"Absurd" is quite an editorialized part of this headline. Maybe Gizmodo should report on the facts and let us decide if we think it's "absurd?"
I personally think it's reasonable enough. For one, buyers signed on the dotted line. It's a luxury product that nobody needs. They don't have to buy one
For two, nobody likes scalpers.
I don't think any court would award the damages that Tesla would be seeking here but they're well within their rights to try and enforce their contract, and they're well within their rights to ban customers (Ferrari is also known to do this to owners who "tarnish their brand")
> The electric truck weighs 7,000 pounds according to Musk, making it about as heavy as a Ford F-150, but can accelerate from 0-60 in under 3 seconds.
Finally, the most missed feature in a pick-up truck is here!
> The futuristic-looking truck has a bulletproof, stainless steel body and is “waterproof enough” to cross rivers like a boat, among a long list of claims that only seem beneficial during an apocalypse.
This, however might actually be useful, given the current geopolitical climate...
Man: "I'm a marketing manager who lives in the suburbs
and commutes to work on the highway. I live alone, so
of course I needed a car that can seat 12 and is
equipped to drive across arctic tundra...it just
makes me feel better!"
Woman: "The new Maibatsu Monstrosity...mine's bigger!"
I was going to chime in to make fun of the paltry towing capacity I assumed it had, but it's rated to 14,000 lbs. That is significantly higher than the F-150 electric's 7700-10,000 lbs.
That 14k towing capacity can probably only be sustained for like 28 minutes.
Edit: expect a ~73mile range at 14k. For comparison an f250 towing 15k lbs gets about 9mpg. With a 55 gallon tank, the f250 is still a better option for practical reasons. Let’s revisit this 5 years after the cyber truck release
As an SF resident who never goes outside but reads Elon's X feed, you would be crazy to live here and not buy a bulletproof Cybertruck. I will wait until it arrives to go out.
Ford made me sign a contract similar to this when I bought a Bronco sport. I was annoyed the dealer sprung it on me at the very end when I was getting the keys, but didn’t plan to resell in the first year anyways.
As long as no consideration has exchanged hands or signatures signed, then yes. Contracts can be modified up to the second they are signed as long as both parties agree to it. Obviously, no one could negotiating away contract like this, but you always have the option to walk away.
You can be asked all kinds of things. It's a little trick law enforcement tends to use: ask for things that the person being asked doesn't have any obligation to do.
As previously discussed in other HN threads from last week, these penalties are DOA. Some of them, such as the liquidated "damages" clause which is clearly just a penalties clause, are straight up illegal. Courts will punish parties attempting to enforce a penalties clause, usually by requiring them to pay the opposing parties' legal fees.
I would love to see a detailed legal breakdown and examination of how many of the clauses in this contract are complete, utter, unenforceable horseshit.
There are many precedence, Porsche being one. I’m sure their lawyers aren’t naive.
We want to ensure that cars are available to reach true enthusiasts, to be driven and enjoyed for years to come. For this reason, those allocated a 911 S/T in the US will be required to adhere to an agreed minimum retention period, set at one year
I'm not sure you read the article? The article states that Porsche solved this by treating the first year of ownership as a "lease" with ownership transferring to the buyer after 1 year.
Or in other words...no lawsuit...And no restrictions on resale, since leased property can't be sold by the lessee.
Lawyers, being very much not naive, knowingly write contracts that are unenforceable in court. They're ok with that because they know the majority of those who sign the contract assume it's legally enforceable and never challenge it.
Huh? There is a ton of precedent for this - as a matter of fact Ford was chasing down famous people and auction houses for being in breach of the GT sales contract.
> I do think it’s pretty cool that the all-terrain tire option is a custom Goodyear with notches in the sidewall to accommodate the plastic aero covers
The second mortgage that you’ll need to take out when it comes time to replace them will be notably less cool.
Just admit they can be remote controlled and call them home when the "owners" displease you.
That might be a little rank even for Musk. Make it part of the EULA. "By opening the door you agree to ..." Add an NDA clause.
If these are "bulletproof"; could someone be kidnapped by their car? I was gonna make a crack about keeping a window breaker handy in case the door locks got overridden but even that might not work.
You're not being inventive enough. Drivers are not liable when autopilot fails. Neither is Tesla.
If it gets into an "accident" involving a body of water, electromechanical locks and bulletproof glass will seal your fate...and nobody will be held accountable.
This is pretty obviously intended to prevent essentially scalpers from selling the early units for massive profit. Not sure why people are mad about this? South Africa man bad?
Right. Have you considered perhaps that there's entire industries out there plagued by organizations that use automated tools to muscle out consumers from access of general goods with with no intent of using those products themselves and only act as an artificial intermediary to resale said goods and inflate the price for their own benefit? This plagues concert tickets, shoes, clothing, computer parts, sometimes evening necessary goods like cleaning wipes and toilet paper.
Are those people just good hard working honest capitalists that create a market opportunity and deserve to use their products as they damn well please too?
How would you feel if all your popular goods had this kind of strings attached to them ?
Buy a PS5, and you better like it because reselling it after the return window will be an arm and a leg. Same for your Roomba, you regret not buying a competitor after a few weeks ? tough luck it's in your closet for the rest of the year and you'll fork the money in full for any other purchase. etc.
If you jail everyone, you'd have jailed all criminals, too. Therefore you could say "pretty obviously intended to stop criminals". But punishing everyone because of a malicious minority defeats the point of your entire action.
They could've just as easily prevented scalping by saying "you can sell your CyberTruck, but for not even a dollar more than the purchase price."
Readit News
I personally think it's reasonable enough. For one, buyers signed on the dotted line. It's a luxury product that nobody needs. They don't have to buy one
For two, nobody likes scalpers.
I don't think any court would award the damages that Tesla would be seeking here but they're well within their rights to try and enforce their contract, and they're well within their rights to ban customers (Ferrari is also known to do this to owners who "tarnish their brand")
This never has been (and probably never will be) Gizmodo’s M.O. ;)
Finally, the most missed feature in a pick-up truck is here!
> The futuristic-looking truck has a bulletproof, stainless steel body and is “waterproof enough” to cross rivers like a boat, among a long list of claims that only seem beneficial during an apocalypse.
This, however might actually be useful, given the current geopolitical climate...
Edit: expect a ~73mile range at 14k. For comparison an f250 towing 15k lbs gets about 9mpg. With a 55 gallon tank, the f250 is still a better option for practical reasons. Let’s revisit this 5 years after the cyber truck release
* Ford F-150 0-60 Times ; 2023 Ford F-150. Raptor R SuperCrew (5'7.1" Bed) · 3.6 sec
You must have missed Elon's marketing pivot a some years ago from libertarian tech-utopianism to libertarian tech-dystopianism.
We want to ensure that cars are available to reach true enthusiasts, to be driven and enjoyed for years to come. For this reason, those allocated a 911 S/T in the US will be required to adhere to an agreed minimum retention period, set at one year
https://www.drive.com.au/news/porsche-stops-supercar-scalper...
Or in other words...no lawsuit...And no restrictions on resale, since leased property can't be sold by the lessee.
Lawyers, being very much not naive, knowingly write contracts that are unenforceable in court. They're ok with that because they know the majority of those who sign the contract assume it's legally enforceable and never challenge it.
https://insideevs.com/news/694929/tesla-cybertruck-matte-bla...
The second mortgage that you’ll need to take out when it comes time to replace them will be notably less cool.
That might be a little rank even for Musk. Make it part of the EULA. "By opening the door you agree to ..." Add an NDA clause.
If these are "bulletproof"; could someone be kidnapped by their car? I was gonna make a crack about keeping a window breaker handy in case the door locks got overridden but even that might not work.
You're not being inventive enough. Drivers are not liable when autopilot fails. Neither is Tesla.
If it gets into an "accident" involving a body of water, electromechanical locks and bulletproof glass will seal your fate...and nobody will be held accountable.
The New Model Y[andere]: You'll love it, or else.
pressed sheet of 304 stainless :: "bulletproof"
polyurethane over more plastic :: "vegan leather"
More discussion over here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38237287
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38236701
Are those people just good hard working honest capitalists that create a market opportunity and deserve to use their products as they damn well please too?
Buy a PS5, and you better like it because reselling it after the return window will be an arm and a leg. Same for your Roomba, you regret not buying a competitor after a few weeks ? tough luck it's in your closet for the rest of the year and you'll fork the money in full for any other purchase. etc.
They could've just as easily prevented scalping by saying "you can sell your CyberTruck, but for not even a dollar more than the purchase price."
Curious how that's NOT what they said, isn't it?
Deleted Comment