News
Volvo faces legal pushback in California on possible pivot to Tesla-style direct sales model
On Tuesday, the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) filed a petition against Volvo USA with California’s New Motor Vehicle Board claiming the legacy car maker violates state franchise laws banning manufacturer competition with dealerships. The group claimed the “Care by Volvo” (CbV) subscription service launched in early 2018 which provides all-in-one packages of 24-month leases, premium insurance, concierge service, and most vehicle maintenance, was using Volvo dealers as de facto “agents” in an effective practice of dealing directly to consumers. The move is reminiscent of Tesla’s struggles, itself being the subject of dealer franchise-focused legal actions. However, the legal questions aside, the sum of CNCDA’s complaints additionally indicate its objection to Volvo’s possible ongoing shift to a Tesla-style overall direct-sales model.
In Volvo’s CbV subscription plan, buyers select from two currently offered models – the S60 and XC40, including customizations – via an app or a corporate-run website. Once the car selection is final, an agent from Volvo’s financial services company (the “Volvo Concierge”) contacts the buyer and finalizes the package particulars, after which delivery is scheduled at a local participating dealership. During the online process, the customer is given a guaranteed monthly subscription price with the option to upgrade after 12 months and chooses the dealership that will complete the sale. Volvo provides the financing directly through a separate financing branch, and the insurance is provided by Liberty Mutual. The dealer handles the final sales contract, payment, and vehicle hand-off.
While the dealerships participate in the CbV program voluntarily and receive an 8% sales commission, CNCDA claims the process significantly limits the dealer’s ability to build a (profitable) relationship with the customer and eliminates dealer earnings potentials stemming from financing services and other package “add-ons” during the sales process. On its face, this might seem like a reasonable argument, but Volvo’s perspective seems to be addressing customer preferences, a new era of sales strategies, and an effort to reach a new customer market. In an aim to make the brand more appealing to a younger generation accustomed to app-based ride-hailing and a la carte video entertainment services, Volvo may be hoping CbV will help them make inroads towards Millennials in particular.
In an interview with Global Fleet, Alan Visser, CEO of Volvo’s Chinese sister brand, Lynk & Co., detailed how the Millennial connection is explicitly part of that company’s subscription-only business model: “On the other [hand], there is [the] smartphone aspect…Millennials want maximum flexibility and all-inclusive pricing rather than long-term commitments and hassle. Our subscription model is more than just a private lease. It includes services like pick-up and delivery, cleaning, and lots of other things I cannot disclose just yet,” he stated. Also, Lynk & Co intends to only sell hybrids and/or battery electrics, adding yet another Volvo parallel to Tesla. That, and its plan for showcasing its vehicles prior to customer purchase: “In large urban areas we will have so-called offline stores: small, sociable brand boutiques,” Visser additionally explained in the interview.
In their petition, the California dealer’s group made the connection between Lynk & Co and Volvo USA a key part of their case for Volvo’s competition law violation. According to Jalopnik’s review of a pre-production model of Lynk’s first vehicle, the direct-sales subscription is possibly being tested in the US via the Care by Volvo program. “They’re very eager to try out this subscription model of car ownership, or subscribership…They’re sort of testing the waters with the Care by Volvo program, which is proving to be a good plan,” Torchinsky writes, summarizing his talks with the company’s representatives. This article was referenced in CNCDA’s petition against Volvo’s CbV program. Torchinsky goes on to further describe how the dealership experience “sucks” enough for consumers to have opened up a new market for doing car sales business which Lynk has intentionally capitalized on.
Protecting dealers doesn’t appear to be the main priority of CNCDA. In their petition, the New Car Dealers Association seems to be taking the biggest issue with Volvo’s possible negative position on the franchise model entirely, using the legal system as a toolkit to keep customers stuck in an aging infrastructure rather than innovating with the times and finding less restrictive ways to make everyone happy. “‘Subscription programs’ like CbV have been described as a way for the manufacturer to cut out the dealer and ultimately eliminate the franchise model,” the group stated in the introduction of their petition to the New Motor Vehicle Board. Where franchise laws were set up to protect dealers from forced manufacturer bidding, the association seems to be attempting to morph manufacturers wanting to do their own customers’ bidding into an attack on dealer rights. Tesla has certainly encountered this type of morphing even without the challenge of having private dealerships.
In December of last year, a Connecticut state court judge concluded that Tesla’s Greenwich Ave. gallery was operating like a dealership and required a license to do so, something the electric vehicle company is not eligible for because it doesn’t have franchises. The Connecticut Automotive Retailers Trade Association (CARA) was the party responsible for initiating the proceedings which led to the judgment, an organization often at the front lines of defending the state’s franchise laws from would-be offenders. CARA holds the position that vehicle sales should only be conducted through licensed independent dealerships, leaving direct-sales manufacturers like Tesla with limited options for providing its products to customers wanting to buy them.
The car subscription model isn’t unique to Volvo. Luxury car manufacturers especially seem to have also discovered the new market potential of app-driven car flexibility: Access by BMW has price tiers in the $2000-$3700 range for their packages (which include unlimited vehicle swapping), but it’s only available in Nashville, Tennessee for now. The UK-only Carpe by Jaguar Land Rover has $1200-$2900 packages with similar features as CbV, the Mercedez-Benz Collection is similar in price to Carpe, and a few others in that range are being developed and expanded by their respective manufacturers. Several third-party subscription services have also popped up with more flexible lease terms and more economical pricing. Clearly, the trend is showing data points that are worth investment attention.
With all the controversy, it might not even be dealerships that stand to lose the most with subscription models. The case has been made for classifying them as rental cars, which would be another market that might take issue with manufacturers latest ideas for doing business. Some of the services, like Flexdrive, are practically set up to be permanent rental solutions. As with all things, though, only time will tell.
2019-1-15 CNCDA Petition Re… by on Scribd
News
Tesla discloses interesting collaboration partner for Supercharging
This BOXABL collaboration would be a great way to add a rest stop to a rural Supercharging location, and could lead to more of these chargers across the U.S.
Tesla disclosed an interesting collaboration partner in an SEC filing, which looks like an indication of a potential project at Supercharger sites.
Tesla said on Tuesday in the filing that it was entering an agreement with BOXABL to design and build a Micromenity structure. Simply put, this is a modular building, usually a few hundred square feet in size, and it has been seen at Superchargers in Europe.
In Magnant, France, Tesla opened a small building at a Supercharger that is available to all EV owners. There are snacks and drinks inside, including ice cream, coffee, a gaming console, and restrooms. It gives people an opportunity to get up and out of their cars while charging.
This building was not built by BOXABL, but instead by bk World Lounges. It is likely the final Supercharging stop before people get to Paris, as it is located 250 kilometers, or 155 miles, from the City of Light.
Voir cette publication sur Instagram
Magnant has 56 stalls, so it is a large Supercharging stop compared to most. The building could be a sign of things to come, especially as Tesla has opened up larger Supercharger stations along major roadways.
It is for just a single building, as the Scope of Work within the filing states “a comprehensive package for one Micromenity building.”
NEWS: BOXABL, a company that creates modular, prefabricated buildings, has entered into an agreement with @Tesla.
This is Tesla formally contracting BOXABL to design, engineer, and build a pilot “Micromenity” structure, a compact, modular building unit.
While some info in the… pic.twitter.com/RabJczGpEp
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) December 9, 2025
Superchargers are commonly located at gas stations, shopping centers, and other major points of interest. However, there are some stops that are isolated from retail or entertainment.
This BOXABL collaboration would be a great way to add a rest stop to a rural Supercharging location, and could lead to more of these chargers across the U.S.
Tesla has done a lot of really great things for Supercharging this year.
Along with widespread expansion, the company launched the “Charging Passport” this week, opened the largest Supercharger in the world in Lost Hills, California, with 168 chargers, opened the Tesla Diner, a drive-in movie restaurant in Los Angeles, and initiated access to the infrastructure to even more automakers.
Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi safety monitor removal in Austin: here’s when
Musk has made the claim about removing Safety Monitors from Tesla Robotaxi vehicles in Austin three times this year, once in September, once in October, and once in November.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed on Tuesday at the xAI Hackathon that the company would be removing Safety Monitors from Robotaxis in Austin in just three weeks.
This would meet Musk’s timeline from earlier this year, as he has said on several occasions that Tesla Robotaxis would have no supervision in Austin by the end of 2025.
On Tuesday, Musk said:
“Unsupervised is pretty much solved at this point. So there will be Tesla Robotaxis operating in Austin with no one in them. Not even anyone in the passenger seat in about three weeks.”
Musk has made the claim about removing Safety Monitors from Tesla Robotaxi vehicles in Austin three times this year, once in September, once in October, and once in November.
In September, he said:
“Should be no safety driver by end of year.”
The safety driver is just there for the first few months to be extra safe.
Should be no safety driver by end of year.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 4, 2025
On the Q3 Earnings Call in October, he said:
“We are expecting ot have no safety drivers in at least large parts of Austin by the end of this year.”
Finally, in November, he reiterated the timeline in a public statement at the Shareholder Meeting:
“I expect Robotaxis to operate without safety drivers in large parts of Austin this year.”
Currently, Tesla uses Safety Monitors in Austin in the passenger’s seat on local roads. They will sit in the driver’s seat for highway routes. In the Bay Area ride-hailing operation, there is always a Safety Monitor in the driver’s seat.
Three weeks would deliver on the end-of-year promise, cutting it close, beating it by just two days. However, it would be a tremendous leap forward in the Robotaxi program, and would shut the mouths of many skeptics who state the current iteration is no different than having an Uber.
Tesla has also expanded its Robotaxi fleet this year, but the company has not given exact figures. Once it expands its fleet, even more progress will be made in Tesla’s self-driving efforts.
News
SpaceX reportedly mulling IPO, eyeing largest of all time: report
“I do want to try to figure out some way for Tesla shareholders to participate in SpaceX. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to how to give people access to SpaceX stock,” Musk said.
SpaceX is reportedly mulling an initial public offering, eyeing what would be the largest valuation at the time of availability of all time, a new report from Bloomberg said on Tuesday.
It is one of many reports involving one of Elon Musk’s companies and a massive market move, as this is not the first time we have seen reports of an IPO by SpaceX. Musk himself has also dispelled other reports in the past of a similar nature, including an xAI funding round.
SpaceX and Musk have yet to comment on the report. In the past, untrue reports were promptly replied to by the CEO; this has not yet gained any response, which is a good sign in terms of credibility.
However, he said just a few days ago that stories of this nature are inaccurate:
“There has been a lot of press claiming SpaceX is raising money at $800B, which is not accurate. SpaceX has been cash flow positive for many years and does periodic stock buybacks twice a year to provide liquidity for employees and investors. Valuation increments are a function of progress with Starship and Starlink and securing global direct-to-cell spectrum that greatly increases our addressable market. And one other thing that is arguably most significant by far.”
There has been a lot of press claiming @SpaceX is raising money at $800B, which is not accurate.
SpaceX has been cash flow positive for many years and does periodic stock buybacks twice a year to provide liquidity for employees and investors.
Valuation increments are a…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 6, 2025
Musk has discussed a potential IPO for SpaceX in recent months, as the November 6 shareholder meeting, as he commented on the “downsides” of having a public company, like litigation exposure, quarterly reporting pressures, and other inconveniences.
Nevertheless, Musk has also said he wants there to be a way for Tesla shareholders to get in on the action. At the meeting in early November, he said:
“I do want to try to figure out some way for Tesla shareholders to participate in SpaceX. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to how to give people access to SpaceX stock.”
Additionally, he added:
“Maybe at some point., SpaceX should become a public company despite all the downsides of being public.”
Musk has been historically reluctant to take SpaceX public, at times stating it could become a barrier to colonizing Mars. That does not mean it will not happen.
Bloomberg’s report cites multiple unidentified sources who are familiar with the matter. They indicate to the publication that SpaceX wants to go public in mid-to-late 2026, and it wants to raise $30 billion at a valuation of around $1.5 trillion.
This is not the first time SpaceX has discussed an IPO; we reported on it nine years ago. We hope it is true, as the community has spoken for a long time about having access to SpaceX stock. Legendary investor Ron Baron is one of the lucky few to be a SpaceX investor, and said it, along with Tesla, is a “lifetime investment.”
Tesla bull Ron Baron reveals $100M SpaceX investment, sees 3-5x return on TSLA
The primary driver of SpaceX’s value is Starlink, the company’s satellite internet service. Starlink contributes 60-70 percent of SpaceX’s revenue, meaning it is the primary value engine. Launch services, like Falcon 9 contracts, and the development of Starship, also play supporting roles.
Tesla discloses interesting collaboration partner for Supercharging
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi safety monitor removal in Austin: here’s when
