Is anyone going to the hearing on Tuesday for HB 2490, the House companion to SB 1415? There is supposed to be a committee substitute similar to the one in the Senate but it’s not official yet. I’m surprised Tesla has been completely silent about this. I think it would be good for owners to attend even if there is a substitute that removes the anti-Tesla service language, to show that owners remain engaged on this issue and to thank them for removing it. It’s also an opportunity to point out that amending the dealer franchise law to solve Warren Buffett’s problem means the law isn’t sacrosanct after all, and this should open the door to future amendments to fit modern circumstances (hint, hint).
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
HB 2490 hearing Tuesday April 9
- Thread starter TexasEV
- Start date
SpiceWare
Member
I agree it would be good for owners to go, but I won't be there as I'm still wiped out from going for the senate bill. Didn't sleep well at the hotel Wednesday night, got up early to make sure I was on time. Then was too wound up when I got back to Houston and didn't sleep well Thursday night either, followed by another bad night for Friday because I was overtired - it becomes a vicious cycle by this point.
My understanding is about 50 people from Austin were going to be there before the substitute was confirmed, and were asked to stand down. Maybe they'll show up for Tuesday instead.
And latest I've heard is that yes, the house bill will use the same substitute.
Stephen Pace on Twitter
My understanding is about 50 people from Austin were going to be there before the substitute was confirmed, and were asked to stand down. Maybe they'll show up for Tuesday instead.
And latest I've heard is that yes, the house bill will use the same substitute.
Stephen Pace on Twitter
With Tesla asking owners at the last minute not to testify on the Senate bill once there was the committee substitute, going silent on the House version of bill being heard in committee tomorrow, and when bringing it up, being told that Tesla doesn’t want any testimony that could undermine what they’ve been doing in meeting with legislators behind the scenes, my completely uninformed speculation is that the sponsors agreed to a committee substitute without the anti-Tesla service center language in return for Tesla letting the Buffett bill pass without drawing any more attention to it. The sponsors probably didn’t want people noticing the hypocrisy of giving an exemption to a different out of state billionaire (one of TADA’s taking points the past three sessions), etc.
As I said that’s just my uninformed speculation, but hey, what’s the internet for if not for uninformed speculation.
As I said that’s just my uninformed speculation, but hey, what’s the internet for if not for uninformed speculation.
SpiceWare
Member
Maybe Tesla's thinking is they can use that to their advantage in future sessions. There will also be significantly more Tesla owners in Texas in 2 years, which could help - the senators certainly seemed shocked at the outpouring of support for Tesla, such as Senator Menéndez comment just after 1:53:53 in the hearing video.
True, but I think the politically engaged owners this session were mostly the same ones that were engaged back in 2015 and 2017. Most new owners seem to care more about autopilot than Tesla’s ongoing battles with the auto dealer cartel.
SpiceWare
Member
Not having gone before I wouldn't know who attended prior sessions, though I don't believe I was the only first-timer there. Of course the fear of losing Tesla service would be a bigger concern to current owners than getting in-state Tesla sales as the current purchasing method does work even if there are some extra hoops to jump thru.
Plus current owners, by definition, already have their car. The idea of putting in effort to make that process easier has small appeal as for them the issue has little immediacy. There are certainly engaged owners who care about it because they share Tesla's mission/vision and those who already envision themselves buying another Tesla, but for the majority, such a change to allow in-state sales has no short term impact. They managed it already.
Maybe, except that TADA showed up with just about as many people as there were Tesla owners. Check the witness list for SB1415: Witness List Display
HB2940: Witness List Display
Considerable difference between the witness lists of the two bills, but TADA continued to support the bill even though they must have known the language had changed by the time the HB hearing took place.
I've thought about it off and on since the hearing and the main reason I can come up with that TADA would continue to object to the elimination of restrictions of "same kind" sales by the manufacturer, knowing full well that Tesla has no intention of franchising dealerships, would have to do with the used car market. Yes, you can buy CPO just like you can buy new, but TADA isn't about to make it easy for anyone. TADA can't force Tesla to create franchises, nor can Tesla prevent used sales by dealers. But they can both make life difficult for the other.
YMMV but my experience with buying a Tesla was quite agreeable, even with the restrictions in place. Much better than any dealership experience I've ever had. Might have been better because of the fact they couldn't talk money. I can see why some people would be turned away by that same thing, though.
The dealership orgs don't really care about competition from Tesla. That's not the issue for them. They are terrified of competition from their own brand's manufacturer. It's not about the competition between buying a Tesla or a BMW. It's about the competition of buying a BMW from John Smith's BMW of Houston dealership or from the BMW store (run by BMW). It's the business model itself that's a threat to them, not brand competition.
That's not really true. Dealers have gone out of their way to get the Texas govt to pass laws that singled out Tesla for restrictions, despite already having existing laws preventing Tesla from running their own dealerships, and smugly saying it was to "level the playing field". Laws to prevent them from having Tesla logos on their car carriers, which might affect the prospect of Tesla Semi being used in TX for delivery. So no, I really don't think the dealers don't care.
And if tomorrow Tesla switched to a franchised dealership sales model, they'd be happily accepted "into the family" and all obstruction and targeting would instantly disappear. Why? Because they don't care about competition from Tesla brand cars so long as it means more dealerships. It's not about Tesla as Tesla. It's only about their business model. But of course in the effort to stymie that model they will do what they can to prevent Tesla from operating as Tesla wants.
Similar threads
