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
Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk trolls budget airline after it refuses Starlink on its planes
“I really want to put a Ryan in charge of Ryan Air. It is your destiny,” Musk said.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk trolled budget airline Ryanair on his social media platform X this week following the company’s refusal to adopt Starlink internet on its planes.
Earlier this week, it was reported that Ryanair did not plan to install Starlink internet services on its planes due to its budgetary nature and short flight spans, which are commonly only an hour or so in total duration.
Initially, Musk said installing Starlink on the company’s planes would not impact cost or aerodynamics, but Ryanair responded on its X account, which is comical in nature, by stating that a propaganda it would not fall for was “Wi-Fi on planes.”
Musk responded by asking, “How much would it cost to buy you?” Then followed up with the idea of buying the company and replacing the CEO with someone named Ryan:
I really want to put a Ryan in charge of Ryan Air. It is your destiny.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 19, 2026
Polymarket now states that there is an 8 percent chance that Musk will purchase Ryanair, which would cost Musk roughly $36 billion, based on recent financial data of the public company.
Although the banter has certainly crossed a line, it does not seem as if there is any true reason to believe Musk would purchase the airline. More than anything, it seems like an exercise of who will go further.
Starlink passes 9 million active customers just weeks after hitting 8 million
However, it is worth noting that if something is important enough, Musk will get involved. He bought Twitter a few years ago and then turned it into X, but that issue was much larger than simple banter with a company that does not want to utilize one of the CEO’s products.
The insufferable, special needs chimp currently running Ryan Air is an accountant. Has no idea how airplanes even fly.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 20, 2026
In a poll posted yesterday by Musk, asking whether he should buy Ryanair and “restore Ryan as their rightful ruler.” 76.5 percent of respondents said he should, but others believe that the whole idea is just playful dialogue for now.
But it is not ideal to count Musk out, especially if things continue to move in the direction they have been.
News
Tesla Robotaxi’s biggest rival sends latest statement with big expansion
The new expanded geofence now covers a broader region of Austin and its metropolitan areas, extended south to Manchaca and north beyond US-183.
Tesla Robotaxi’s biggest rival sent its latest statement earlier this month by making a big expansion to its geofence, pushing the limits up by over 50 percent and nearing Tesla’s size.
Waymo announced earlier this month that it was expanding its geofence in Austin by slightly over 50 percent, now servicing an area of 140 square miles, over the previous 90 square miles that it has been operating in since July 2025.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk shades Waymo: ‘Never really had a chance’
The new expanded geofence now covers a broader region of Austin and its metropolitan areas, extended south to Manchaca and north beyond US-183.
These rides are fully driverless, which sets them apart from Tesla slightly. Tesla operates its Robotaxi program in Austin with a Safety Monitor in the passenger’s seat on local roads and in the driver’s seat for highway routes.
It has also tested fully driverless Robotaxi services internally in recent weeks, hoping to remove Safety Monitors in the near future, after hoping to do so by the end of 2025.
Tesla Robotaxi service area vs. Waymo’s new expansion in Austin, TX. pic.twitter.com/7cnaeiduKY
— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) January 13, 2026
Although Waymo’s geofence has expanded considerably, it still falls short of Tesla’s by roughly 31 square miles, as the company’s expansion back in late 2025 put it up to roughly 171 square miles.
There are several differences between the two operations apart from the size of the geofence and the fact that Waymo is able to operate autonomously.
Waymo emphasizes mature, fully autonomous operations in a denser but smaller area, while Tesla focuses on more extensive coverage and fleet scaling potential, especially with the potential release of Cybercab and a recently reached milestone of 200 Robotaxis in its fleet across Austin and the Bay Area.
However, the two companies are striving to achieve the same goal, which is expanding the availability of driverless ride-sharing options across the United States, starting with large cities like Austin and the San Francisco Bay Area. Waymo also operates in other cities, like Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Orlando, Phoenix, and Atlanta, among others.
Tesla is working to expand to more cities as well, and is hoping to launch in Miami, Houston, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Dallas.
Elon Musk
Tesla automotive will be forgotten, but not in a bad way: investor
It’s no secret that Tesla’s automotive division has been its shining star for some time. For years, analysts and investors have focused on the next big project or vehicle release, quarterly delivery frames, and progress in self-driving cars. These have been the big categories of focus, but that will all change soon.
Entrepreneur and Angel investor Jason Calacanis believes that Tesla will one day be only a shade of how it is recognized now, as its automotive side will essentially be forgotten, but not in a bad way.
It’s no secret that Tesla’s automotive division has been its shining star for some time. For years, analysts and investors have focused on the next big project or vehicle release, quarterly delivery frames, and progress in self-driving cars. These have been the big categories of focus, but that will all change soon.
I subscribed to Tesla Full Self-Driving after four free months: here’s why
Eventually, and even now, the focus has been on real-world AI and Robotics, both through the Full Self-Driving and autonomy projects that Tesla has been working on, as well as the Optimus program, which is what Calacanis believes will be the big disruptor of the company’s automotive division.
On the All-In podcast, Calcanis revealed he had visited Tesla’s Optimus lab earlier this month, where he was able to review the Optimus Gen 3 prototype and watch teams of engineers chip away at developing what CEO Elon Musk has said will be the big product that will drive the company even further into the next few decades.
Calacanis said:
“Nobody will remember that Tesla ever made a car. They will only remember the Optimus.”
He added that Musk “is going to make a billion of those.”
Musk has stated this point himself, too. He at one point said that he predicted that “Optimus will be the biggest product of all-time by far. Nothing will even be close. I think it’ll be 10 times bigger than the next biggest product ever made.”
He has also indicated that he believes 80 percent of Tesla’s value will be Optimus.
Optimus aims to totally revolutionize the way people live, and Musk has said that working will be optional due to its presence. Tesla’s hopes for Optimus truly show a crystal clear image of the future and what could be possible with humanoid robots and AI.