2023 Tesla Model 3 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Tesla not bought with Bitcoin currency after all?

The story we posted about a dealership accepting Bitcoins as payment for a Tesla Model S is reportedly only partially true. Lamborghini Newport Beach instead used BitPay to exchange the electronic currency for US dollars before completing the sale, according to "Squawk on the Street" on CNBC.
"We found out that by using a little program that Bitcoin uses, which is actually BitPay, we would have received US dollars," Pietro Frigerio, general manager of the dealership, says in the interview. "It's like if you come into the dealership and you want to buy a Lamborghini using gold bars, we would not accept it. So you'd go out, exchange it, and you'd come back to us. That was how it worked [with the Tesla and the Bitcoins]."
Frigerio says that the dealership doesn't accept Bitcoin as a currency and only accepts US dollars as payment for its vehicles. That said, we wouldn't be surprised if using BitPay to turn Bitcoins into US dollars for the used Model S purchase was actually easier than going through a more traditional financial establishment. Head over to CNBC to check out the "Squawk on the Street" interview with more details.

FTC officials question 'bad policy' that stops Tesla's direct sales

It looks like Elon Musk has a new group of allies over at the Federal Trade Commission. Writing on the FTC blog, three high-level FTC officials came out against the "protectionist" network of laws in the US that govern automotive dealers and prevent, in some cases, Tesla Motors from selling its cars directly to customers. They called the rules, "bad policy for a number of reasons." They write: [The legal] protections expanded until in many states they included outright bans on the sale of new cars by anyone other than a dealer-specifically, an auto manufacturer. Instead of "protecting," these state laws became "protectionist," perpetuating one way of selling cars-the independent car dealer. The post is not a call to arms, but more of a position statement co-authored by Andy Gavil (director of the Office of Policy Planning), Debbie Feinstein (director of the Bureau of Competition), and Marty Gaynor (director of the Bureau of Economics). "The collective [cost] impact of [the state-by-state battles] is one of the major concerns here. [Tesla is] just trying to sell their cars" – Andy Gavin Gavil told AutoblogGreen that the main goal was to bring attention to the issue, which the post has certainly done. There are so many of state fights going on, he said, that this was a way to reach a lot of people at once. "We've been watching this for months," he said. "It's very clearly a state-by-state battle. We are concerned about Tesla litigating state-by-state. The collective [cost] impact of that is one of the major concerns here. They're just trying to sell their cars. The way the industry is reacting shows that it's about more than that." Gavil wouldn't go so far as to say that there should be new national rules – it's up to Congress to do that, he said - but he has also been looking at the taxi industry and the upstarts like Lyft and Uber. The competition angle sometimes doesn't get the attention it deserves, he said. "If there's a more open debate about it, that can only be a good thing." One of the groups opposed to Tesla's direct sales is the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), which represents 16,000 new car and truck dealerships with about 32,000 domestic and international franchises.

Can we keep the gauge cluster around, please?

Let’s not follow TeslaÂ’s lead in the elimination of the gauge cluster. I might be too late, but IÂ’m going to say it anyway. The cute 2025 Volvo EX30 is to blame for this needing to be said. I genuinely like most things about the EX30 and its cost-oriented approach to a luxury EV. However, Volvo went and deleted the gauge cluster, and thatÂ’s just one cost-saving step too many. Of course, center-mounted instruments is nothing new, but Tesla popularized the idea of removing the cluster entirely years ago with its Model 3 and Model Y. I didnÂ’t like the idea when I first saw it, and my displeasure with driving around a car with no cluster was confirmed when I drove a Model 3 for the first time. There are numerous reasons, but it all boils down to the importance of having vital information in your direct line of sight. The transition to EVs allows for the elimination of certain monitoring gauges within a cluster, but basics like speed, gear position, headlight status, cruise control and range are all things I want directly in front of me. I donÂ’t want to glance down and to the right to see these things. You could make a valid safety argument for such an arrangement, but including all of that info just for the sake of convenience is enough. The only excuse I see for eliminating the cluster is if a comprehensive head-up display impervious to polarized sunglasses comes as standard equipment. ItÂ’d still be bothersome in a gasoline-powered car to lose all those gauges, but I could live with just a HUD in an electric car if it meant a lower cost to the buyer. That said, my favorite integrations are the smaller clusters installed in some EVs like the Ford Mustang Mach-E or Volkswagen ID.4. These little clusters are smaller and simpler than many of the massive instrument screens going into cars these days, but they include all the information you might want at a glance. Beyond the safety and convenience aspect, thereÂ’s a nostalgic angle to the gauge cluster. Just a short while ago, I trumpeted the return of retro designs in digital gauge clusters. You can quite literally do whatever youÂ’d like when youÂ’re working with a screen, which leaves the field of opportunities wide open. We wonÂ’t have the privilege of enjoying old-school (or revolutionary new-school) designs if OEMs start eliminating them entirely.