Do you think Tesla should honor original reservation price?

[rizvend]

To OP, what do you say to dealers that have $50,000 mark-ups on certain models? Try to buy a Raptor R at less than $160k right now. People pay $230k for the 911 Turbo S that merely ties a Cybertruck to 60 mph all day long. Those buyers are already driving this market up as buyers now.

Yup. Market price is fair price. Otherwise, ebay bidding should be illegal too.

Sponsored

 

[TruckDaddy]

I am glad that the videos were posted showing the Raptor R getting destroyed in the quarter mile, and the model Y beating a Raptor up a sand dune. This will drive the dealer markups way down as those buyers want performance and will jump in line for a Tesla.

 

[ÆCIII]

I am glad that the videos were posted showing the Raptor R getting destroyed in the quarter mile, and the model Y beating a Raptor up a sand dune. This will drive the dealer markups way down as those buyers want performance and will jump in line for a Tesla.

Tesla's business model is far superior than any distribution involving third party skimmers like dealers.

When buying from a dealer, you're essentially agreeing to split a portion of your purchase money for the dealer margin which added nothing to the manufacturing substance of the vehicle at all. When you look at the lavish and constantly lit dealer store fronts and huge leased commercial property lots with their suits and lifestyles, all the customers of car sales and service pay for that. It's baked into the dealer price and the manufacturer gets none of it to innovate or make a better car.

- ÆCIII

 

[Crissa]

NO

- ÆCIII

No.

Estimates cannot be knowingly or gratuitously off. They have an obligation to make it as close to their prices or not.

We know they aren't obligated to the EXACT price. But they are obligated to make their best effort.

Anything other than than is FRAUD.

And I don't want to see Tesla inviting more SEC-type investigations, do you?

Yeah, amazing that after the highest inflation period in 40 years they think prices should not change.

Note: Inflation averaged 4.5% over the last four years. By fiduciary duty they should have given room for 3% inflation over the sales period.

There's no way that gets to 50% price increases.

'Highest' you say, as the average inflation was higher just a year before forty years ago. This was the longest period of low interest rates in US history.

-Crissa

 

[ÆCIII]

No.

Estimates cannot be knowingly or gratuitously off. They have an obligation to make it as close to their prices or not.

We know they aren't obligated to the EXACT price. But they are obligated to make their best effort.

Anything other than than is FRAUD.

And I don't want to see Tesla inviting more SEC-type investigations, do you?

-Crissa

I would agree if the release was only few months after an 'estimate' - maybe.

But this release is years and many dynamic inflation factors after the estimate so I don't think any court will try to hold a company to a figure that they originally declared was an estimate in good faith, that many years ago. Tesla covered themselves legally anyway by using the term 'estimate', and by saying the actual price would be provided as production nears. This is clearly stated.

It's irrelevant anyway because this Cybertruck is not even the same truck as the one at the reveal, and they're including some seriously more complex and robust features the original didn't have, including Steer-By-Wire, rear wheel steering, completely different doors and mechanisms, and total resizing for garages. These aren't small changes. Tesla could've even renamed or rebranded this truck to Cybertruck II or something, because substantively, it really is a completely different truck other than similar appearance.

Main thing is Tesla did make a best effort, but in technology as well as in software, the design process often becomes iterative and evolves into many changes. The current Cybertruck is much better than the original. Who is to say Tesla didn't make a 'best effort' - someone's emotions? Tesla navigated waves of external factors along with iterative gained knowledge during development, and still turned out a brilliant product. The only unexpected headwind was taking more time, but that also happens in tech and computer software development too.

Anyone who wants to split these sort of hairs should really take it up with the Tesla legal team, but I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing.

- ÆCIII

 

[TruckDaddy]

Tesla's business model is far superior than any distribution involving third party skimmers like dealers.

When buying from a dealer, you're essentially agreeing to split a portion of your purchase money for the dealer margin which added nothing to the manufacturing substance of the vehicle at all. When you look at the lavish and constantly lit dealer store fronts and huge leased commercial property lots with their suits and lifestyles, all the customers of car sales and service pay for that. It's baked into the dealer price and the manufacturer gets none of it to innovate or make a better car.

- ÆCIII

Exactly! Dealers justify their existence because traditional vehicles need a LOT of maintenance and repairs.
Teslas need next to nothing for years. Tires, go somewhere else. Never needs a brake job, ever. Have a wreck? Body shop, go elsewhere. Anything else?

Lavish dealers are over. I will miss the negotiations with a numbnut salesman, because I enjoyed not giving them anything in a buyer's market. During the chip shortage, you really had to work at it. Not as fun.

 

[vinyl.blowfish]

I can't believe no one has brought this up, but in any lawsuit you have to demonstrate actual damages.

 

[C T Rick]

I believe as an investor after the 2019 CT preview and purchasing stock in the company, had the stock dropped considerably and I lost money on the fact that they convinced 2 million people to put $100 into a fully refundable deposit. But it hasn’t, I’m only up 533%.

My mistake was selling off 60% and keeping the 40% literally free.

Yes, Elon is buying my CT. Actually I’m buying with my personal funds as My Tesla stock is in my retirement sep account and subject to capital gains.

So back on track. Who got hurt purchasing stock after the 2019 CT preview. Heck, the broken window created mass free advertising.

Yes, taking off 3 days of work, flying to Austin, staying in a hotel, eating An expensive Rib dinner, buying boots and a cowboy hat so I can be present at the Tesla reveal event sure did surprise me with the 60% price jump. But the stock continued to be strong.
I would be interested in what percentage of the original $100. Reservation holders are going to still purchase a CT, compared to how many non reservation holders are putting in new $250 to become a new reservation holder?





Now for those that want to sue, Im no Attorney, but I’m sure I can get you off

Rick

 

[Bill837]

No.

Estimates cannot be knowingly or gratuitously off. They have an obligation to make it as close to their prices or not.

We know they aren't obligated to the EXACT price. But they are obligated to make their best effort.

Anything other than than is FRAUD.

And I don't want to see Tesla inviting more SEC-type investigations, do you?


Note: Inflation averaged 4.5% over the last four years. By fiduciary duty they should have given room for 3% inflation over the sales period.

There's no way that gets to 50% price increases.

'Highest' you say, as the average inflation was higher just a year before forty years ago. This was the longest period of low interest rates in US history.

-Crissa

The key words are knowingly and gratuitous. Tesla could and would easily argue that it was impossible to have truly a curate knowledge on production development cost. So that kills knowingly. As for gratuitous a simple visit to the judges chambers to discuss the covid adjusted cost for development of the new gigapress and sundry steel related process and processing engineering and building.

 

[wanders]

I can't believe no one has brought this up, but in any lawsuit you have to demonstrate actual damages.

You mean a $100 refundable deposit isn't damaging enough !? We have standing dammit !! lol

 

[Crissa]

I can't believe no one has brought this up, but in any lawsuit you have to demonstrate actual damages.

Not always. Depends on the law being used. Many presume a damage and the law is written from there.

Not only are the buyers damaged at being asked to cough up more after waiting - that damaged the entire market by delaying demand that wouldn't have waited were it not for the promised price point.

The key words are knowingly and gratuitous. Tesla could and would easily argue that it was impossible to have truly a curate knowledge on production development cost. So that kills knowingly. As for gratuitous a simple visit to the judges chambers to discuss the covid adjusted cost for development of the new gigapress and sundry steel related process and processing engineering and building.

No, that's not how arguments work.

Arguments work by establishing evidence in discovery. They'd have to provide proof that they didn't ignore higher estimates.

And gratuitous is... Based on the pick of the attorney general, judge, and possibly jury; as well as any prior cases. It's not an exact science.

-Crissa

Sponsored