Dealers Vote Against Bill to Change Tesla and Rivan Sales Verdict in Colorado

In Colorado, a new bill, SB 167, was introduced that would enable the state’s direct sales ban to be bypassed by electric vehicle industries.

The legislation was passed in 2010, meaning that Tesla’s shop is’ grandfathered’ in Tesla’s state, although Tesla can not open other outlets.  There still are some sites in Colorado, although legally these are “galleries,” the law was first enacted in 2009 in reaction to the GM bankruptcy.  The aim was to save local dealers who could lose their licenses during bankruptcy. 

This law differs from many other U.S. sales bans.  Many other state-owned sales ban implemented decades earlier to prevent manufacturers from competing out local retailers. Firms grew to the point where they could establish their dealerships and undermine local businesses that had spent a long time and lots of capital building up their enterprises.

For several factors, Tesla had a different sales plan at the outset.  Tesla came up in the Internet era so that they can conveniently sell their cars rather than have a local dealer in every town in that manner.

To small manufacturers, this is critical because it is challenging to sell everywhere, and established dealers may be dismissive to a little fresh brand.

It refers in particular to dealers who require specialized training in addressing electric vehicle questions.  In the early days, Tesla employed George Blankenship, Retail VP, who previously developed retail models at Gap and Apple. Even for manufacturers that sell electric cars, the EV retailer experience is not ideal.  With specialized employees, the company has established its high-traffic stores to create a better dealing experience.

Colorado was among the first states to be targeted by Tesla since it is reasonably wealthy, progressively focused on environmental issues, and has a very high state rebate for EV ownership at the moment (half of the car price up to $5,000).  Before the 2010 law came into effect, they opened a store there that meant they were grandfathered.

Since then, the state has, in several ways, supported Tesla and EVs.  Colorado officially embraced California’s ZEV mandate as an answer to the ridiculous interference with fuel economy laws by the US EPA at the start of this year.  Governor Polis Jared is SB 167 supportive.

The Tesla / Rivian model does not appeal to dealership associations since they view it as a threat to their enterprise.  State dealership organizations are also politically influential and have lobbying money and many local jobs supporting their enterprises.  In many countries, politicians will loathe their wrong side unless they won’t lose political contributions and votes from dealer-tied citizens. 

Tim Jackson, CEO of the association of Colorado dealers (who defines himself as a “futurist” but is always cynical about electric vehicles), states, “this bill is a problem-solving bill” and would endanger the investment of dealerships.