Tesla could sue Cybertruck buyers for $50K if they flip it too soon | Hacker News Reader

Tesla could sue Cybertruck buyers for $50K if they flip it too soon

engadget.com

20 pointstoss149 comments

This makes sense. As an auto manufacturer why would they sell a car for “money”? If I made cars I too would require money and a legally binding pledge to neither profit or cut losses on any purchases made from me. After all what is a truck but an NFT with wide panel gaps anyway?

Often hot items in short supply can be resold immediately for significant profit.

So let's avoid that by suing our customers.

That's what I call a "financial vehicle".

You wouldn’t want to get “taken for a ride”!

They're trying to protect their actual customers from scalpers.

As someone from Austin,TX I read "flip it" very differently. As in crashed it, much like so many truck owners do here in Texas (the state with the worst traffic safety record).

By "flip" they mean "Resell". (presumably for a profit)

Man, Tesla ownership is just too complicated for me.

"You will be satisfied with this purchase or we'll sue you" is a pretty wild idea for a marketing campaign.

This is probably done to deter people from buying it and flipping it immediately.

But if it's worth more on the open market than what Tesla is charging, why don't they just charge more? (assuming the motivation for flipping is to make a profit)

same reason nike/gucci/every high end brand does the same. It creates anticipation/ exclusivity. Every brand has their own resale laws.

> Every brand has their own resale laws.

Nike / Gucci / every high-end brand has resale laws?

I've never heard of anybody threatening to sue their own customers for selling the product too early. Threatening to void warranties, yes. Threatening to refuse future sales, sure. But suing? No.

This just screams "don't do business with us".

High end brands enforce restrictions on those whom they do business with on the basis of maintaining an ongoing relationship. They don't try to contractually bind individual buyers. You are trying to "brand" this is normal and customary when it is unique and defective.

The same reason Sony didn't sell the PS5 for $1000 - it's a mass market product, with excessive demand probably created by manufacturing bottlenecks.

I genuinely do wonder what the outcome would be if a highly demanded (but ultimately unlimited supply) product was instead delivered by sorted bids? Like what if Tesla simply said Your position in line is relative to all bids, and at price $X you will certainly get one eventually...

The outcome is a really brutal society where rich people are preferred in literally everything.

Waiting in line for a chipotle burrito? Sorry, this guy is gonna put in $5 to cut you in line.

Even if it’s right or wrong, at the end of the day, your brand is gonna get outcompeted based on values because lots of ppl don’t want to patron business like that.

You just described buying a Rolex

Maybe. I don't know much about Rolexes. To some they are a status symbol. To other groups, they are an anti-status symbol.

If you want your business/society to be more like Rolex, then I guess implement this prioritization function.

It's only really worth more to a small select group of people. Those people had no way to jump to the front of the line when ordering.

Because they are trying to keep the price low? When announced, it was stated it would sell for $40k and it is going to stay be higher than that at release. Contrary to dealerships, they don’t seem to be participating in the act of jacking the price up higher and higher.

Suing customers isn't a way to make friends, though.

They're not suing customers. Flippers are buying them, but they're not customers. They're marking the cars up, and immediately selling them to some sucker for more money. The second owner in this case is the true customer, who probably would have been happier with Tesla if they could have just gone straight to them and paid the actual price.

By that same logic, it's fine to make negative public statements about customers who died using your product, because they're dead and won't buy any more products from you.

This is exactly what it is. Same thing other manufacturers have done with other high-end cars. Like the Ford GT for example. GM is cancelling warranties on some of their high end cars for the second owners as well to deter flipping.

https://www.carscoops.com/2022/07/general-motors-penalizes-c...

Honestly, I think people who do this are huge dirtbags, as it keeps the vehicles out of the hands of enthusiasts who want the car for what it is. But at the same time, if some idiot wants to pay extra for no reason, let them part with their money.

> GM is cancelling warranties

is this even legal? Terrible precedent to sell a car without a transferable warranty.

Or is it to prevent people from flooding the market with deeply discounted, used Cybertrucks?

What if I get a Cybertruck, find out it really is as shit as I imagined it was, and want to sell it right away and get a 2001 Tacoma? Should be able to do that, I think.

Then you first offer to sell it back to Tesla, like stated in the contract.

Start an llc > Buy cybertruck > Sell llc along with assets. Profit?? Not legal in every state tho.

Anything stopping people from renting them out to loaded would-be Cybertruck drivers?

If I’m early in the queue I’ll happily rent my brand new $90k truck out to anyone for $20k/mo. I’d even offer a 50% discount for someone who wanted to rent it a whole year.

Unobtanium has a value. :)

[dupe]

Lots more discussion over here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38237287

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38236701

This is like the fight against scalpers.

Don’t understand why anyone that doesn’t have “throw away money” would ever want to “own” a Tesla

Even more if you have throw away money

Many I know who rode the Tesla stock wave are using the earnings to get their ‘free’ Tesla.

I rode that wave, starting with buying TSLA at pre-split double-digits. I still didn't buy one (I had my reasons). If I had literal "throwaway" money, I'd be throwing it at Ferraris, not Teslas like some commoner.

For what reasons do you choose ferraris over teslas?

If I, for example, preferred a McLaren over a Ferrari, I could understand someone questioning me on that choice. It might even be fair to ask, "yeah, but which Ferrari?" But never in my wildest imagination did I picture myself being called to answer why I would prefer a Ferrari over a mass-produced car such as a Tesla.

But in the interests of cooperation, I will offer one reason: because even in Redmond, WA, I don't see a Ferrari at every intersection. In contrast, Teslas are basically the "Redmond Corolla" these days. If I'm throwing money away, it'll be thrown at something ridiculously impractical. And on grocery day I'll drive the Hyundai that was purchased with "not-throwaway" money.

So in short "Status" or "Exclusivity"?

I think cybertruck is hitting on markets where "Real men drive trucks"[1], and may have a sort of uniqueness / exclusivity in markets like those that would buy a Ford F-150 Raptor. The latter new can cost as much as a used Ferrari 8|

[1]: regardless of what one feels about that phrase it is a marketing tactic.

So in short "Status" or "Exclusivity"?

No, but I did suspect I was being setup with your question. The word you're looking for in my original post is "impractical". Otherwise, my money wan't really thrown away, now was it?

No no, no setup... I wouldnt use those terms pejoratively towards you if they were your goal :) .

So in short i'm understaning the goal is to "throw away the money" and get something you see as absurdly excellent? (i'm guessing that's what you mean by impractical, other wise why not get 1M goats for example (IMO that'd be very impractical)

Anyways, thanks for having the discussion with me :)

My apologies for misjudging your motivation. I was a gold medalist in the Conclusion Jump in 2012. But, yes, throwaway money gets spent on things I might not otherwise buy. A Tesla is Just Another Car, nothing special. I have one of those already, just in Hyundai form, don’t need another one. Hence the Ferrari with all its impracticality.

Back to the original post I replied to: the money I made on TSLA wasn’t “free”, it represents opportunity cost if nothing else (I could’ve purchased the car I really wanted instead). And hence no Tesla for me. But if I had purchased 10x of those early Tesla shares…I’d still buy the Ferrari, and get groceries in the Hyundai. :-)

Aw yes, the lowly commoner. Ha, are you living in a Monty Python skit?

Why not? Most owners seem to love them. They certainly aren’t without faults, but for their price range (especially since in the US there are many government incentives), they seem to be pretty decent vehicles. You could certainly do worse for the price.

How else could you get the quality of a geo metro at the price of an S-class MB?

I think the exact same thing except change "own a Tesla" to "buy a new car"

Musk is just bitter that he was forced to buy Twitter and could not resell it for profit.

It has to be a lie

Reply on news.ycombinator.com