5 ms·
it was initially to stop manufacturers vertically integrating all the way from building cars to running stores.
by rweir 12y ago
it was initially to stop manufacturers vertically integrating all the way from building cars to running stores.
- logicallee 12y agoWhich would suck why again? e.g. why on Earth would anyone hate the existence of physical Apple stores, for example? (which fits the description of "a manufacturer vertically integrating all the way from building [PC's] to running stores.")
- psykovsky 12y agoAnd yet you can still buy Apple stuff at any major retailer or high street store. The retail lobby doesn't seem to mind much.
- kevin_thibedeau 12y agoThere was a time when Apple only sold through franchisees and were unable to sell direct.
- rweir 12y agothink of Bell or the oil companies of the early 20th century.
- ams6110 12y agoThe original purpose of these laws was to prevent a manufacturer from selling direct in a market that a dealer had developed. The dealership model allowed manufactures to expand much faster and with less risk than if they had sold direct everywhere. Once the dealers developed the market, there would have been a large incentive for the manufacturers to simply open up a local direct outlet and keep all the dealer commissions themselves. Tesla has never had a dealership network, so I don't see why this should apply to them. But that is why these laws came to exist.