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 exec: Preparations underway but no firm timeline yet for FSD rollout in China
The information was related by Tesla China Vice President Grace Tao in a comment to local media.
Tesla has not set a specific launch date for Full Self-Driving in China, despite the company’s ongoing preparations for a local FSD rollout.
The information was related by Tesla China Vice President Grace Tao in a comment to local media.
Tesla China prepares FSD infrastructure
Speaking in a recent media interview, the executive confirmed that Tesla has established a local training center in China to support the full adaptation of FSD to domestic driving conditions, as noted in a report from Sina News. However, she also noted that the company does not have a specific date when FSD will officially roll out in China.
“We have set up a local training center in China specifically to handle this adaptation,” Tao said. “Once officially released, it will demonstrate a level of performance that is no less than, and may even surpass, that of local drivers.”
Tao also emphasized the rapid accumulation of data by Tesla’s FSD system, with the executive highlighting that Full Self-Driving has now accumulated more than 7.5 billion miles of real-world driving data worldwide.
Possible 2026 rollout
The Tesla executive’s comments come amidst Elon Musk’s previous comments suggesting that regulatory approval in China could arrive sometime this 2026. During Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting in November 2025, Musk clarified that FSD had only received “partial approval” in China, though full authorization could potentially arrive around February or March 2026.
Musk reiterated that timeline at the World Economic Forum in Davos, when he stated that FSD approval in China could come as early as February.
Tesla’s latest FSD software, version 14, is already being tested in more advanced deployments in the United States. The company has also started the rollout of its fully unsupervised Robotaxis in Austin, Texas, which no longer feature safety monitors.
News
Tesla Semi lines up for $165M in California incentives ahead of mass production
The update was initially reported by The Los Angeles Times.
Tesla is reportedly positioned to receive roughly $165 million in California clean-truck incentives for its Semi.
The update was initially reported by The Los Angeles Times.
As per the Times, the Tesla Semi’s funding will come from California’s Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Incentive Project (HVIP), which was designed to accelerate the adoption of cleaner medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. Since its launch in 2009, the HVIP has distributed more than $1.6 billion to support zero-emission trucks and buses across the state.
In recent funding rounds, nearly 1,000 HVIP vouchers were provisionally reserved for the Tesla Semi, giving Tesla a far larger share of available funding than any other automaker. An analysis by the Times found that even after revisions to public data, Tesla still accounts for about $165 million in incentives. The next-largest recipient, Canadian bus manufacturer New Flyer, received roughly $68 million.
This is quite unsurprising, however, considering that the Tesla Semi does not have a lot of competition in the zero-emissions trucking segment.
To qualify for HVIP funding, vehicles must be approved by the California Air Resources Board and listed in the program catalog, as noted in an electrive report. When the Tesla Semi voucher applications were submitted, public certification records only showed eligibility for the 2024 model year, with later model years not yet listed.
State officials have stated that certification details often involve confidential business information and that funding will only be paid once vehicles are fully approved and delivered. Still, the first-come, first-served nature of HVIP means large voucher reservations can effectively crowd out competing electric trucks. Incentive amounts for the Semi reportedly ranged from about $84,000 to as much as $351,000 per vehicle after data adjustments.
Unveiled in 2017, the Tesla Semi has seen limited deliveries so far, though CEO Elon Musk has recently reiterated that the Class 8 all-electric truck will enter mass production this year.
Elon Musk
Tesla reveals major info about the Semi as it heads toward ‘mass production’
Some information, like trim levels and their specs were not revealed by Tesla, but now that the Semi is headed toward mass production this year, the company finally revealed those specifics.
Tesla has revealed some major information about the all-electric Semi as it heads toward “mass production,” according to CEO Elon Musk.
The Semi has been working toward a wider production phase after several years of development, pilot programs, and the construction of a dedicated production facility that is specifically catered to the manufacturing of the vehicle.
However, some information, like trim levels and their specs were not revealed by Tesla, but now that the Semi is headed toward mass production this year, the company finally revealed those specifics.
Tesla Semi undergoes major redesign as dedicated factory preps for deliveries
Tesla plans to build a Standard Range and Long Range Trim level of the Semi, and while the range is noted in the company’s newly-released spec list, there is no indication of what battery size will be equipped by them. However, there is a notable weight difference between the two of roughly 3,000 lbs, and the Long Range configuration has a lightning-fast peak charging speed of 1.2 MW.
This information is not available for the Standard Range quite yet.
The spec list is as follows:
- Standard Range:
- 325 miles of range (at 82,000 lbs gross combination weight
- Curb Weight: <20,000
- Energy Consumption: 1.7 kWh per mile
- Powertrain: 3 independent motors on rear axles
- Charging: Up to 60% of range in 30 minutes
- Charge Type: MCS 3.2
- Drive Power: Up to 800 kW
- ePTO (Electric Power Take Off): Up to 25 kW
- Long Range:
- Range: 500 miles (at 82,000 lbs gross combination weight)
- Curb Weight: 23,000 lbs
- Energy Consumption: 1.7 kWh per mile
- Powertrain: 3 independent motors on rear axles
- Charging: Up to 60% of range in 30 minutes
- Charge Type: MCS 3.2
- Peak charging speed: 1.2MW (1,200kW)
- Drive Power: Up to 800 kW
- ePTO (Electric Power Take Off): Up to 25 kW
It is important to keep in mind that the Semi is currently spec’d for local runs, and Tesla has not yet released or developed a sleeper cabin that would be more suitable for longer trips, cross-country hauls, and overnight travel.
Tesla Semi sleeper section and large side storage teased in new video
Instead, the vehicle will be initially used for regional deliveries, as it has in the pilot programs for Pepsi Co. and Frito-Lay for the past several years.
It will enter mass production this year, Musk confirmed on X over the weekend.
Now that the company’s dedicated Semi production facility in Sparks, Nevada, is standing, the timeline seems much more realistic as the vehicle has had its mass manufacturing date adjusted on several occasions.