Connect with us

News

Volvo faces legal pushback in California on possible pivot to Tesla-style direct sales model

Published

on

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.

An overview of the “Care by Volvo” subscription sign up process. | Credit: Volvo USA

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.

Advertisement
The Care by Volvo app, as pictured on Volvo’s website. | Credit: Volvo USA

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

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Cybertruck sales bolstered by bold Musk move, report claims

If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.

Published

on

Credit: Cybertruck | X

A new report from Bloomberg claims Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by internal buyers, meaning companies owned by CEO Elon Musk, and most notably, SpaceX.

According to a new registration data analysis, a significant portion of the fourth quarter’s Cybertruck sales came from Musk companies.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, 7,071 Cybertrucks were registered in the United States. SpaceX, Musk’s rocket and satellite company, accounted for 1,279 of those vehicles—more than 18 percent of the total. Musk’s additional ventures, including xAI, the Boring Company, and Neuralink, acquired another 60 trucks during the same period.

Tesla Cybertruck just won a rare and elusive crash safety honor

Advertisement

If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.

These internal sales supplemented the Cybertruck’s overall performance for the quarter, as without them, sales would have plunged 51 percent. The vehicle, which has repeatedly been called “the best product Tesla has ever made,” has fallen short of expectations due to pricing.

When first unveiled back in 2019, Tesla had a $39,990, $49,990, and $69,990 configuration for sale. Those prices inflated significantly as the truck was not released to customers until 2023. Those who had placed orders for affordable configurations were priced out.

Sam Fiorani, VP of Global Vehicle Forecasting at AutoForecast Solutions, said, “Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck.” In reality, there are probably a lot of buyers, but they simply cannot afford the truck at its current price point.

Advertisement

The Cybertruck was supposed to broaden Tesla’s appeal beyond its core lineup of sleek sedans and SUVs. While it has done a lot for brand notoriety, it has not lived up to its monumental expectations, and it’s simply because the truck has not been as available as most had thought.

The truck is still the best-selling electric pickup in the country, outpacing rivals like the Ford F-150 Lightning and Chevrolet Silverado EV. It is also not uncommon for companies to use their own vehicles for internal operations, like Ford using its own Transit van for Mobile Service.

However, this much inventory of Cybertrucks being purchased by Musk’s companies is not what you love to see as a fan or investor.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Signature Model S, X owners get hit with crazy no-resale clause

With production of the Model S and X winding down to focus on next-generation projects like the Optimus robot, Tesla is building just 250 units of each model. Priced at $159,420, these exclusive vehicles come loaded with bespoke features and the full Luxe Package—but buyers must sign a binding contract before delivery that bars resale for one full year.

Published

on

Tesla Signature Model S and X owners got hit with a crazy no-resale clause by the company, a move that has been used before to limit the immediate resale of a vehicle to obtain a sizeable profit.

Tesla has introduced a strict “No Resale Agreement” for its ultra-limited Signature Edition Model S and Model X Plaid vehicles, signaling the automaker’s determination to keep these final flagship models in the hands of genuine enthusiasts rather than speculators.

With production of the Model S and X winding down to focus on next-generation projects like the Optimus robot, Tesla is building just 250 units of each model. Priced at $159,420, these exclusive vehicles come loaded with bespoke features and the full Luxe Package—but buyers must sign a binding contract before delivery that bars resale for one full year.

Purchasers promise they “will not sell or otherwise attempt to sell the vehicle within the first year following your vehicle’s delivery date.”

Advertisement

Violators face steep consequences: Tesla can pursue liquidated damages equal to $50,000 or the full amount received from any sale or transfer, whichever is greater. The company also reserves the right to refuse future vehicle sales to anyone who breaches the clause. Orders are account-specific, requiring buyers to log in with their personal Tesla account, which further complicates any informal transfers.

The restrictions extend beyond the one-year lockout. Even after the prohibition period ends, key elements of the Signature Edition’s appeal do not transfer with the car. The Luxe Package—bundling lifetime Full Self-Driving (Supervised), free lifetime Supercharging, and permanent Premium Connectivity—terminates upon any change in ownership.

While four years of Premium Service, tire, and windshield protection plans do transfer, the high-value software and charging perks effectively vanish for the second owner. This non-transferability has long been Tesla’s policy for Luxe-equipped vehicles, but it carries extra weight on a nearly $160,000 limited-run model.

Tesla’s move is a direct response to past flipping of rare editions. By tying the car to the original buyer’s account and imposing financial penalties, the company aims to curb gray-market speculation that could drive prices far above MSRP.

Advertisement

Critics of the no-resale clause argue that the agreement limits personal property rights and could complicate legitimate life events like relocation or financial hardship.

For now, the policy appears ironclad. Deliveries of the Signature Editions are expected to begin in May 2026, complete with Garnet Red paint, gold-accented badging, Alcantara interiors, yoke steering, and unique numbered plaques.

In an era when limited-edition vehicles often become instant investment pieces, Tesla is betting that true fans will embrace the rules. Whether the No Resale Agreement successfully protects the final chapter of the Model S and X legacy remains to be seen—but one thing is clear: these will be among the most tightly controlled Teslas ever sold.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla just tipped its hand on a major Cybercab feature as production hits Plaid Mode

Tesla has delivered a clear signal that its Robotaxi ambitions are shifting into high gear. On April 17, longtime factory observer and drone pilot Joe Tegtmeyer captured drone footage and still images showing approximately 14 freshly built Cybercabs parked in the outbound lot—each one conspicuously lacking a steering wheel.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

Tesla just tipped its hand on a major Cybercab feature as it is putting production into Plaid Mode, but a clear indication of what the company plans to do with the vehicle is now apparent.

Tesla has delivered a clear signal that its Robotaxi ambitions are shifting into high gear, and it’s doing it with full autonomy in mind.

On April 17, longtime factory observer and drone pilot Joe Tegtmeyer captured drone footage and still images showing approximately 14 newly built Cybercabs parked in the outbound lot, each conspicuously lacking a steering wheel, and potentially pedals.

Tegtmeyer’s post highlighted the significance of this development: The images and video reveal sleek, two-seat Cybercabs in their final production form: no driver controls, no side mirrors, and the minimalist interior first unveiled at Tesla’s “We Robot” event in October 2024.

Advertisement

Advertisement

These units contrast with earlier test vehicles spotted at the factory’s crash-test area, which carried temporary steering wheels and pedals to meet current federal regulations during data-collection phases.

The outbound-lot vehicles appear complete, with production wheels, tire stickers, and the signature Cybercab styling ready for deployment.

This sighting represents a pivotal transition. Tesla designed the Cybercab from the ground up as a purpose-built robotaxi, engineered for unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) operation. Removing manual controls eliminates cost, complexity, and weight while maximizing interior space and range.

The move also signals that Tesla has cleared initial validation hurdles and is now building vehicles to the exact specification intended for commercial robotaxi service.

Advertisement

Industry watchers note the timing aligns with Tesla’s broader rollout plans. Production of early Cybercabs began in late 2025 and early 2026, primarily for internal testing and regulatory compliance.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards currently limit vehicles without steering wheels to 2,500 units per year without exemption, a cap that Tesla is navigating through ongoing filings.

Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison

The appearance of steering-wheel-free units in the outbound lot suggests the company is preparing a small initial fleet—likely for Austin pilot operations or further validation—while pushing for regulatory relief to scale output.

Advertisement

The development comes as Tesla ramps its dedicated Cybercab line at Gigafactory Texas. If the Monday surge materializes as predicted, observers expect dozens more units to accumulate rapidly.

With unsupervised FSD advancing and regulatory conversations ongoing, these wheel-less Cybercabs parked under the Texas sun represent more than hardware—they embody Tesla’s bet that autonomous mobility is no longer a prototype dream but an imminent reality.

Continue Reading