4 ms·

Tesla goes after Cybertruck owners selling their electric pickup trucks

26 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
airhangerf15 3y ago
Doug DeMuro covered this recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iqz-mlYwRo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iqz-mlYwRo Tesla doesn't have a legal ground to stand on here and would lose in courts, but it would also cost way more to the person trying to sell his or her own property. The litigation itself would be more than the profit margin unless you do this as a trial/civil lawyer and can litigate it yourself. Ferrari has banned sales to people and this seems within the rights of a company to do (so long as it's not based on specific discrimination like race or sex). I personally would never buy an Internet connected vehicle, and I'll never buy a car with access to cell networks. Cars made before this decade are going to become insanely valuable as time goes on.
- l2p 3y ago
  Regarding your last point: I used to also have this view, I changed my mind after realizing that driving a vehicle is one of the more dangerous things you do regularly. In fact, it is a leading cause of mortality for my demographic. Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. In many newer automobiles, there are DIY ways to remove the 'phone home' capability if you so desire.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. That's a valid point. Personally, I'd prefer to take the increased chance of being seriously injured or killed in an accident over being under constant surveillance. But this is a thing reasonable people can and do have different perspectives on.
    - rokkitmensch 3y ago
      I went off the edge of a forest road and head on into a tree in my 2022 Tacoma. Passenger and I both walked away with no injuries. I have completely reevaluated my stance (was yours) after this experiment. I'll take the plastic car that explodes on contact if it saves my life.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        > I'll take the plastic car that explodes on contact if it saves my life. Don't get me wrong -- I'm completely on board with this sentiment. I think where you & I diverge in our viewpoints is when it comes to the surveillance.
    - dzhiurgis 3y ago
      > being under constant surveillance Don your tinfoil hat sir. SAR sats can track cars already.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        Sure, but so? Even if it can't be eliminated completely, it's worth eliminating what you can. Especially corporate surveillance.
  - patrick451 3y ago
    I don't particularly care. I'd rather be at more risk and actually own the vehicle than subject myself to all of this silicon valley nanny-mode nonsense.
  - jjav 3y ago
    > Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. I think we need to define "safety". Leaking all my private information is a major safety threat. Only cars from the last 8-9 years have this risk (with some exception). So depending on what you think safety is, the most recent cars can be the least safe of them all. In terms of mechanical safety, I wouldn't want to drive a car from the 50s. But a car from, say, 2005, is perfectly safe mechanically while also having zero data flow risks.
- dzhiurgis 3y ago
  > Cars made before this decade are going to become insanely valuable as time goes on. Why? What value does it add?
  - ianschmitz 3y ago
    Software that doesn’t change, heated seats that don’t require a subscription, not selling your location data, able to repair yourself
    - dzhiurgis 3y ago
      FWIW none of this applies to Tesla, so maybe you should support them. When I was considering Model 3 for my parents in eastern europe I’ve looked up tons of VINs. Pretty much all of them were totalled write-offs, rebuilt with FSD, supercharging, etc. You can still get free lifetime supercharging for Model S…
qarl 3y ago
> Consumers should have been limited to one vehicle during the reservation process. But that would bring down the numbers.
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  There are going to be fleet buyers with multiple reservations. Flippers would be the vast majority of multiple reservations, but you can't assume that anybody with multiple reservations is a flipper.
  - qarl 3y ago
    HEH. You should read the article. The sentence immediately after the one I quote says: > If you represent a business and you need a fleet, you can talk directly with Tesla’s fleet unit.
dgrin91 3y ago
The title is a bit clickbait-y Tesla isn't suing anyone, and that $50k threat they got in how water for is not in play here at all. They are only cancelling his reservations and refunding him his full deposit amount. Its a bit of a dick move, but I think Tesla is well within its rights here.
- rokkitmensch 3y ago
  Nothing prevents him from standing up an LLC and buying via that vehicle...

26 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Doug DeMuro covered this recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iqz-mlYwRo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iqz-mlYwRo Tesla doesn't have a legal ground to stand on here and would lose in courts, but it would also cost way more to the person trying to sell his or her own property. The litigation itself would be more than the profit margin unless you do this as a trial/civil lawyer and can litigate it yourself. Ferrari has banned sales to people and this seems within the rights of a company to do (so long as it's not based on specific discrimination like race or sex). I personally would never buy an Internet connected vehicle, and I'll never buy a car with access to cell networks. Cars made before this decade are going to become insanely valuable as time goes on.

l2p 3y ago
Regarding your last point: I used to also have this view, I changed my mind after realizing that driving a vehicle is one of the more dangerous things you do regularly. In fact, it is a leading cause of mortality for my demographic. Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. In many newer automobiles, there are DIY ways to remove the 'phone home' capability if you so desire.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. That's a valid point. Personally, I'd prefer to take the increased chance of being seriously injured or killed in an accident over being under constant surveillance. But this is a thing reasonable people can and do have different perspectives on.
  - rokkitmensch 3y ago
    I went off the edge of a forest road and head on into a tree in my 2022 Tacoma. Passenger and I both walked away with no injuries. I have completely reevaluated my stance (was yours) after this experiment. I'll take the plastic car that explodes on contact if it saves my life.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > I'll take the plastic car that explodes on contact if it saves my life. Don't get me wrong -- I'm completely on board with this sentiment. I think where you & I diverge in our viewpoints is when it comes to the surveillance.
  - dzhiurgis 3y ago
    > being under constant surveillance Don your tinfoil hat sir. SAR sats can track cars already.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      Sure, but so? Even if it can't be eliminated completely, it's worth eliminating what you can. Especially corporate surveillance.
- patrick451 3y ago
  I don't particularly care. I'd rather be at more risk and actually own the vehicle than subject myself to all of this silicon valley nanny-mode nonsense.
- jjav 3y ago
  > Automobile safety has changed significantly in the last 10-20 years. I think we need to define "safety". Leaking all my private information is a major safety threat. Only cars from the last 8-9 years have this risk (with some exception). So depending on what you think safety is, the most recent cars can be the least safe of them all. In terms of mechanical safety, I wouldn't want to drive a car from the 50s. But a car from, say, 2005, is perfectly safe mechanically while also having zero data flow risks.
dzhiurgis 3y ago
> Cars made before this decade are going to become insanely valuable as time goes on. Why? What value does it add?
- ianschmitz 3y ago
  Software that doesn’t change, heated seats that don’t require a subscription, not selling your location data, able to repair yourself
  - dzhiurgis 3y ago
    FWIW none of this applies to Tesla, so maybe you should support them. When I was considering Model 3 for my parents in eastern europe I’ve looked up tons of VINs. Pretty much all of them were totalled write-offs, rebuilt with FSD, supercharging, etc. You can still get free lifetime supercharging for Model S…

qarl 3y ago

> Consumers should have been limited to one vehicle during the reservation process. But that would bring down the numbers.

bryanlarsen 3y ago
There are going to be fleet buyers with multiple reservations. Flippers would be the vast majority of multiple reservations, but you can't assume that anybody with multiple reservations is a flipper.
- qarl 3y ago
  HEH. You should read the article. The sentence immediately after the one I quote says: > If you represent a business and you need a fleet, you can talk directly with Tesla’s fleet unit.

dgrin91 3y ago

The title is a bit clickbait-y Tesla isn't suing anyone, and that $50k threat they got in how water for is not in play here at all. They are only cancelling his reservations and refunding him his full deposit amount. Its a bit of a dick move, but I think Tesla is well within its rights here.

rokkitmensch 3y ago
Nothing prevents him from standing up an LLC and buying via that vehicle...