15 ms·

Tesla finds a loophole in states where dealerships are forbidden: Tribal lands

182 points by alex_young 4y ago

mshaler 4y ago
Following the money--of casinos.
8bitsrule 4y ago
>[In the only two stores, both in New Mexico,] under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. That might just work out well.
- b112 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - akuji1993 4y ago
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    We've already seen reservations try to legalize marijuana only to basically be shot down by the state/federal government. Tribal sovereignty has always been a thorny issue.
    - cuteboy19 4y ago
      It's actually quite interesting. I don't know of many cases where regional autonomy (tribal or otherwise) actually becomes sovereignty. There's a small uncontacted tribe living on an island in the Indian ocean that legally is a part of India. However, the govt does not attempt to enforce the law and in fact actively prevents people from reaching the island.
      - jimz 4y ago
        India claims sovereignty over the Andaman Islands including the Sentinel Islands. Just because the islanders don't know/refuse to engage with the state doesn't stop the state from asserting their claim. Although, there are entities that are de facto sovereign and even have had the wherewithal to keep it with arms. Myanmar is home to more than one of these, actually. There's the Shan State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State), and within their de facto sovereign areas there are pockets of smaller administrative units that are armed and are also de facto sovereign, accepting nominal de jure Burmese authority over the authority of the nationalist minority independence movements, such as the Wa State with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army). Alas, the tribes here in the US don't quite have that kind of firepower, nor the desire to refight the latter half of the 19th Century. That's not to say that the relationships between tribes, the federal government, and state governments is any less complicated and at times contentious. The Supreme Court tends to favor tribal sovereignty as almost akin to that of a state, but not in all circumstances and where "full faith and credit" ends when it comes to tribal judicial authority when it comes to civil matters seldom actually represent actual "full" anything. Although tribes do have sovereign immunity so without congressional approval one can't simply litigate out every issue by suing the tribe, so the ambiguities are likely to persist.
    - b112 4y ago
      Not even sure why this comment/thread is flagged. More flagging abuse. My understanding is that now, in the US, due to a court decision being overturned, abortion is now seen as a state issue. This means that if Tesla dealerships are an option, so are abortion clinics, to bypass state law. I don't think drugs are, at least not completely, but car dealerships are seen as under the authority of the state. All it takes, is eroding the rights of tribal land, beneath that of the state, instead of equal to/immune to, and Telsa's plan won't fly. If I was GM, or Ford, or what not, I'd backdoor fund an abortion clinic on tribal land, then use that poliical pressure to pass laws, which would stand for years, at least, until being struck down. Once tribal land no longer has the power to flout state law, bam, no more Tesla problem for Ford or GM. Americans in the room: stop getting all emotional, and flagging things which meet your "us vs them" political blather, and start examining the implications instead. Even if the above "sneaky corporate play" is not the outcome here, this move by Tesla made me realise, a reservation is the a place where abortion clinics may fight the next battleground.
klabb3 4y ago
I don't particularly like tesla, much less musk, but this just seems like a win-win. Dealerships are a middleman much more deserving to be ruthlessly demolished by "tech disruption" than, say, journalism. It's fascinating, and frankly suspicious, that they're still in business and thriving, given their value proposition in today's world.
- rapsey 4y ago
  Nothing better than a legal moat around your business model.
- badpun 4y ago
  What's so bad about American dealerships? Here in Europe I've never heard anyone complain about them. They just provide a service - they have cars available to test drive and have a real person to talk to during the purchase. Sure, the owners make profit, but they DO provide value for the customer and they're at mercy of the car company, which means, in bad economic times, they can get squeezed pretty hard. How is it different in the US?
  - jakewins 4y ago
    I’ve bought vehicles at both US and EU dealerships; the EU sales process was; they showed me the vehicle I had seen on their website, we drove the car, then we haggled a bit and signed contracts. US sales process was much more akin to how I imagine time share sales scams work - when you think you’re done, the gauntlet of high pressure multiple-rooms-with-increasingly-“senior”-managers has just started. It took nearly two hours of people telling me I was an idiot for not taking the extended leather steering wheel warranty etc before getting out of there. Both of these experiences were at official Hyundai dealerships.
    - badpun 4y ago
      Interesting. I've only bought car in EU (in Mitsubishi dealership in Poland) and it was BY FAR the best customer service I've received in my life. The salesman was thoughtful, listened to me carefully, knew the product well, didn't try to push anything on me. It was pure pleasure. I was kind of sad that one has to spend $15k in order to warrant a customer experience this good.
oxplot 4y ago
> Under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. > But with 574 federally recognized tribal governments in 35 states, Tesla’s new strategy could do a lot to close that advantage. Fuck ye!
TulliusCicero 4y ago
Dealerships are a plague, so I support this. Helping Native Americans is also very nice.
kortilla 4y ago
Not a loophole. The tribal lands are not in the jurisdiction of the state. This is why they can set their own liquor, tobacco, gambling, etc laws.
- dehrmann 4y ago
  I'm not entirely sure how California halfway regulates gambling on tribal land when Indian affairs fall under federal jurisdiction, and tribal lands are sovereign-ish, but definitely out of state control.
phendrenad2 4y ago
Imagine if Apple wasn't allowed to sell Macbooks directly to consumers, and you had to go to an independent reseller instead. It's bizarre. How long can these laws last?
- Sakos 4y ago
  You mean you'd have to, uh, buy them at an electronics store?
  - SeanLuke 4y ago
    Yes. That's what he meant.
    - Sakos 4y ago
      Shoot, I guess my sarcasm detector is off today.
- kderbyma 4y ago
  sounds good.....really good.....apple store sucks...the lines.... hahahaha...yeah no thanks. considering they only have base models now....what's the point.
  - plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
    Where in the brain did apple hurt you?
kmbfjr 4y ago
The whole ecosystem for car sales in the US is rigged, and not just dealerships. I had a surplus car, researched “fair market” value for private sale versus selling it to a dealership. I was closing up an estate, getting rid of it easily, but fairly was the goal. It was a 2013 Subaru Impreza with 149,000 miles that I’d have to clean up for sale to a private party, I opted to unload it as a sale to a dealer. Trade in value quoted at three sites (kbb, edmunds, carfax) was $3500. Private party sale was $4100, retail sale that a buyer would pay at a dealer $5200. Dealer puts new tires on it lists for $9999 and suddenly the three sites list “fair market” retail at $11,000, trade in at $7000 and private party at $9000. Same VIN entered, same mileage, suddenly the car on the lot is worth more when owned by a dealership according to KBB, Edmunds and Carfax.
- realgeniushere 4y ago
  This is normal. You buy a car from a guy on the street, it could break on the drive home and you’re mostly shit outta luck. Even if you have a legal claim (and you usually don’t since the sale is as-is), it’s not worth the trouble and they’re likely to be judgment proof. On the other hand, dealers usually include a warranty of some kind with their “certified pre-owned” vehicles. And as repeat players, they have a reputation to keep. The manufacturer also imposes further rules on them to protect the car brand. Fwiw, I strongly oppose laws that protect the dealership business. But this specific thing you’ve noticed is not some grand conspiracy (how would that work anyway?). It’s just rational consumer behavior.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    That doesn't quite seem responsive to your parent comment. They recognize that the dealer price is higher. What's weird is that every price jumped after selling the car to a dealer, not that the retail price was higher than the trade-in price. > Trade in value quoted at three sites (kbb, edmunds, carfax) was $3500. Private party sale was $4100, retail sale that a buyer would pay at a dealer $5200. > Dealer puts new tires on it lists for $9999 and suddenly the three sites list “fair market” retail at $11,000, trade in at $7000 and private party at $9000. How much did the tires cost?
bilsbie 4y ago
I never understood why tribal lands aren’t loopholes for almost any law?
- KirillPanov 4y ago
  Only state laws. And not all of them, but many. Tribes have no special privileges to circumvent federal laws unless specifically stated (e.g. Makah whaling rights nullify the Marine Mammal Protection Act) in a treaty. The rat's nest of auto dealership laws are all at the state level, largely because the other 49 states didn't want Michigan dictating the structure of their transportation sector.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  There are a lot of unchallenged aspects amongst these 500+ different semi-sovereign nations They pretty much universally have extremely low physical infrastructure though, which limits anyone’s interest or ability to set up anything to do business. They also almost universally have extremely low administrative and legal infrastructure, with completely foreign and distinctive customs in each tribe, which really means arbitrary decisions after long negotiations. They are all too small to bother with, for most. And finally, they almost all universally distrust the entrepreneurs that would show up, because a history of exploitation that got them in this quagmire to begin with. But if you can imagine it, its likely possible. There have been or currently are data centers on tribal lands, operating with some theoretical legal edge. Heard it was cumbersome and bad service though. There are drug running corridors on unique tribes that straddle the US - Canada border with a river running between them. There are infinite permutations. Even with things being under Federal law, federal enforcement and federal prosecution has evidence gathering issues as well as obscurity in how to proceed, as well as having to weigh the perpetual political fallout of stirring the nest and symbiosis with the indigenous community. They don’t want some treaty challenged. They don't know how to bother or bring the case or win the case or deal with pursuing the case.
  - from 4y ago
    Is rent-a-tribe for payday lending actually legal? It seems like courts have said the tribe needs to have some ownership and involvement in the day to day operations for immunity to apply.
mensetmanusman 4y ago
One of my favorite things about Tesla is their battle with the dealership model enshrined in outdated laws.
pard68 4y ago
It is only a loophole to the guy who did not think of it first.
bryanlarsen 4y ago
A firm fixed price is a key aspect of the free market delivering maximum benefits to the consumer. If you have an Econ 101 "perfect market" in a commodity with a large number of buyers and and a large number of sellers, then you end with a single price being the marginal cost of production. Every buyer willing to pay at least the marginal cost gets to do so at the marginal cost. The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is the consumer surplus. The difference between actual cost and marginal cost is the producer surplus. With few exceptions the consumer surplus is massively larger than the producer surplus. Excuse the bad summary of micro-econ 100. Cars aren't a commodity which is why there is the potential for a consumer win in negotiation, but it's slight. It's like gambling against the house. The best ones make it feel like you've won at the same time they suck you dry. You think you got a good price at the dealership when you negotiated the price down, but any good salesman will leave you feeling that way.
- Aerroon 4y ago
  >The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is the consumer surplus. You forgot a few words there. I assume it's supposed to say: >The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is [willing to pay] is the consumer surplus. Eg when the buyer is willing to pay $30 for a box, but the box costs $25 then that's a $5 consumer surplus. Did I understand it right or did you mean something else?
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    Thanks for the accurate correction.
hk1337 4y ago
On the surface this seems like a great thing for Tesla, consumers, and those living on tribal land, but the skeptic i me wonders what is Tesla’s real benefit and/or how how are one or both of the other two getting used or screwed over?
- FredPret 4y ago
  Why can’t everyone benefit?
  - hk1337 4y ago
    I don’t have a problem with that and that would be preferred. What I am skeptical about is that this will turn out to not be as good a thing for tribal nations as it’s being made out to be.
- from 4y ago
  Existing dealerships would be doing most of the losing. Depending on the tribes' leverage in negotiations (how remote their location is, status of their infrastructure etc) they may or may not receive what you would consider a "fair deal."
dahfizz 4y ago
> To auto industry veterans, the company’s jaw-dropping achievement isn’t popularizing electric cars. That may have been inevitable as the consequences of climate change began to hit Americans. I find this so fascinating. I think there comes a point where an achievement is so monumental, that people stop comprehending it as a person's achievement and instead view it as a historical event. Then the achievement becomes "inevitable", because it was the march of history pushing the achievement forward. Being the CEO of a successful car company is an achievement. But revolutionizing the car industry itself is "inevitable".
- blululu 4y ago
  I’m not sure what planet the author is living on. 70 years of oligopoly would suggest otherwise. Seat belts, safety glass and steering columns that don’t harpoon the driver may have been inevitable as the consequences of dying in minor crashes began to hurt Americans, but it sure took a lot of dedicated people like Ralph Nader to make it so.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    I think the argument is which perspective you take. From the internal observe perspective, you actually have to do the thing for the thing to get done. Yes you need individuals. If you take an external observer perspective that collectively internal and external pressures cause individuals with talent and drive to go and tackle that problem. For example, even if you personally did absolutely nothing, Apple will still collectively create some new fangled device with new features, new performance etc etc. That’s literally true of every human endeavor - no person is doing it alone regardless of how pivotal they may seem. So then the question is “how pivotal is Musk personally”. Certainly Tesla existed outside of him but I think his accomplishment there was to make EV cars sexy and grow that industry from nothing despite headwinds. Would it have happened without him? Not sure. I’m not as bullish as the author given how Tesla really was a motivating force for them to get the show on the road and government regulations in the space are a joke (vs what is actually needed) and even still manufacturers are dragging their feet. So I think the author is right that “it would have happened anyway” but wrong about the scale of the specific impact Musk has had through Tesla.
jwilk 4y ago
If you're getting Access Denied, here's an archived copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20221115123055/https://www.kbb.com/car-news/tesla-finds-a-workaround-for-state-laws-dealerships-on-tribal-lands/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221115123055/https://www.kbb.c...

182 points by alex_young 4y ago

Following the money--of casinos.

>[In the only two stores, both in New Mexico,] under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. That might just work out well.

b112 4y ago
[flagged]
- akuji1993 4y ago
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  We've already seen reservations try to legalize marijuana only to basically be shot down by the state/federal government. Tribal sovereignty has always been a thorny issue.
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    It's actually quite interesting. I don't know of many cases where regional autonomy (tribal or otherwise) actually becomes sovereignty. There's a small uncontacted tribe living on an island in the Indian ocean that legally is a part of India. However, the govt does not attempt to enforce the law and in fact actively prevents people from reaching the island.
    - jimz 4y ago
      India claims sovereignty over the Andaman Islands including the Sentinel Islands. Just because the islanders don't know/refuse to engage with the state doesn't stop the state from asserting their claim. Although, there are entities that are de facto sovereign and even have had the wherewithal to keep it with arms. Myanmar is home to more than one of these, actually. There's the Shan State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State), and within their de facto sovereign areas there are pockets of smaller administrative units that are armed and are also de facto sovereign, accepting nominal de jure Burmese authority over the authority of the nationalist minority independence movements, such as the Wa State with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army). Alas, the tribes here in the US don't quite have that kind of firepower, nor the desire to refight the latter half of the 19th Century. That's not to say that the relationships between tribes, the federal government, and state governments is any less complicated and at times contentious. The Supreme Court tends to favor tribal sovereignty as almost akin to that of a state, but not in all circumstances and where "full faith and credit" ends when it comes to tribal judicial authority when it comes to civil matters seldom actually represent actual "full" anything. Although tribes do have sovereign immunity so without congressional approval one can't simply litigate out every issue by suing the tribe, so the ambiguities are likely to persist.
  - b112 4y ago
    Not even sure why this comment/thread is flagged. More flagging abuse. My understanding is that now, in the US, due to a court decision being overturned, abortion is now seen as a state issue. This means that if Tesla dealerships are an option, so are abortion clinics, to bypass state law. I don't think drugs are, at least not completely, but car dealerships are seen as under the authority of the state. All it takes, is eroding the rights of tribal land, beneath that of the state, instead of equal to/immune to, and Telsa's plan won't fly. If I was GM, or Ford, or what not, I'd backdoor fund an abortion clinic on tribal land, then use that poliical pressure to pass laws, which would stand for years, at least, until being struck down. Once tribal land no longer has the power to flout state law, bam, no more Tesla problem for Ford or GM. Americans in the room: stop getting all emotional, and flagging things which meet your "us vs them" political blather, and start examining the implications instead. Even if the above "sneaky corporate play" is not the outcome here, this move by Tesla made me realise, a reservation is the a place where abortion clinics may fight the next battleground.

klabb3 4y ago

I don't particularly like tesla, much less musk, but this just seems like a win-win. Dealerships are a middleman much more deserving to be ruthlessly demolished by "tech disruption" than, say, journalism. It's fascinating, and frankly suspicious, that they're still in business and thriving, given their value proposition in today's world.

rapsey 4y ago
Nothing better than a legal moat around your business model.
badpun 4y ago
What's so bad about American dealerships? Here in Europe I've never heard anyone complain about them. They just provide a service - they have cars available to test drive and have a real person to talk to during the purchase. Sure, the owners make profit, but they DO provide value for the customer and they're at mercy of the car company, which means, in bad economic times, they can get squeezed pretty hard. How is it different in the US?
- jakewins 4y ago
  I’ve bought vehicles at both US and EU dealerships; the EU sales process was; they showed me the vehicle I had seen on their website, we drove the car, then we haggled a bit and signed contracts. US sales process was much more akin to how I imagine time share sales scams work - when you think you’re done, the gauntlet of high pressure multiple-rooms-with-increasingly-“senior”-managers has just started. It took nearly two hours of people telling me I was an idiot for not taking the extended leather steering wheel warranty etc before getting out of there. Both of these experiences were at official Hyundai dealerships.
  - badpun 4y ago
    Interesting. I've only bought car in EU (in Mitsubishi dealership in Poland) and it was BY FAR the best customer service I've received in my life. The salesman was thoughtful, listened to me carefully, knew the product well, didn't try to push anything on me. It was pure pleasure. I was kind of sad that one has to spend $15k in order to warrant a customer experience this good.

oxplot 4y ago

> Under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. > But with 574 federally recognized tribal governments in 35 states, Tesla’s new strategy could do a lot to close that advantage. Fuck ye!

TulliusCicero 4y ago

Dealerships are a plague, so I support this. Helping Native Americans is also very nice.

kortilla 4y ago

Not a loophole. The tribal lands are not in the jurisdiction of the state. This is why they can set their own liquor, tobacco, gambling, etc laws.

dehrmann 4y ago
I'm not entirely sure how California halfway regulates gambling on tribal land when Indian affairs fall under federal jurisdiction, and tribal lands are sovereign-ish, but definitely out of state control.

phendrenad2 4y ago

Imagine if Apple wasn't allowed to sell Macbooks directly to consumers, and you had to go to an independent reseller instead. It's bizarre. How long can these laws last?

Sakos 4y ago
You mean you'd have to, uh, buy them at an electronics store?
- SeanLuke 4y ago
  Yes. That's what he meant.
  - Sakos 4y ago
    Shoot, I guess my sarcasm detector is off today.
kderbyma 4y ago
sounds good.....really good.....apple store sucks...the lines.... hahahaha...yeah no thanks. considering they only have base models now....what's the point.
- plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
  Where in the brain did apple hurt you?

kmbfjr 4y ago

The whole ecosystem for car sales in the US is rigged, and not just dealerships. I had a surplus car, researched “fair market” value for private sale versus selling it to a dealership. I was closing up an estate, getting rid of it easily, but fairly was the goal. It was a 2013 Subaru Impreza with 149,000 miles that I’d have to clean up for sale to a private party, I opted to unload it as a sale to a dealer. Trade in value quoted at three sites (kbb, edmunds, carfax) was $3500. Private party sale was $4100, retail sale that a buyer would pay at a dealer $5200. Dealer puts new tires on it lists for $9999 and suddenly the three sites list “fair market” retail at $11,000, trade in at $7000 and private party at $9000. Same VIN entered, same mileage, suddenly the car on the lot is worth more when owned by a dealership according to KBB, Edmunds and Carfax.

realgeniushere 4y ago
This is normal. You buy a car from a guy on the street, it could break on the drive home and you’re mostly shit outta luck. Even if you have a legal claim (and you usually don’t since the sale is as-is), it’s not worth the trouble and they’re likely to be judgment proof. On the other hand, dealers usually include a warranty of some kind with their “certified pre-owned” vehicles. And as repeat players, they have a reputation to keep. The manufacturer also imposes further rules on them to protect the car brand. Fwiw, I strongly oppose laws that protect the dealership business. But this specific thing you’ve noticed is not some grand conspiracy (how would that work anyway?). It’s just rational consumer behavior.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  That doesn't quite seem responsive to your parent comment. They recognize that the dealer price is higher. What's weird is that every price jumped after selling the car to a dealer, not that the retail price was higher than the trade-in price. > Trade in value quoted at three sites (kbb, edmunds, carfax) was $3500. Private party sale was $4100, retail sale that a buyer would pay at a dealer $5200. > Dealer puts new tires on it lists for $9999 and suddenly the three sites list “fair market” retail at $11,000, trade in at $7000 and private party at $9000. How much did the tires cost?

bilsbie 4y ago

I never understood why tribal lands aren’t loopholes for almost any law?

KirillPanov 4y ago
Only state laws. And not all of them, but many. Tribes have no special privileges to circumvent federal laws unless specifically stated (e.g. Makah whaling rights nullify the Marine Mammal Protection Act) in a treaty. The rat's nest of auto dealership laws are all at the state level, largely because the other 49 states didn't want Michigan dictating the structure of their transportation sector.
yieldcrv 4y ago
There are a lot of unchallenged aspects amongst these 500+ different semi-sovereign nations They pretty much universally have extremely low physical infrastructure though, which limits anyone’s interest or ability to set up anything to do business. They also almost universally have extremely low administrative and legal infrastructure, with completely foreign and distinctive customs in each tribe, which really means arbitrary decisions after long negotiations. They are all too small to bother with, for most. And finally, they almost all universally distrust the entrepreneurs that would show up, because a history of exploitation that got them in this quagmire to begin with. But if you can imagine it, its likely possible. There have been or currently are data centers on tribal lands, operating with some theoretical legal edge. Heard it was cumbersome and bad service though. There are drug running corridors on unique tribes that straddle the US - Canada border with a river running between them. There are infinite permutations. Even with things being under Federal law, federal enforcement and federal prosecution has evidence gathering issues as well as obscurity in how to proceed, as well as having to weigh the perpetual political fallout of stirring the nest and symbiosis with the indigenous community. They don’t want some treaty challenged. They don't know how to bother or bring the case or win the case or deal with pursuing the case.
- from 4y ago
  Is rent-a-tribe for payday lending actually legal? It seems like courts have said the tribe needs to have some ownership and involvement in the day to day operations for immunity to apply.

mensetmanusman 4y ago

One of my favorite things about Tesla is their battle with the dealership model enshrined in outdated laws.

pard68 4y ago

It is only a loophole to the guy who did not think of it first.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

A firm fixed price is a key aspect of the free market delivering maximum benefits to the consumer. If you have an Econ 101 "perfect market" in a commodity with a large number of buyers and and a large number of sellers, then you end with a single price being the marginal cost of production. Every buyer willing to pay at least the marginal cost gets to do so at the marginal cost. The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is the consumer surplus. The difference between actual cost and marginal cost is the producer surplus. With few exceptions the consumer surplus is massively larger than the producer surplus. Excuse the bad summary of micro-econ 100. Cars aren't a commodity which is why there is the potential for a consumer win in negotiation, but it's slight. It's like gambling against the house. The best ones make it feel like you've won at the same time they suck you dry. You think you got a good price at the dealership when you negotiated the price down, but any good salesman will leave you feeling that way.

Aerroon 4y ago
>The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is the consumer surplus. You forgot a few words there. I assume it's supposed to say: >The difference between marginal cost and the price a buyer is [willing to pay] is the consumer surplus. Eg when the buyer is willing to pay $30 for a box, but the box costs $25 then that's a $5 consumer surplus. Did I understand it right or did you mean something else?
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  Thanks for the accurate correction.

hk1337 4y ago

On the surface this seems like a great thing for Tesla, consumers, and those living on tribal land, but the skeptic i me wonders what is Tesla’s real benefit and/or how how are one or both of the other two getting used or screwed over?

FredPret 4y ago
Why can’t everyone benefit?
- hk1337 4y ago
  I don’t have a problem with that and that would be preferred. What I am skeptical about is that this will turn out to not be as good a thing for tribal nations as it’s being made out to be.
from 4y ago
Existing dealerships would be doing most of the losing. Depending on the tribes' leverage in negotiations (how remote their location is, status of their infrastructure etc) they may or may not receive what you would consider a "fair deal."

dahfizz 4y ago

> To auto industry veterans, the company’s jaw-dropping achievement isn’t popularizing electric cars. That may have been inevitable as the consequences of climate change began to hit Americans. I find this so fascinating. I think there comes a point where an achievement is so monumental, that people stop comprehending it as a person's achievement and instead view it as a historical event. Then the achievement becomes "inevitable", because it was the march of history pushing the achievement forward. Being the CEO of a successful car company is an achievement. But revolutionizing the car industry itself is "inevitable".

blululu 4y ago
I’m not sure what planet the author is living on. 70 years of oligopoly would suggest otherwise. Seat belts, safety glass and steering columns that don’t harpoon the driver may have been inevitable as the consequences of dying in minor crashes began to hurt Americans, but it sure took a lot of dedicated people like Ralph Nader to make it so.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  I think the argument is which perspective you take. From the internal observe perspective, you actually have to do the thing for the thing to get done. Yes you need individuals. If you take an external observer perspective that collectively internal and external pressures cause individuals with talent and drive to go and tackle that problem. For example, even if you personally did absolutely nothing, Apple will still collectively create some new fangled device with new features, new performance etc etc. That’s literally true of every human endeavor - no person is doing it alone regardless of how pivotal they may seem. So then the question is “how pivotal is Musk personally”. Certainly Tesla existed outside of him but I think his accomplishment there was to make EV cars sexy and grow that industry from nothing despite headwinds. Would it have happened without him? Not sure. I’m not as bullish as the author given how Tesla really was a motivating force for them to get the show on the road and government regulations in the space are a joke (vs what is actually needed) and even still manufacturers are dragging their feet. So I think the author is right that “it would have happened anyway” but wrong about the scale of the specific impact Musk has had through Tesla.

jwilk 4y ago

If you're getting Access Denied, here's an archived copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20221115123055/https://www.kbb.com/car-news/tesla-finds-a-workaround-for-state-laws-dealerships-on-tribal-lands/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221115123055/https://www.kbb.c...