press/2014/03/05/elon-musks-
statement-...](http://www.spacex.com/press/2014/03/05/elon-musks-statement-us-
senate-appropriations-subcommittee-defense)

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/musk-makes-
washingt...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/musk-makes-washington-
push-for-military-launch-market.html)

~~~
Jgrubb
Why isn't Crony Capitalism an accurate term for this? Seems like exactly the
term to me.

~~~
bfe
Because it's all crony, no capitalism.

~~~
stcredzero
_it 's all crony, no capitalism_

crony capitalism == crony "capitalism"

Americans are just lousy with punctuation.

------
mncolinlee
Having bought a Nissan LEAF, I can say with confidence that traditional auto
dealers are where electric vehicles go unsold. Numerous members of our
electric auto owners group share the same exact stories.

You go to the dealer specifically asking for an electric car and the salesman
tries to make you change your mind to another vehicle. Considering the bonus
structure at most dealerships, there is no incentive to sell an electric
vehicle.

First, the dealership may choose not to participate in selling electric models
at all.

Second, there is usually only one or two people allowed to sell an electric
vehicle because your salesperson was not trained. Who wants to lose a customer
and a bonus to another salesman?

Third, it takes longer to sell an electric vehicle because you have to explain
everything that gas car owners already take for granted. You make less money
by spending more time. This also leads most salesmen to push for 10% over
MSRP, harming sales.

Finally, some very corrupt dealers go so far as to deliberately discharge
their vehicles and leave them that way so they won't have to try selling them.
Dealers have little incentive to sell the entire lineup of manufacturer
vehicles if they have to train and hire more sales staff for one model. Some
dealership owners may even may be politically opposed to the idea of electric
vehicles.

~~~
MartinCron
It's amazing to think that even with all of this horrible experience at Nissan
dealers, the Leaf is still selling so well. Imagine how strong it would be if
they had real retail support.

~~~
mncolinlee
Actually, the worst stories came from Ford and GM dealers. Among Nissan
dealers, it was more likely they either chose not to participate, told you to
come back later for the right salesperson, and/or charged 10% over MSRP and
refused to offer the base model.

------
mrt0mat0
It blows my mind that in a country that preaches a free-market economy, the
government is preventing a company from selling a superior product. I'm pretty
sure people will still buy the car if they want to, and in time, those car
companies will go under anyway, but why slow down progress?

~~~
cylinder
Remember that the US is not pro-business, it's corporatist. It's a government
that is able to be easily captured by incumbent, monied interests. Starting
businesses and operating them on a small level is much easier in other
developed nations.

~~~
bfe
Acting in favor of individual businesses is usually orthogonal or antithetical
to acting in favor of the free market.

Big businesses and the politicians who love them often rely heavily on erasing
the perception of that difference.

~~~
mncolinlee
It depends whether you're describing "the free market" religion or "the free
market" reality.

In practice, most politicians mean an economy tilted in favor of multinational
corporations when they use these dog whistle terms. It is an offense to
everything Adam Smith stood for, but it's what they really mean by "free
market." The real Adam Smith believed modern-style multinational corporations
were a recipe for corruption.

"The directors of such [joint-stock] companies, however, being the managers
rather of other people’s money than of their own, it cannot well be expected,
that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the
partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own....
Negligence and profusion, therefore, must always prevail, more or less, in the
management of the affairs of such a company."

~~~
stcredzero
_dog whistle terms_

That's a great phrase. I look on in trepidation at the almost mechanical way
folks in their teens and 20's react to memes. I find parallels in the way
programmers parrot half-truths and untruths. And of course, there's the joke
that passes for political discourse on TV.

Really, we 1st world people aren't that much more sophisticated than 19th
century Russian peasants chanting "Constantine and constitution" thinking
"constitution" was Constantine's wife.

------
smacktoward
_> The evidence is clear: when has an American startup auto company ever
succeeded by selling through auto dealers? The last successful American car
company was Chrysler, which was founded almost a century ago, and even they
went bankrupt a few years ago, along with General Motors. Since the founding
of Chrysler, there have been dozens of failures, Tucker and DeLorean being
simply the most well-known. In recent years, electric car startups, such as
Fisker, Coda, and many others, attempted to use auto dealers and all failed._

This part works better as an argument for "don't start a car company" than
anything else.

I mean, yes, Tucker and DeLorean and Fisker _et al_ used dealers, and they all
failed, but that doesn't mean that they failed _because_ they used dealers.
The people who worked for them all consumed oxygen, too; it doesn't follow
that we'd all be driving DeLoreans today if only we lived in an artificial
vacuum.

I appreciate where he's coming from, and I think he should be allowed to sell
his cars directly to anyone who wants to buy one that way, but shoddy
"correlation equals causation" arguments don't help his case.

~~~
oddevan
You make a valid point. In Musk's defense, I can't think of __any __car
manufacturers that have used direct sales on this scale, so while the
correlation does not prove causation here, it doesn 't disprove it either. He
seems to simply be stating that this aspect of their business model (direct
sales) is a key part of Tesla's business and one that he believes is essential
to its survival.

~~~
gutnor
Just wondering though, what is preventing them to sell a franchise of Tesla
and just provide the seller the appropriate incentive - like keep a fraction
of the sales. I suppose they still have the right to put some restriction to
the franchisee like they do in the food industry ( like you will not see a
McDonald selling KFC )

~~~
thenonsequitur
What's preventing them? If they did that, they'd have to give up a fraction of
their sales. Also, it's not easy to set or agree on a commission percent when
Tesla and the dealerships have such opposing interests to begin with.

In other words, they are not trying this simply because selling direct is a
better choice.

------
jusben1369
Musk is massively disingenuous and rather insulting to our intelligence. But
he's a heck of a salesman and makes a wonderful car. Like many persuasive
people he arrives at an answer and backs into rationale but makes it appear
the other way around.

I'll give you just _one_ example. The law of the land in NJ is that you can't
sell in NJ unless through a dealership. That's the current law. Those laws
need to change to allow a direct to consumer sale. Map that to this quote
"ended your right to purchase vehicles at a manufacturer store within the
state." Brilliant. "You lost something you had" is so much more powerful than
"We need to persuade the legislator to make a change to add something new"

Seriously, I dig his cars. And his vision. And I suspect that to attack such
large entrenched markets you have to have this kind of maniacal drive. I just
hate being misled and manipulated - no matter who the person.

~~~
larrys
"Musk is massively disingenuous and rather insulting to our intelligence. But
he's a heck of a salesman "

Agree. And makes you wonder a bit about the marketing materials surrounding
these cars, huh?

He's trying to make as if he's acting in the best interest of the people of
the state of NJ. When it is very clear that his motivation is his own
interests and selling his car. And making more money for himself. Most
businesses don't make it that obvious.

Another word I will use is immature. His argument sounds like a spoiled kid
who doesn't get what he wants and is going to call out the teacher at school
hoping to berate them into just caving in. [1] Real life doesn't work that
way. Not to mention the fact that there simply aren't enough people in NJ [2]
that care about buying a Tesla to protest and make change on this.

[1] "Hey great argument no I don't mind if you insulted me because you are
right!".

[2] Guess what? In Pennsylvania there are many more people that don't want to
buy liquor at state stores (which they have to) and that hasn't changed yet.

~~~
skore
> _When it is very clear that his motivation is his own interests and selling
> his car. And making more money for himself. Most businesses don 't make it
> that obvious._

You cannot possibly be saying that with a straight face.

Pretty sure Musk has the high road rather solidly booked all to himself when
it comes to his credibility concerning trying to change things for the better
when you compare him to any other auto corp.

------
rayiner
> The rationale given for the regulation change that requires auto companies
> to sell through dealers is that it ensures “consumer protection”. If you
> believe this, Gov. Christie has a bridge closure he wants to sell you!

One of the things I love about Elon Musk, besides the fact that he has the
balls to tackle hard, capital-intensive problems, is that he has a pragmatic,
realist approach. Getting SpaceX NASA contracts was not something everyone
would have done, not when many were marching to the drumbeat of "private space
exploration is superior to public." And apparently, he's not being above
throwing a recent scandal in Chris Christie's face.

The whole article is a great play though. Note that he starts by explaining
the rationale for the existing laws, validating their original purpose, then
showing why that rationale doesn't apply to Tesla. This is wonderful
persuasive writing.

------
bane
The truth is, car dealerships, which are mostly locally owned, are a way for a
state to boost revenue capture and generate jobs. In New Jersey, not being
able to pump your own gas is the same deal.

Look at the economics of a Tesla dealership, for every car sold in New Jersey,
how much of that money stays in New Jersey? And let's be honest, being a car
salesman is not the most lucrative or respectable of trades. The jobs are
usually temporary so down on their luck folks can try and earn some money
while looking for something else. Ensuring a state has dealerships possibly
out of work people can fall into for temporary jobs is like having a social
welfare program without having it on the books.

It sucks, but if you were a legislator in NJ, would you rather Tesla's profit
went all out of state to Tesla, or if your citizens could get a crack at some
of it and have it circulate around in the local economy for a bit.

It's unpopular, and us tech folks don't like it, but from a NJ legislator's
position it's pretty rational.

The correct answer of course is to foster a local auto industry and get a
company to make and build and sell cars from out of NJ elsewhere. But that's
too impossibly forward looking.

~~~
hrjet
> The truth is, car dealerships, which are mostly locally owned, are a way for
> a state to boost revenue capture and generate jobs. In New Jersey, not being
> able to pump your own gas is the same deal.

That can be said to be true about everything. Why allow online software sales,
or Amazon purchases? Force them to have local BNM shops.

~~~
Crito
Or hell, computers. Why is Apple allowed to have Apple stores in New Jersey,
but Tesla is not allowed to have Tesla stores?

------
Edmond
I hope people don't forget the profit motive of Mr Musk. It seems technology
entrepreneurs have adopted the rhetoric of "just trying to make the world a
better place" while conveniently ignoring their own profit making motives. I
am no friend of car dealers but I am also not going to be suckered by a self-
serving sales pitch.

While I don't necessarily support the NJ move, I think we should start asking
questions about economic value flow. If people live in one place yet all their
economic activity is directed to some place on the other side of the country,
what is the long term effect of this on their local economy?

I don't exclude myself, we all use these web services that are highly
concentrated in SV, what is going to happen to our local economies?

~~~
kenrikm
Elon made enough off PayPal to never have to work.. ever again . Instead he
put all of his money into Electric cars, solar power and rockets with a huge
chance that he would loose it all (and almost did). I don't think that profit
is his motivating factor.

~~~
TheMagicHorsey
I seriously don't understand people that get mad when someone makes a profit.
Like are those people expecting to work and earn nothing? When you risk your
capital, should you not get a return? And when you risk it on something crazy
like electric cars, shouldn't the profits be even that much larger, to
compensate you for the out of proportion risk?

~~~
Edmond
No one's getting mad about profit making, the point being made is that when
profit-making is the motive, it is disingenuous to position your argument as
being about something else (such as pretending to be advocating for good
government).

~~~
TheMagicHorsey
But its not about profit-making purely. Because if it was, there are easier
ways to make a profit ... like the way these crony motherfuckers do it with
their dealerships.

------
ZeGoggles
"The rationale given for the regulation change that requires auto companies to
sell through dealers is that it ensures “consumer protection”. If you believe
this, Gov. Christie has a bridge closure he wants to sell you! Unless they are
referring to the mafia version of “protection”, this is obviously untrue."

This is weird. Really weird. It's raw and exaggerated...almost a cartoon. I'd
believe this is raw Elon Musk, but _why_ is someone letting raw Elon Musk
define this campaign? Remember raw Bill Gates? Did we learn nothing from that?
Or maybe we learned a lot. And "we" have developed an affinity--a need--for
the brash genius.

I'm probabilistically wrong--Tesla's doing well. But something about this
appeal, the wording, makes me react atavistically, "Go fuck yourself. Nothing
is obvious."

I had an argument here, but it didn't seem important, so whatever. Dogecoin
and such. Also hyperloop. But really, hyperloop. But remember, I was right
about New Jersey. Poor New Jersey.

------
caycep
Throwing it down publicly to Chris Christie - now that is confidence!

~~~
300bps
Chris Christie all but had the Republican presidential nomination sewn up
before the bridge closure scandal.

Between that and this nonsense, his reputation as a "non-politician" has been
tremendously tarnished.

~~~
stcredzero
Given that everyone in the US, starting at least a level below State Governor,
is basically required to play political hardball just to survive, why does
anyone in the US believe anyone's "non-politician" or "non-insider" political
marketing?

Even Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi knew how these things worked.

The best one can hope for are high functioning sociopaths who are somehow
invested in the betterment of society -- basically Sherlock with better
packaging. That's not to say there aren't real heroes and statesmen out there.
Just good luck with distinguishing them from the hordes of sociopaths.

~~~
saraid216
> Given that everyone in the US, starting at least a level below State
> Governor, is basically required to play political hardball just to survive,
> why does anyone in the US believe anyone's "non-politician" or "non-insider"
> political marketing?

Wishful thinking. Same reason a lot of people felt George W. Bush was someone
they'd have a beer with, and considered this a relevant datum for supporting
his presidency.

Schwarzenegger was basically elected as state governor off this notion. And it
wasn't untrue so much as... stupid.

------
sheetjs
> the auto dealer franchise laws were originally put in place for a just cause
> and are now being twisted to an unjust purpose

... and Christie can argue that allowing Tesla creates a slippery slope
whereby Ford and GM and other companies end up crushing the franchisees that
the law intended to protect.

Musk is trying to find a middle ground that just doesn't exist unless you
accept governments creating one-off laws that specifically recognizes
individual corporations.

~~~
strlen
There is no slippery slope here if the law is states something like:
"contracts between existing de-facto oligarchy of car manufacturers and
dealers remain as is, new entrants are free to set their own terms".

Everyone is talking about how we can't trust Elon Musk since he is acting in
his rational self-interest. Yet why should we assume that Christie is acting
out of the pure goodness of the heart? Politicians too act in their self-
interest and that kind of self-interest often involves maximization of power.
The currency of politics is not just cash (that helps too, of course!), but
also favours: you can be sure that in return for this favour, he'll ask
something from the dealership industry which would beneficial to his political
career (e.g., the first thing that pops would be to accept additional vehicle
taxes, which would help Christie carry and receive donations from
environmentally conscious voters in a liberal state susceptible to flooding)

(Edit: remove an incorrect assertion. Laws regarding specific individuals are
constitutional, just not "bills of attainder")

~~~
stcredzero
_Everyone is talking about how we can 't trust Elon Musk since he is acting in
his rational self-interest._

Except that Elon Musk's rational self-interest appears to genuinely involve a
vision of the world I really like. Given all the money and effort he's put in
toward that vision and the many hours of public speaking and personally
answering questions consistent with that, you'd better hope he's the real
deal.

~~~
strlen
Indeed, that's why I said rational self-interest and not just profit. His
self-interest involves advancing science and technology.

"[I would] rather discover one cause than gain the kingdom of Persia." \-
Democritus

------
a1a
> all Tesla Model S vehicles are capable of over-the-air updates to upgrade
> the software, just like your phone or computer

It's an interesting future. We are approaching the age of malware infected
cars. Does anyone have more info about what the limitations of this internet
connected system is? What is possible if someone roots my car?

\- Can they disable security system?

\- Unlock the car? Lock me out of the car?

\- Feed false data (slow destruction of car)? Feed false speed-data? False
directions?

\- Obtain the cars whereabouts?

\- Disable breaks (would assume not)?

~~~
zmjjmz
Hopefully those updates are signed, in which case as long as there aren't user
install-able applications it should be fine.

------
flyinglizard
Look beyond this local issue, and you'll see how we're in the middle of a huge
power shift. It used to be that businessmen like Musk had to lobby, pressure
and bribe, now they just need to appeal directly to the public, completely
bypassing the political system in the process.

It hasn't started with Musk, of course. The most obvious display of such power
was the website blackout that led to the SOPA repeal. That showed politicians
who _really_ holds the power. These companies barely flex their muscles
either; just imagine what would happen if Google decided to get into public
shaming in its homepage for entities trying to block its Fiber initiative.

The public no longer believes politicians, but they all believe Zuckerberg,
Page and Musk. That makes for an interesting future.

~~~
tonyhb
> The public no longer believes politicians, but they all believe Zuckerberg,
> Page and Musk

People are given a lot of information from a lot of sources nowadays, which
means they're better at analysing it and weeding out the bullshit(typically).

Your point assumes we're blindly following what they have to say without
analysing it.

I can imagine a lot of people aren't. A lot of people may be annoyed with
their rights or privacy taken away (SOPA), or laws being changed when it
doesn't benefit them (this). At which point, people complain.

If any tech company tried to push a law that didn't benefit the public in an
obvious way, I bet most people wouldn't like it.

~~~
npizzolato
>People are given a lot of information from a lot of sources nowadays, which
means they're better at analysing it and weeding out the bullshit(typically).

Or people find the version of the "truth" they most agree with and just go
with that. Given the huge industry of politically-charged "news"
organizations, I think there's a significant amount of people that are doing
this instead (sadly).

~~~
tonyhb
Right, exactly. People would probably do this whether their "truth" is coming
from Musk or a politician, unfortunately.

------
atmosx
Could someone explain to a European, in simple words, how the franchise-
dealer-factory thing works?

If a dealer is the company who _actually sales cars_ and the factory is the
one that produces them, why do they need a franchise in between? And how come
that a _dealer_ is comparable to a manufacturer _Tesla_? Why do they have
conflict of interests selling non-gasoline cars?!

~~~
softbuilder
It's not a franchise in between. The terminology makes it more confusing than
it should be. The dealers buy franchise rights (right to sell that product)
from the manufacturers, becoming "franchisees" \- franchise owners. So my
local Chevy dealership has a franchise from GM. Typically they also have
rights to perform service and are certified for repairs on various brands.

~~~
atmosx
thanks, clearer now. :-)

------
easymovet
Very saddened by the blatant corruption in our government. Where do I vote for
a new government based on ethics and accountability (apart from New Zealand).

~~~
jliptzin
The HN community should band together and buy an island and create our own
government there.

~~~
DavidAdams
What should actually happen is that the US-based tech crowd should put
together a political action committee and start lobbying. That would have a
better chance of real-world impact.

------
larrys
"An even bigger conflict of interest with auto dealers is that they make most
of their profit from service, but electric cars require much less service than
gasoline cars. There are no oil, spark plug or fuel filter changes, no tune-
ups and no smog checks needed for an electric car."

Well then what about BMW with bumper to bumper service as only one example.
That's a high end car that you don't pay for service for (iirc) 3 years. They
cover everything. Wiper blades you name it. I think last I checked the same
was true for Subaru and I think even Jeep Chrysler is doing this (may be wrong
about that one).

And that's not a conflict of interest but rather a business model. In the case
of cars which do make money from service they therefore in theory have a lower
price for the vehicle.

This argument is like saying that you are a better airline because you don't
charge for luggage. Presumably that extra revenue allows you to offer lower
ticket prices. And surprise that is what happens. Back when airlines were
regulated (and had less competition) and they charged way higher prices they
didn't have to nickle and dime you to make a profit.

~~~
ghaff
More to the point, the things he mentions are not very expensive service items
--to say nothing of the fact that there's no particularly compelling reason to
have them done at the dealer if you don't want to. (And talking about "tune-
ups" is pretty close to an anachronism at this point.)

Tesla, on the other hand, does have all its new electric car components which
are all very impressive technically but about which relatively little is yet
known about service life and long-term service costs.

Really, this is about Musk wanting control over the complete experience.
Nothing wrong with that (see, e.g., Apple). And I'm no particular fan of the
auto dealer experience. (Though I don't buy luxury brands today which, I've
been told, unsurprisingly offer a better dealer experience in general.) But
you'll end up with dealers of some sort one way or the other.

~~~
larrys
I buy luxury brands and have for a long time.

The dealer experience is pretty darn good.

I took delivery on a new Porsche. The transmission had a problem. So they flew
a new one in from Germany by Fedex at a cost of perhaps $8,000 (after all it's
pretty heavy) in air freight I was told. Loaner cars? Last time they gave me a
brand new Cayman (I own a 911) with 300 miles on it. Other times Cayene
Hybrids with 3k miles.

It's not without it's bumps of course (routine service maintenance was $450 to
keep up the warranty Mercedes does something similar). But if you can't afford
that type of thing you don't buy this type of car (at least not a new one).

The standards are higher for several reasons. One is that people with money
don't take shit generally and are very demanding. So they keep the people
working there in line and don't take bs answers and complain so much.

I brought the car in to fix a problem and when I was driving down 95 the
repair broke. I called them they towed the car back and got the repair
mechanic back from home (he had left for the day) and fixed it while I waited.
I felt bad for him he was literally fearing for losing his job.

~~~
jonknee
If you have a problem with your Tesla they will come to you and if required
leave you with a loaner (the top end model of course). I'll take that over
going to any dealer, no matter how nice it is.

------
kator
My father worked for 30+ years in auto dealerships. He was a mechanic and in
the end worked his way up as the service manager. It was made clear to him
that sales had to make money and service had to make money and they didn't
care how it was done. He is a good and honorable man and even quit one
dealership because they pushed crazy service incentives on service writers to
up-sell every kind of service you can imagine. That said in the end he retired
early because the dealership he was at was bought by a consortium of
dealerships and they let him know that his service shop wasn't as profitable
as needed and that he needed to up-sell more services to the customers.

In the end dealerships are about making money from their clients by "adding
value". Sadly most of the time that value is having the black car in stock
-vs- someone down the street who only has the blue one.

It's sad to see a government more concerned about backing the establishment
then creating an environment for free trade and new business models.

------
SurfScore
_Our stores will transition to being galleries, where you can see the car and
ask questions of our staff, but we will not be able to discuss price or
complete a sale in the store. However, that can still be done at our Manhattan
store just over the river in Chelsea or our King of Prussia store near
Philadelphia._

"Cross an imaginary line a few miles down the road that the auto dealers can't
access and everything will be A-OK!"

This is everything that is wrong with politics in a sentence.

~~~
zem
the entire modern geopolitical setup is based on complicated networks of
imaginary lines.

------
larrys
"Moreover, it is much harder to sell a new technology car from a new company
when people are so used to the old. Inevitably, they revert to selling what’s
easy and it is game over for the new company."

That's total BS. Any dealer who invests money in a new show room to sell a new
brand of car (think of Mini which was picked up by many legacy BMW dealers and
is sold in many mini only showrooms) is going to put in the effort to sell the
product. We aren't talking about putting Teslas on the same floor as Mercedes.
It would be trivial for Tesla to insist that the product be sold out of a
dedicated facility which would cost a dealer money to construct. The idea that
that dealer would simply push another product (or the salesman) in another
showroom that he operates is ridiculous. And contrary to the behavior of
existing multi line large dealerships.

------
dangoldin
So it seems you can still buy it online. Does that mean you can go into a
dealership and just buy it on your phone?

~~~
dangrossman
AFAIK, everyone who's ever bought a Tesla car has bought it online. In the
states Tesla is allowed to sell directly, the process of buying one in the
store is being sat at a computer and being guided through your online order
with a sales rep's help. They don't have cars on lots you can purchase and
drive away. The stores are all basically showrooms whether they're allowed to
sell cars there or not.

------
ValG
This just got reposted on the NPR site, it's highly relevant and timely along
with this law and Elon's response:

[http://pcasts.in/9Ruq](http://pcasts.in/9Ruq)?

In it, some argue that "A no haggle, painless car buying experience will
eventually come; but it won't be without your local dealers"

I wouldn't be so sure. As Elon states, the fundamentals of the industry
haven't changed in quite a while. He's approaching it from one direction (The
cars/manufacturing and sale of new cars), and others (like myself and
partners) are going directly after the used car Buying/Selling process. Our
goal is to make it as easy as possible for Sellers/Buyers to transact. Check
us out here:

[http://www.instamotor.com/](http://www.instamotor.com/)

------
Systemic33
So much for the american "free market"...

What a joke.

As a european, i can't even comprehend how ludicruous it sounds that a
business can't sell it's goods directly. It's so outrageously wrong, that I
can't find words that fit adequately.

~~~
mcv
I agree, it sounds ludicrous. But there are plenty of ludicrous instances in
the EU where free trade gets banned by some stupid law legalizing a monopoly.
As much as I'd like it to be, the EU is hardly perfect in this.

~~~
stcredzero
What makes it ludicrous is how much noise US politicians on the right make
about "free market" and how they vilify "socialism" then turn around and pass
legislation that implements massive market-distortions. It's basically massive
demagoguery and corruption.

~~~
bubbleRefuge
So true. If conservative talking points would concatenate the String s =
"except when it favors the 1%," they'd reflect reality.

"Free market regulation is bad for the economy " \+ s

"Government services are handouts and immoral " \+ s

etc. etc.

------
chris_mahan
That's some good writing by Elon, by the way.

Perhaps it went through an editor or two, for typos and such, but I have to
say I find his style engaging...

(Disclaimer: If I had the money I'd buy a tesla, and I am an investor.)

~~~
untog
_Perhaps it went through an editor or two_

I 110% percent guarantee it did. No CEO of a decent sized company would not.

~~~
minimax
Your comment reminded me of the Whole Foods guy -- a counterexample.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/business/12foods.html?_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/business/12foods.html?_r=0)

------
lnanek2
This is pretty standard for New Jersey. It's common for money from highway
projects to get diverted, or tolls to go into people's pockets long after
roads were paid for, etc..

------
rdtsc
Is it possible for Tesla to just create a shell "autodealer dealer" company in
each state. I am guessing they thought of that and legal language prevents its
from working.

~~~
mediaman
The dealer cannot be owned by the manufacturer.

~~~
koenigdavidmj
Shell company owning both the manufacturer and the dealers?

------
zobzu
I think the major point is that we _want_ to be on his side. As long as hes
not saying or doing something completely wrong, I'm sure we all agree there
are huge issues with the govt, laws and corruption and that any strong voice
attempting to fix this is a good thing.

There's also a lack in innovation and lead from the US market in various
technologies.

Elon Musk took all of these things head on and keeps doing so all the time.
What's not to like, I would ask?

I am 100% behind the man as long as he keeps doing so.

------
AgathaTheWitch
I will be glad to move out of Jersey (likely next year). I live in Fort Lee
and was trapped in "Bridgegate" traffic last fall. My cautious optimism over
Christie has faded over the years as he has so transparently started focusing
on positioning for 2016. This cave-in to the dealership lobby is just another
reason to take my talents and tax dollars elsewhere.

------
pbreit
In case you missed this last year, Tesla's vision for servicing and customer
delight is refreshingly progressive:
[http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/creating-
world%E2%80%99s-bes...](http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/creating-
world%E2%80%99s-best-service-and-warranty-program-0)

------
tinalumfoil
TL;DR: Elon Musk disagrees with the decision and viciously attacks Chris
Christie , Auto Dealers, the State of NJ and compares their reasoning to the
mafia. He also encourages you to buy a tesla car before the laws take into
effect. Tesla will continue to lobby and possibly sue for a change.

------
sidcool
The ugly side of capitalism. But that does not make the whole system bad.
There are those who will always stall progress for profits, and there are
those who will surmount the bullies. Go Elon!

------
rdl
It's interesting that Christie seems to have totally given up on being a
viable national political candidate, after the drive slow thing with the
bridges, this, and some other issues.

------
acd
I think that oil is poison for humanity, it leads to resource conflicts and
providing money for evil governments. Thus we need to get off oil to have long
term peace on earth.

Elon Musk is a hero

~~~
stcredzero
It's not oil or other resource conflicts that are poison per-se. It's a system
of conflict resolution that eventually and too often turns to armed conflict
as "diplomacy by other means."

It's also a "human nature" that is prone to having one group of us kill
another as a means of conflict resolution. Unfortunately, that is apparently a
part of the natural behavior repertoire of _Homo sapiens_ and _Pan
troglodytes_.

I assure you that governments will continue to do evil things and will find
the money to do so, but over time governments will become less evil.

------
zipop
I'm not opposed to what Musk is trying to do but how or why are auto dealers a
monopoly? Those direct sales laws were originally created to preserve small
business.

~~~
silverlight
I thought he did a good job explaining why those laws were put in place and
why they're not needed to be applied here. Even if you don't agree it's a
monopoly, clearly in this case the law is not being applied as it should be.

~~~
notahacker
I was impressed by the fact that he bothered to offer an explanation of why
the law was introduced and what purpose it served; it makes for a more
compelling argument than some cookie-cutter rant about Big Evil Corporations
wrapping their rent-seeking tentacles around the government.

~~~
rhizome
Cookie-cutter rants are rarely published by people with skin in the game.

~~~
stcredzero
I suspect it's the same general mechanism as even the most liberal of recent
US presidents strangely doing the bidding of the military-industrial complex.
(Obama and Carter.)

------
EGreg
Musk's sales around the country are probably going up thanks to this event,
and his taking the opportunity to tout Teslas using facts :)

~~~
dangrossman
There probably aren't many people reading Tesla press releases other than (a)
people that already own a Tesla car, and (b) people that don't need to be
swayed, they just can't afford/justify the price of one.

------
Jugurtha
"To the People of New Jersey".. I can picture a Marsian saying this. Oh wait,
it's Elon Musk :)

------
sadfnjksdf
NJ can just buy from nearby states. Not a good solution, but whatever.

------
puppetmaster3
Musk, you need to make donation to the right politicians. N00b.

------
hyp0
such pleasure to read Musk. he's got that evangelial air... of course, it
helps that he's in the right.

I wonder if he'll end up Emperor of Mars?

