4 ms·

Since all the comments I've seen thus far have been anti-dealership, I thought I should provide one single solitary reason for dealerships. Before I do- I've ne

Since all the comments I've seen thus far have been anti-dealership, I thought I should provide one single solitary reason for dealerships. Before I do- I've never worked at a dealership, or a car company, nor owned a car, nor have I driven a car in over twenty years, so I have almost no skin in this game other than my wife and I bought a car last year. The one thing dealerships do is that they do have a very slight incentive to address issues related to recalls. This is because dealerships are incentivized to do recalls because these service calls are covered by their agreements with the manufacturer as an independent entity, where as a company owned site would not be. It could then be argued that dealerships provide some level of accountability to manufactures to be independent in reporting defects. I think this is a weak argument and does not justify the existence of dealerships, but it is a real argument nonetheless, even if it's not sufficient to justify its own existence.

MBCook 5y ago
I like that dealerships exist for maintenance and browsing. They’re fine for used car sales. I think they have a place. It’s the games they play with new cars, especially popular/hard to get models like EVs or the new Bronco that make people hate them. I think things would work better if the brands owned/ran the dealerships. But I don’t know we can get there from here, at least with traditional cars. EVs may give brands leverage to change the rules. But dealerships may fight back with more regulations from friendly state governments. I bought a Mach E in part because I knew the dealers existed. They’re not perfect, but they’re there.
whoisjuan 5y ago
I think this is a bug of the system, not a feature. Manufacturers and Dealerships have a co-dependent relationship where manufacturers provide a franchised business and the supply of a very unique product and dealerships provide distribution/footprint, last mile logistics and support. This is where Tesla has an incredible position. They can invest in becoming a logistics company in every possible part of the chain and maximize value at every point. The other manufacturers have to undo their dealership footprint which is predicated on a +60 year relationship. That divorce will eat alive most classic manufacturers and will permanently block them from making good progress in direct to consumer. This is what being disrupted looks like.
- manmal 5y ago
  The reviews of Tesla‘s support system I‘ve seen in recent years let me come to a different conclusion: If the manufacturer is tight on money or resources, then customers will wait an excessive amount of time to get their issues fixed. Those manufacturers might also stop requiring yearly inspections and let the customer decide when to do them - you can look at that as efficiency („EVs just don’t need as much maintenance“ - which I agree with, I own an EV), but you could also call it a shortcoming in their ability to come up with a proper servicing infrastructure.
  - whoisjuan 5y ago
    In many ways the big disruption is that EVs require orders of magnitude less service than ICE vehicles. In the case of Tesla, their gains in reliability are directly transformed into a lesser demand for servicing. Once they get into a inflection point with their fit and finish quality they will likely become less dependent on having a traditional service infrastructure. Instead they can double down on more unorthodox models like mobile service. Traditional manufacturers, in particular Japanese manufacturers, already achieved peak reliability in ICE vehicles. But even with that, they still need to have a service and maintenance footprint because their cars still break. The average-reliability EV breaks way less than the top-reliability ICE, so you really need way less service infrastructure if you only sell EVs.
    - manmal 5y ago
      > EVs require orders of magnitude less service than ICE vehicles I think not. I have a Hyundai Ioniq, and I still have to change tires 2x a year, fill up wiper fluid, change the pollen filter, get AC/heatpump fluids checked. I had to get an axle boot repaired for 200€ - these things happen to any car. EVs (even Teslas) also have a conventional car battery for backup power - this will die every 4-5 years. People might key your car, or bump into you. If you own a „Monday“ Tesla, chances are you‘ll spend more time at a garage in the first few years than a gasoline Kia or Toyota. Will you spend less on maintenance? Very likely. An order of magnitude less? Highly unlikely!

MBCook 5y ago

I like that dealerships exist for maintenance and browsing. They’re fine for used car sales. I think they have a place. It’s the games they play with new cars, especially popular/hard to get models like EVs or the new Bronco that make people hate them. I think things would work better if the brands owned/ran the dealerships. But I don’t know we can get there from here, at least with traditional cars. EVs may give brands leverage to change the rules. But dealerships may fight back with more regulations from friendly state governments. I bought a Mach E in part because I knew the dealers existed. They’re not perfect, but they’re there.

whoisjuan 5y ago

I think this is a bug of the system, not a feature. Manufacturers and Dealerships have a co-dependent relationship where manufacturers provide a franchised business and the supply of a very unique product and dealerships provide distribution/footprint, last mile logistics and support. This is where Tesla has an incredible position. They can invest in becoming a logistics company in every possible part of the chain and maximize value at every point. The other manufacturers have to undo their dealership footprint which is predicated on a +60 year relationship. That divorce will eat alive most classic manufacturers and will permanently block them from making good progress in direct to consumer. This is what being disrupted looks like.

manmal 5y ago
The reviews of Tesla‘s support system I‘ve seen in recent years let me come to a different conclusion: If the manufacturer is tight on money or resources, then customers will wait an excessive amount of time to get their issues fixed. Those manufacturers might also stop requiring yearly inspections and let the customer decide when to do them - you can look at that as efficiency („EVs just don’t need as much maintenance“ - which I agree with, I own an EV), but you could also call it a shortcoming in their ability to come up with a proper servicing infrastructure.
- whoisjuan 5y ago
  In many ways the big disruption is that EVs require orders of magnitude less service than ICE vehicles. In the case of Tesla, their gains in reliability are directly transformed into a lesser demand for servicing. Once they get into a inflection point with their fit and finish quality they will likely become less dependent on having a traditional service infrastructure. Instead they can double down on more unorthodox models like mobile service. Traditional manufacturers, in particular Japanese manufacturers, already achieved peak reliability in ICE vehicles. But even with that, they still need to have a service and maintenance footprint because their cars still break. The average-reliability EV breaks way less than the top-reliability ICE, so you really need way less service infrastructure if you only sell EVs.
  - manmal 5y ago
    > EVs require orders of magnitude less service than ICE vehicles I think not. I have a Hyundai Ioniq, and I still have to change tires 2x a year, fill up wiper fluid, change the pollen filter, get AC/heatpump fluids checked. I had to get an axle boot repaired for 200€ - these things happen to any car. EVs (even Teslas) also have a conventional car battery for backup power - this will die every 4-5 years. People might key your car, or bump into you. If you own a „Monday“ Tesla, chances are you‘ll spend more time at a garage in the first few years than a gasoline Kia or Toyota. Will you spend less on maintenance? Very likely. An order of magnitude less? Highly unlikely!