2014 Honda Accord Plug-In site Live, Available in CA, NY

Mark ups? can imagine if dealers get their hands on Tesla Model S.

Protecting the Consumer!

 

From my experience, when a new car is introduced and each stealer is only getting one or two, they will play the game of mark up to maximize profit because there are suckers that will pay to get the first one in the block.

I still remember when the Miata first came out, people will pay $10 K above MSRP of $18K, for one, this is insane for the buyer.

 

The markup is only put on high demand vehicles. So there's no need to cater to more price conscious consumers. There's no incentive to sell to them at less than markup when there are suckers willing to throw their money away.

I don't want to defend dealers but they are just following supply and demand. Wouldn't you sell your car or home to the highest bidder?

When the HOV stickers in California had run out. 2-3 year old used Prius with stickers were selling for almost the same price as a brand new one. No one had a problem with that.

Price gouging gasoline after a major disaster, now that's shameful.

 

Would you consider giving them any of your business after that?

 

This is known as price gouging. Unfortunately the dealer associations are extremely powerfull politically. They have people like Mike Kelly in congress making sure they can do whatever they want no matter how unethical. This hurts the car companies. Now the dealers association in an eastern state wants to prevent tesla from even replying to emails. Let's not defend unethical behaviour.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. People were plenty mad that some toyota dealers were gouging. Dealers that gouge should be publically humilated, and customers should stay away.

 

I disagree. There is no pressing need for someone to purchase a new model when it comes out. Early adopters choose to pay more money. I don't see how ethics is involved. Your opinion is that it is price gouging. My opinion is that it is good business practice. Dealers that price gouge should be shunned by customers. Good luck finding a desler that doesn't charge mark up or price gouge in your opinion.

I'm talking about a used Prius with the HOV sticker commanding nearly the same price as a new one from the dealer. No one is getting mad at the dealer. And no one is getting mad at the seller either.

 

When the dealers association allows companies to collude, its called gouging. Luckily there are some dealers that do not go along. Bad dealers are bad for the car company, but political influence seems to stop car companies from policing gouging. The most they can do is prevent certain cars from going to the bad behaving dealer.

But more to the point, people should get the word out and boycott those gouging dealers. That is the only way to treat the unethical behavior OR do you go to them because you think they are looking out for your best interest as a customer.

This is quite different from a unique house being sold. No one is allowed to price fix housing. That is illegal.

This is a different form of corruption, really only part of the state of California. At least when a individual sells a used vehicle it is difficult for collusion to take place with other individuals. What you are talking about is california, I'm guessing, creating a favored class of cars, but giving them special rights. Then the car owner sold his special rights. Why these are transferable is beyond my understanding. It seems bad for the state, but I moved out of that state.

 

If you cut them off, but allow the user to resell the vehicle, it defeats the purpose doesn't it. Its just a little graft.

The government gives you an incentive to use a vehicle. Then they cut it off for future buyers. If you don't use it in the way for the credit, you can sell it, after the government created a shortage. Making them non-transferable makes sense, at least then if the government cuts them off again it does not create this strange situation. Then they are an incentive to buy and use, instead of an incentive to buy then sell. I thought the whole carpool lanes thing in California was a huge failure. It didn't get people to car pool. Will it now get them to buy plug-ins? I doubt it.

Do you think the state should grant certain classes of citizens the right to sell rights to use public roads in a certain way? While at the same time, not allowing others those same rights? It is only a minor thing, that smacks of government run-a-muck. You bought your hybrid this year, no you can't have that right, you need to buy a used one from this guy, who owns the rights to the car pool lane.

 

I just about disagree with everything you say, austingreen. I purchased the PiP for the sole reason of HOV access. There would be a Prius C in my garage otherwise. So did my uncle with a Civic Hybrid and my sister with her Gen 2 Prius a few years ago. When these green stickers expire, I plan to get a BEV for continued use of HOV lanes.

I don't know if HOV lanes are successful or not, their implemenation was before my time. What I do know is that stickers spurred sales of hybrids and now they are doing the same for Plug ins but not in the same numbers as before. Evidence is seen on the uptick of Volt sales once they were qualified.
Chevy Volt Plug-In Sales Surge In CA, Outsells 'Vette Too
Arguably, California is the most important state to hybrids and EV's where the majority of said vehicles are sold. Like it or not, California dictates what the rest of the nation gets for alternative fuel vehicles.

I do see your point on the transferability of the stickers on the used car market. It doesn't fit with the intent of the law. My $1500 California state PHEV rebate requires me to return it if i sell the car within 3 years.

 

The only reason this law came about because of the stealerships and their employees. When the Volt came out to take advantage of the CA/IRS incentives, there was no 3 year requirement. Guess what happened? All the Volts from bad stealerships were being sold as used while making profit before even selling the car itself. Obama Motors looked really bad because the Volt would not move EVEN with those incentives put in.

With this prevision, stealerships would loose their pants for holding their cars for 3 years before selling. You would notice that 3 year leases, the $7500 tax credit is still in play. And in the case of Toyota, they decided to keep the $7500 if you lease a Rav4EV from them directly.

 

​

I had no problem finding a Toyota dealer selling at msrp to buy my 2005 Prius from, back when some areas had year waits for the car.

 

Me neither. I don't understand why people choose to pay markup.

 

Before the Miata mark up there was the Mazda Rx 7
That gouge was even worse - but the customers just kept coming. You can't blame the dealers ... after all - they gotta feed their kids too - and if someone will pay it ... why not get what you can for it.
We would do the same thing ... we wouldn't be selling cars for charity.
.

 

The question is should the dealers be protected from say a tesla selling direct and not gouging so that they can continue to collude? I mean do we grant them a monopoly, that includes the ability to gouge, be cause hey they have to feed there kids.

Or after gouging customers for an extra $10K should Honda be able to cut off a dealership. Or perhaps after putting double sets of mats on a Lexus, where people died, should Lexus be able to stop giving cars to a dealership? I just question the favored political position of dealerships. The advent of the internet has stopped some of the worst practices, but really, do you want to give these folks your business.

Don't excuse, boycott.