Tesla’s recent modification to its Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement introduces a stipulation preventing early adopters of the Cybertruck from reselling their vehicles until a year after taking delivery. This measure is designed to exert control over the initial resale market for the highly anticipated electric pickup.
To heighten the anticipation before the official launch, the Petersen Automotive Museum in LA conducted an auction last month, featuring the sale of an “early Cybertruck VIN” for an impressive $400,000. This event underscored the mounting excitement surrounding the impending release of the Cybertruck.
The updated agreement now imposes a one-year restriction on Cybertruck resales, with Tesla reserving the first right of refusal in case an owner needs to sell within this period. Failure to inform Tesla about the resale may result in legal consequences, including the threat of a lawsuit for $50,000 or more, and the potential denial of the opportunity to purchase future Tesla vehicles.
This specific clause, labeled “For Cybertruck Only,” is a recent addition to the “No Resellers” section in Tesla’s Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement, a section typically aimed at preventing dealerships from making bulk purchases for resale.
While exceptions are allowed under the agreement, owners seeking to resell their Cybertrucks must notify Tesla and secure approval. However, the final decision lies with Tesla, contingent upon their assessment of the buyback price and the validity of the owner’s reasons for resale.
Tesla has a track record of its popular vehicles fetching prices well above the sticker price upon release. The limited initial releases of previous models have seen early owners taking advantage of high demand. In some instances, these vehicles have been acquired by other automakers, possibly for reverse-engineering purposes. Given the unique features of the Cybertruck, such as its extra-thick stainless steel body and 48-volt electrical architecture, it may attract similar interest.
While the enforceability of such clauses might raise questions, they are not uncommon in the realm of rare cars. A notable example is wrestler John Cena’s resale of a Ford GT, which violated Ford’s two-year resale restriction clause. Ford pursued legal action, resulting in a settlement where Cena issued an apology and donated the proceeds to charity.
