Car-sharing service HiGear shuts down due to theft of 4 cars worth $400,000
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
FOLLOWUP (responding to comments): I'm not concerned about the women in the pictures. They freely chose it, and made enough money to make it worth it to them.
But things that reinforce the societal ideal that women's value comes from being conventionally attractive is much more deeply damaging than most people realize. It leads to the body image issues that the majority of young women grapple with. Anything that makes it seem like numbers define how attractive you are is especially bad, because it makes it harder for people to accept their own non-ideal bodies as beautiful. It encourages young women to spend vast amounts of their free time learning about and working on being attractive rather than, say, tinkering with computers. To some extent, it leads to income inequality between men and women (Girls grow up with the message that pleasing men, by being attractive among other ways, is good, so they tend to up more passive in many situations. This makes them less willing to negotiate for salary, less willing to go out of their way to take credit for their work, etc. It also leads to other bad things like being less willing to say no to sex.)
I like seeing racy pictures of girls as much as the next guy, but displays of women like this, especially right next to and in the same format as rental listings, encourages societal ideals that are at the root of most of the gender-related problems in our society.
So what? I don't recall reading anything that indicates these women were forced to do anything against their will.
(Also, not all men want gto look at hot girls)
No, but something around 90% of men do. Sex sells, people need to get over that.
I imagine if the women in question didn't want to be objectified, they were free to not accept the money.
Enslavement should not be the standard by which we assess the effect of such actions. Under capitalism, we should expect to see people trading their labor (or image) for money.
The more interesting questions include: why is this marketing pursued? How does it fit into a tapestry of cultural "norms" that objectify and demean women? What effect does it have on all the people (men and women, boys and girls) who "consume" it?
The origins and continued existence of "car chicks", "beer girls", and "booth babes" has nothing to do with empowering women by creating new labor niches. It is a reflection and extension of a sexist society and culture.
It is not so much 'I can get paid for this' but more of 'In what other way can I get paid?'. There are exceptions of course as in all cases, some workers have a high degree of control and as long as they have great working conditions and a say in how they do their job I have no problem with the industry but again, my first sentence applies.
In the case of these Hi Gear girls, I cannot speak for them but likely they were simply hired by a modeling agency and have no particular commitment to the car company itself.
Although they didn't go out of business because of their sexist business practices, I don't shed a tear for them.
Yes, this is a marketing stunt, but I hope the day comes when the cost of this marketing outweighs the benefit (i.e., more people find the objectification of women offensive to the point of changing their purchasing decision than people who find it appealing).
This is related to a common theme on HN: discussions of why there are not more women in tech and tech leadership positions.
To take this to an unrelated extreme, it seems like a rather common and valid position on abortion is to support the freedom of choice for a woman without making that choice for oneself and advising others not to as well.
Also all baseball players chose to be baseball players, and can easily choose to leave and not be in the group of 'baseball players'. Not so with women.
The generic concept of "women" cannot disassociate themselves from the images of these particular models in the same way that the generic concept of "men" cannot disassociate themselves from the image of these particular baseball players. I find it hard to be concerned about either of these situations.
Interesting. What do you think about the info on Eharmony, Match and other dating sites: age, height, athletic, curvy, this, that? Objectification?
Also, some of the shots were rather tasteful (others, not so much, but this one for instance) -
http://www.higear.com/images/our_community/shar_large/shar_0...
Anyone that has financial sense and/or understands the hedonic treadmill will understand why.
Fwiw the place I use doesn't have pictures of women with cars anywhere....
I don't understand why such comments get so many upvotes, really. And where such sentiment comes from. I really wonder if my parent comment's poster should claim to understand the problems of the majority of young women and the society impact of such pictures.
That's because usually (if not always) non-ideal bodies are not beautiful. I feel like there's a giant disconnect between people like you (sweeping generalization, no offense intended) and people around me. You see a girl with some extra weight and you may think she should ignore it, and hop on a computer. Here, most (yes, most) of the girls go to the gym and exercise.
Also, often the girls aren't even trying to please men. One friend of mine spends a lot of her time making Youtube videos on nail decoration. Do her thousands of followers think men will be irresistibly attracted to the detailed glitter polish on their nails? No.
I understand your desire to make the genders equal, but I think you're being blinded because of it.
| You see a girl with some extra weight and you may think she should ignore it, and hop on a computer. Here, most (yes, most) of the girls go to the gym and exercise.
And few would argue that isn't a healthy behavior. I'm guessing GP is more concerned when women use potential harmful means to make themselves better looking (eating disorders, plastic surgery, etc.). That said even in most cases that is more just a manifestation of low self-esteem/confidence - which said women would show in other ways if society cared less about appearance.
people have different tastes. just look at gay men and straight men. they find different things attractive. there is no perfectly sexy/beautiful type. it's all subjective. for every person, there's someone who thinks they are beautiful.
After all, there are some niche tastes. Just look at the gay community whose tastes can range from Bears (big chunky hairy guys) to twinks (young skinny femmy guys). For straight male equivalents, look at BBW, to Asian, to MILFs, to femdom/dominatrixes, etc.
I am not advocating being unhealthy. There are many people who have a healthy lifestyle & fitness and body, and yet are not as skinny as many many models and 'attractive people'. The fashion industry does not promote healthy bodies.
You could be right about the "everyone is beautiful to someone".
I agree, the fashion industry is not much better. If I was king, I'd have everyone aim for athletic/fit. I suppose that's just one person's preference though.
We call everyone beautiful despite most people being unattractive, because we ourselves, being imperfect, would like someone else to call us beautiful. Its the lie that keeps on giving.
Deep inside everyone sees someone else as ugly or unattractive but we don't want the world to see us as judgmental assholes so we bullshit each other and act like no one on earth is ugly. I always get a good laugh at the audience on Oprah who clap and cheer like crazy during before and after makeovers, and weight loss stories. "You look so beautiful Kelly! You look so much better Jennifer!" But then comfort other women who feel unattractive with "you're beautiful just the way you are"... I'm sitting there eating pizza laughing my ass off thinking, "Really?! You've all got 30 minutes of makeup on your face and you're telling her she's beautiful just the way she is.?! Had she walked out of the room, got a makeover, lost 40 pounds and walked back in, you'd all be cheering your asses off and teller her how much better she looks."... Tsk tsk Humans and their lies...
But a lot of women, especially those around high school age, are just completely irrational in this realm. I know lots of women who are very attractive in conventional ways but aren't happy with their bodies. They think they're too fat because their stomach isn't totally flat, even though they look just as good as if they were that skinny, and they're only 5 or 10 pounds off. They think their breasts are too small. They fixate on small imperfections like a little bit of acne.
This all happens because society puts forward an airbrushed ideal of perfection that they're told to strive for even though it's totally unattainable. They see all of the small ways they could be better without taking a step back and realizing how attractive they really are. The fact that lots of men are interested in them doesn't convince them otherwise. They'll claim those men just like them because they're nice, or that the men are just interested in anyone who they think will put out, or some other mediocre excuse.
> Girls grow up with the message that pleasing men,
> by being attractive among other ways, is good
AFAIK being conventionally attractive comes from being a healthy individual. For a long time we were selecting our mate by (in large part) how healthy he/she is, and getting rid of that habit wouldn't to any good to humans long term, I guess.
(In fact, it would arguably do more good if such ‘objectification’ was common for men.)
Well, it can very easily go both ways. Just in the last week I was asked by 2 different women (rather smart, otherwise) about "how much I earn". I honestly didn't know how to explain to them that at this early point in getting to know someone how much the person in front of you earns has no significance whatsoever.
The problem is not that they care about how much money you make, but that they were too clumsy on their "investigation".
Think globally, act locally, I say, and those look like women to me, and adults, not girls.
I think you have some work to do on your own before judging HiGear.
Want to use racy ads and associations to try to get me to buy lingerie for my gf, or condoms from your website? Ok fine. But, ahem, Godaddy, are you seriously trying to persuade me to buy internet domains from you using a sex sells strategy? Godaddy girls? Really? I couldn't think of anything less relevant.
But that's the problem - when men are bombarded with messages and images that link things that have no connection whatsoever, over time it actually does create a connection by weakening the critical faculties necessary to reject the association in the first place, and makes men more vulnerable to manipulation, power of suggestion, etc.. Moreso in some men than others.
Sex is one of the most powerful concepts to link to totally irrelevant products or services since it triggers our ape subroutines. See the same associations enough, and when it actually comes time to evaluate a purchase or other decision, those ape subroutines have more influence and control vs. your reasoning and critical faculties than they should. This effect is pervasive and pernicious.
So, the flip side of female objectification is male zombification, or a weakening of critical and reasoning faculties. It's not just females that suffer from female objectification in the media.
But things that reinforce the societal ideal that men's value comes from being conventionally big and strong is much more deeply damaging than most people realize. It leads to the body image issues that the majority of young men grapple with. Anything that makes it seem like numbers define how tall and strong you are is especially bad, because it makes it harder for men to accept their own non-ideal bodies as strong. It encourages young men to spend vast amounts of their free time learning about and working on being strong and muscular rather than, say, being productive, peaceful, starting a family. To some extent, it leads to happiness inequality between men and women (men grow up with the message that being emotionless is good, so they tend to keep emotions, feelings, pain hidden. This makes them less willing to seek help for depression, anger management problems, and more willing to be violent to get what they want. It also leads to other bad things like having no self discipline over their sex drive and thinking it's ok to fuck anything that moves, thus resulting in divorce, embarrassment, and losing millions of dollars and destroying their political careers or livelihood. ex: tiger woods and the countless other men like him who had it all and fucked it up.)
I like seeing racy pictures of shirtless guys as much as the next girl, but displays of men like this, especially wrestling action figures, or overly muscular super heroes, encourages societal ideals that are at the root of most of the gender-related problems in our society.
(not that you were wrong, just showing you the opposite)
I am always amazed by the efficiency and technological prowess that the kids I grew up with who steal cars apply to their trade (even if I wish they were involved in a better trade).
One kid I grew up with now has a ring of six guys working for him, paying good benefits and matching retirement accounts, where all they do are steal Honda Civics. Just that model. I swear he's implemented Kaizen into his workflow.
Colin (the aforementioned kid I grew up with) figured it was easier to attract good talent and keep them happy if he treated his operation like a professional job.
So, he employs his team through an auto-repair shop, where they're full-time employees with full benefits and he sets them up with a 401k (that he matches up to some percentage of, I don't know the number). That's pretty much unheard of among actual mechanics, never mind car thieves.
And he gets to cherry-pick his team, and they like the stability and "legitimate"-ness of the operation.
He's been doing it for a while, so his numbers must make it a good decision financially (he has elaborate spreadsheets of every facet of his business).
The most "boss" I ever got to look to impress a girl was in college when a friend of mine went out to Boston on a Friday and ended up at the end of the night having her car stolen. She calls me all upset, and I think, "Maybe I can see if Colin can get her car back."
So I call her an hour later and let her know that if she goes to a specific T-station parking lot, her car will be there. She calls me later and lets me know that, it is, indeed there, and there's a case of beer in the passenger seat with a note saying "Sorry".
Nerdy, adolescent me felt like a puffer fish that had puffed itself up.
401k's of mechanics could be used to pay off victim's compensation (so the mechanics could stay out of jail).
That would put extra pressure on law enforcement to catch the thieves and they would eventually be caught.
Next step is several years in jail and close monitoring of the future crime activities.
End result - the only expertise that he would gain over the years (in stealing) would be not marketable.
For starters, all territory is split up among the different crews who run them. That they do this democratically and unanimously without anyone muscling in on surrounding territory is something I've never quite figured out; but it's been working for forty years.
That limitation on potential territory makes you maximize your resources in the geographic areas you control. You get to the point where you know the best neighborhoods for your guys to work based on time-of-day, holidays, local sports schedules, which neighborhoods are composed of people who primarily have others over for the holidays, vs. which neighborhoods primarily go somewhere else to celebrate, etc.
So there is a pretty small limit to how large an operation like that gets, but he's able to pay for his house, send his kids all to private school, and ensure they all can go to any college they want.
It's a decent "lifestyle business", minus the fact that it's a terrible thing to do to people, and unbelievably dangerous.
That's probably not that much due to negotiation, but because smarter team tips off police about criminal activity of competing team, and competing team ends up in jail.
I would guess that more aggressive team is more likely to end up in jail, which causes natural evolution toward less greedy teams.
Still, stealing is a stupid choice for people capable of running efficient organization.
Why would he want to scale? To launch an IPO? Come on Bro.
In my opinion prostitution and theft fall in the gray area.
Risk-Reward balance in theft is probably the same as in every other risky business. The difference is barrier to entry is so low. That makes all the difference.
Alright, I'll just say this, because I don't want to look like a guy who takes moral high-ground on issues. I got my bike stolen, few years before, I was broke at that time, in a job that doesn't pay at all. I was not crazy about the thief at all. My insurance company paid me after a year, which I used to buy my first web server, which led to me starting my web design business.
I try not to put material possessions above human beings, I lost my bike. But, I don't want to put the thief in jail, and steal years of his lifetime.
I guess 2x loss monetary fine could be a good replacement to jail time for first time thieves.
> In my opinion prostitution and theft fall in the gray area.
One is the forced appropriation of another's labor, the other isn't.
Are you also ok with bank heists, dacoity on trains, white-collar crime/corruption (all are theft)? I'm really interested in your reasoning.
One thing that theft and prostitution have in common are, they both have near zero barrier to entry. I sometimes argue with friends, that starting a internet company is the only near zero barrier to entry market. But, me and my friends take for granted, computers and internet connections paid by month and the knowledge that comes with it. For folks with no real skills that may land them on a job. Its natural to look for ways, to get some money, without putting in a lot of money.
I say material theft is in the gray area, because of all the white-collar crimes that are happening all the time, and people doing it are getting away with it. There are interesting studies about, how all bank robberies and auto-thefts constitute to a tiny portion of theft when compared to people stealing office supplies.
I don't support bank heists, dacoity on trains or white-collar crime/corruption.
All I'm saying is all crimes happen because, people who are doing it doesn't have enough social equity to be a good member of the society. Old people here in India used to say, English medicines treat symptoms not the disease. Punishing theft is somewhat like that, unless we uplift the communities that involve in crime, we can never stop crimes.
The real problem is the ridiculously lax penalties for car theft in many jurisdictions. In the Seattle, WA area, you basically don't even see the inside of a cell until your third or fourth conviction. (One news article I found at http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=200... contains a quote to the effect that a thief would have to be caught stealing up to seven cars before being punished with prison time.)
Given the lack of interest in auto theft on the part of the legislature, it's not surprising that such crimes don't arouse much interest on the part of law enforcement. As a result there are plenty of large metro areas where an organized auto theft ring could be quite profitable.
When I was growing up, I knew this girl who works part time at a cinema. Her job is basically to clean up the place after everyone has left once the movie has ended. While cleaning up the place, 7 out of 10 times, she will find something someone has left behind and out of that 7 times, probably 2 items will be valuable (wallet, mobile phones, jewellery, etc). Instead of returning it to their respective owners, she ALWAYS pocket anything that is valuable with the excuse of finders keepers.
When I found out about what she does, I had a moral dilemma. I knew she probably did it because she (to make a long story short), had a very unfortunate and underprivileged life so she just found a quick and easy (albeit illegal) way to supplement her pay. Yet at the same time, I knew what she was doing was wrong and I contemplated telling the authorities about her but couldn't bring myself to do it because she trusted me enough (i've always helped her in dire times) to tell me about it.
Now, here is my question. Do you ever feel that you should report your friend knowing he is breaking the law? Do you find yourself in a moral dilemma knowing that you know a person committing a crime but you have not (i assumed) turn him in?
My older brother ran away from home when he was 15, partially to get away from all of that. I stayed until I was 17, but left for much the same reason.
If I felt obliged to report everyone in my history who has broken the law (or made it a habit of breaking the law), I would have quite possibly spent thousands of dollars on phone calls to the police.
I removed myself from the moral dilemma by going far away from all of that and not going back. I've been a boring nerd for the past twelve years.
Kudos for being open about it.
Kudos as well for being able, and having the balls to make the exit.
I'm speaking from a background of gangs, where there is no exit. Except a coffin.
Why not just move to another side of the country and start a new life?
That's a good start.
Yes, that might not pay as much as criminal activity, but that's definitely enough to survive.
As for safety - why is it not safe to quit a gang? Why would remaining gang members care about former gang member who disappeared in unknown direction and does not cause any trouble?
And with the pay from that he could afford to live where? No place better than where he came from!
The point of moving to new place is to eliminate all the ties with old life and gang members.
But I guess even that is not necessary. I'm not expert on quitting gangs, but would assume that most gangs would not really force gang member on staying in the gang against the will of quitting gang member. If gang member is lacking determination - he might be useless of even dangerous as an active member of the gang. So the most practical approach should be mutual thinking: "good riddance".
Great. So you move to some other depressed community, which will have all of what you were trying to escape. Only now you have no support network, nobody who's got your back. Guess what that's a recipe for?
It's not as easy as you make it sound.
Who promised you that improving life would be easy?
I ask honestly, but do you have any idea what you're talking about here? Here are two reference articles, one on empathizing with people in situations that are completely outside of your realm of experience:
“A Muscular Empathy”: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/a-muscul...
’If you really want to understand slaves, slave masters, poor black kids, poor white kids, rich people of colors, whoever, it is essential that you first come to grips with the disturbing facts of your own mediocrity. The first rule is this--You are not extraordinary. It's all fine and good to declare that you would have freed your slaves. But it's much more interesting to assume that you wouldn't and then ask "Why?"‘
And one on getting out of gangs and the psychological pull they still have even after you've decided to get gone:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/02/06/the-draw-of...
‘"They'll say, 'What's wrong with you, sissy? What's wrong with you, faggot?' Misery loves company. They don't want to see you succeed because they're still in misery. 'He's doing good? F––– that fool.' A lot of kids fall away. They sabotage their success."’
===
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/02/06/the-draw-of...
"I missed pulling out the gun on people, I missed the adrenaline. I like taking risks. It's the high."
===
So it's more like drug addiction.
It is responsibility of quitting gang member to deal with such addiction. Blaming gang members on keeping him in the gang usually is not correct.
Ignoring the obvious answers, try this one on for size:
Who fucking cares? The fact is that they do care.
You need not understand the problem for it to exist.
Step 2. Find solution.
Step 3. Implement solution.
There is no point in planning step 3 when step 1 is not complete.
If they could afford to move from the projects where these gangs operate, don't you think they would in a heartbeat? The foot soldier in a gang is not making a lot of money - far from it. But your mom just got laid off, rent needs to be paid and your baby sister needs to be fed. So you do what you have to do.
I'm a big believer in personal responsibility, and was as big a supporter of Randian thought as one could be without ever reading any of her book. But as I grew up and got exposed to The Real World, I realized that many times we are the victims of circumstances which seem to conspire against us.
So it's not always easy to just up and move to another side of the country.
That's me as a teenager 20 years ago as a member of said family.
I never implied that quitting criminal gang is easy. The hardest part though is to overcome greed and change mentality.
Unemployed mom and baby sister would likely to be better off without criminal gang member in the family.
I do not claim to know your past. But I know my parents were also poor, and the difference between them and the other kids who were poor around them who never moved up was in their parenting and their education. They ended up in a situation where they could pull out because of that education, and they ended up with certain mindsets that stemmed from the parenting they received. If you don't have one or, often, both of those, you're basically hosed. Not completely, mind you, but the jump needed to pull yourself out of poverty becomes massively bigger. And if you're immersed in a culture where violence is the norm and gangs are the only way to gain serious social acceptance at a young age, you've got even more working against you.
I'm really not sure why you're bringing greed into this. Most of the members in gangs are in no way rich. The leaders might be (and even that is not necessarily the case), but the members are not.
2) Why do you equate greed with being rich? These are orthogonal concepts.
3) Yes, it's hard to make right decision when you grew up submerged into bad culture. Fortunately good culture is available too. Even more - bad culture is at disadvantage due to schools, popular mass culture, law enforcement and mutual gang killings.
So in the end the decision of quitting the gang is a matter of personal choice.
GPS tracking devices are much cheaper.
There are much more surveillance cameras than 10 years ago.
That could significantly reduce car hijacking business.
Still, I've always felt a tingle of guilt every time someone looses something valuable at the cinema. It always reminded me that if everyone runs away from a problem, nobody will solve the issue. Being slightly older (and maybe wiser) now, what I should have done is try to find a way to convince her to stop stealing.
Anyway, thanks for your reply!
m0nastic: Just think of the people who have their cars stolen, and tell yourself that every time they steal a car and you don't turn him in then you've essentially helped screw that person over. That person could be someone just like nostromo.
Imagine young nostromo, coming to you for help. What would you do? Who would you side with? Every time they steal a car it's the same situation, except the victim may not personally know you so they won't come asking you for help.
So they only got 20 feet away before the car died on them.
Wiring one up is real easy, takes like 20 minutes, all you have to do is pull the rear seats out, cut the wire and extend the wire to the switch.
Please, if anyone knows someone who is willing to do this to another human being, make it stop. You have the power to prevent a loved one's Christmas from becoming a nightmare, use it. Please?
I had my brother's Tahoe stolen out of a hotel parking lot in Vegas. (I bought him a new truck.)
In this case, three old Datsuns were stolen, reported to the police as four recent Jaguars, who wrote down five Porsches, and finally reported as 1 Veyron.
Most likely they reported based on original MSRP (likely around 400K) rather than current value (300K)
I'm not sure how to solve it.
He didn't have to do this, but it struck me as a nice and unexpected gesture.
The Valley or startup scene is a small world. If his company doesn't work out, he/they can always work for the others.
During this thought exercise I came to the conclusion that an embedded GPS would be essential to maintain security.
Another idea would be making your social network your security system, by only allowing rentals to people within two degrees of separation on a social networking site.
Thereby increasing the chicken and egg problem ten fold
There are not so many real expert thieves. That's why extended security measures do work: less experienced majority of thieves is caught outright, and more experienced minority of thieves is eventually caught due to unforeseen circumstances (unexpected witness, unexpected new security measure, etc.).
For example, GPS transmitter can stay silent until it gets "You are stolen" signal.
There could be more than one transmitter in a car. It may get activated only when on the move (and not in a garage) etc.
If it were that easy, none of us here would be complaining about hiring incompetent people :)
That's true, but most electronic circuits emit stray radiation, switching or crystal references. Not only that, the hypothetical receiver needed for your stolen signal has a least a local oscillator with a nice and probably almost on clean signal. (I think in UK they used something like this to track people that didn't pay their TV tax, or even SS tracking WWII French resistance, but it might be an urban legend, although feasible, since stray LO frequency can propagate to the antenna and is sometimes used to check correct mixer/filter tuning).
Or even more simple, get a big truck with metal cage for RF shielding and disassemble the car for parts, which is more profitable. They just need to get rid of serial numbers and such.
I agree about the expert thief, but considering that [internet] criminal gangs go to the trouble of hiring experts to do the (hard) technical part, I would guess that gangs interested in stealing expensive cars would have no problem finding unscrupulous people to help them disable any security measure.
Even the car share company devises a security measure, what stops someone from registering into the service with fake ID and knowing all about it to neutralize it?
Yes, it's possible, but as an exception, not as a rule.
Criminal activity would never stop completely, but not because it's impossible to beat criminals, but because as soon as crime goes down - people and businesses start doing more risky activities, trust more and check less.
There is a certain amount of evidence to suggest that the TV detector vans are (if not entirely fictional) exist mostly to scare people into paying.
I wouldn't be surprised if the total theft from HiGear is more than 4 cars, but that some of the other thefts either haven't happened yet, or weren't easily tied to the HiGear service.
Edit: This is why background checks without fingerprints are not very meaningful. The check may be on a clean identity, not the criminal.
Without some skilled operator attending closely, there are all manner of ways to fake fingerprints on both electronic and traditional ink systems. If it's going to net you a $100k car, the incentive is probably sufficient that someone would do it.
So if you are interested in this, let us know. This is the first pillar after all: http://blog.kodesk.com/2011/11/01/the-three-pillars-of-colla...
The problem is that the cars are owned not by HiGear but by wealthy clients who want to rent out their car (instead of having it sit in a garage). The cars have sentimental value. They may be customized and difficult/impossible to replace.
I suppose there are already businesses that don't use a Peer-to-Peer model. If it's just a matter of arranging rentals in a more traditional model, and only for wealthy customers, I don't even have to google -- it's been done before.
I saw him again recently and asked why the business went bust. To paraphrase him: "High overhead and picky customers." Turns out people who rent exotic cars want the newest and latest cars, not older models (unless it's vintage/classics they're looking for, but that's another beast). So you have to keep your stable fresh. Trying to offload exotics is a pain, because there's a specific type of person who will buy a used exotic: a nouveau rich man with more pride than financial management skills.
The kicker was when he told me that if he ever decides to launder money, he'll start another luxury rental place, because it would be perfect for that.
so they should just tweak it to make it work...there are hundreds of supercar rental companies, so just copy them.
.
It would require setting up a false bank account with enough money. That's harder than false ID and stolen credit card.
If the above isn't enough, add an income statement.
Then you get billed for how much you use the car.