Virginia Allows Tesla To Establish Traditional Dealership

virginia allows tesla to establish traditional dealership

One week after we mused that electric carmaker Tesla would never be able to defeat current state laws prohibiting factory direct automobile sales and thus must join the franchised dealer model, the company proved us wrong thanks to the Commonwealth of Virginia.

According to Automotive News, the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles and, amazingly, the Virginia Automobile Dealer Association have come to an agreement to allow Tesla to open one dealership in the state. Tesla currently operates a order-taking outlet in a mall in Tysons Corner, a suburb of Washington, D.C., while their nearest service center is in Rockville, Maryland. Although details of the agreement are sealed, it is likely that Tesla will be allowed to build a full service store in the Tysons Corner area.

Tesla has been wrangling with the state for some time. Their request to open a dealership had previously been denied by the state’s DMV and the company was appealing the ruling in a county court. The next step is for the Virginia Motor Dealer Vehicle board to grant Tesla a business license.

Tesla had previously won approval to sell its vehicles in the state of New Hampshire but having a point near the nation’s capital is huge for the company’s exposure. Besides having near-perfect client demographics for the product, it affords CEO Elon Musk the opportunity to showcase his dealership to members of Congress, whom he is considering lobbying to pass a federal law allowing factory direct car sales to customers.

As this agreement has been in the works for some time, we cannot say if our editorial had any influence on the Virginia entities, but we cannot help but wonder if TTAC commenter and dealer apologist Ruggles, who posted a remarkable one hundred and seventy-four comments on our story last week, might have been in Richmond this week, wearing the lawmakers down until they caved.

Join the conversation
2 of 310 comments
  • Ruggles Ruggles on Oct 11, 2013

    RE: "Author: doctor olds Comment: @Vulpine- "BUYERS are saying GM needs to shut down one of those brands..." Absurd!! GMC is strong and profitable, Sierra represents plus business at higher unit profit. The fact the GM production system builds Sierra as s trim level of a Silverado is one element of why this is a good business plan. Your notions about the cost elements are disconnected from business reality." Good points. Another small detail is that GMC is the brand handled by Buick dealers, who have lost Olds and Pontiac. In a market with Chevrolet, the GMC dealer provides a competitor that can work in the consumer's favor.

  • Ruggles Ruggles on Nov 30, 2013

    Has the irrational exuberance flamed out here?

  • Sgeffe Bronco looks with JLR “reliability!”What’s not to like?!
  • FreedMike Back in the '70s, the one thing keeping consumers from buying more Datsuns was styling - these guys were bringing over some of the ugliest product imaginable. Remember the F10? As hard as I try to blot that rolling aberration from my memory, it comes back. So the name change to Nissan made sense, and happened right as they started bringing over good-looking product (like the Maxima that will be featured in this series). They made a pretty clean break.
  • Flowerplough Liability - Autonomous vehicles must be programmed to make life-ending decisions, and who wants to risk that? Hit the moose or dive into the steep grassy ditch? Ram the sudden pile up that is occurring mere feet in front of the bumper or scan the oncoming lane and swing left? Ram the rogue machine that suddenly swung into my lane, head on, or hop up onto the sidewalk and maybe bump a pedestrian? With no driver involved, Ford/Volkswagen or GM or whomever will bear full responsibility and, in America, be ambulance-chaser sued into bankruptcy and extinction in well under a decade. Or maybe the yuge corporations will get special, good-faith, immunity laws, nation-wide? Yeah, that's the ticket.
  • FreedMike It's not that consumers wouldn't want this tech in theory - I think they would. Honestly, the idea of a car that can take over the truly tedious driving stuff that drives me bonkers - like sitting in traffic - appeals to me. But there's no way I'd put my property and my life in the hands of tech that's clearly not ready for prime time, and neither would the majority of other drivers. If they want this tech to sell, they need to get it right.
  • TitaniumZ Of course they are starting to "sour" on the idea. That's what happens when cars start to drive better than people. Humanpilots mostly suck and make bad decisions.