Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

macobserver.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 135 posts

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#81

Post by damncabbage »

rtrunck wrote: post #73
jellicle wrote: post #68

Except there's no loophole. Registering the vehicle at purchase (or at beginning of lease) is required. Cal DMV will then send you plates. At which time your paper stickers expire. Besides, his vehicle wasn't displaying the temporary plates either. Look, MacObserver and all the rest of you fanboys: Steve Jobs just decided to disobey the law. There's no loophole. There's just a guy who thought the lines of his car wer…

Disobeying vehicle registration laws does not equal being an asshole. I doubt anyone actually makes it through a day without breaking at least one law. Quit being an asshole yourself and at least provide a legitimate reason why he was an asshole.

Parking in disabled spaces[1][2]. :)

  [1] http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Handicapped.txt
  [2] http://www.cultofmac.com/2613/steve-jobs-still-parking-in-handicapped-spaces-the-pictures/

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#82

Post by nlh »

zach wrote: post #30
gcv wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, chill out. The article says the car was leased. He probably had to pay some kind of premium to keep his leases down to six months at a time, but it's not like he was buying a new $120k car twice a year.

I'm not upset about it or concerned with the financial arrangements, I'm just kind of amazed by the concept. On top of the self-expression of never having license plates, he got one of the finest cars in the world delivered to his driveway, brand new, twice a year. I'm guessing not only did he never have car trouble, he never needed to take it in for maintenance either. That's hard to beat as far as perks of being a…

Don't overly idolize the concept. The SL55 is, relatively-speaking, a fairly modest car (brand new, the SL55 was a bit over $100k vs. the SL65, which looked the same but had a bigger motor and was almost _double_ the price). Among car nerds, Jobs' choice of the 55 model showed a lot of restraint.

It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world.

And lastly, I'd bet that he didn't actually get a brand new one every six months -- leasing companies generally don't do that without requiring a massive chunk of money up front (i.e. $20k each time), and given the restraint he showed with the car selection, I doubt he'd be so, well, inefficient.

It's MUCH more likely, as another commenter suggested, that the actual loophole they used was for him to "sell" the car back to the leasing company and immediately re-lease it every six months.

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#84

Post by nlh »

Steko wrote: post #71
jarek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most people who can afford $120k Mercedes vehicles really care who's driven them before. If it was a Ferrari driven by a rock star, maybe , but people who drive Benzes are generally boring and reasonable.

Honestly "most people" don't have to care. Only a few people need to care enough to affect prices for something with such a limited supply. It's not hard to find pre-owned by celebrity car sales fetching a premium. For all we know though there's some loophole that lets the dealer resell the exact same car to Jobs every 6 months which somehow keeps it under the no-plate period.

I'm in the luxury car industry and I can say that the "celebrity-owned" cars fetch approximately $0 in premium in the marketplace.

Dealers will certainly (try to) use that fact in their marketing, but the cars are such commodities anyway (particularly the SL55, of which there are TONS out there) that nobody, in the end, really cares who owned the car as long as it looks and runs like it's supposed to.

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#85

Post by nlh »

cvg wrote: post #57
zach wrote: post #3

So basically, Steve got a new Mercedes more often than I get new shoes. Now that's what I expect out of a multibillionaire. Good to see he at least kept himself in new-car smell on a regular basis, and certainly kept a local dealer quite happy.

I'm not sure that he had to get a brand new car every six months. He could have created a new lease on the same car every six month from a leasing company. That should have been enough to satisfy the law: http://dmv.ca.gov/fee_calc/feecalcfaq.htm#plates

I think you nailed it on the head here. This is the most likely scenario for what actually happened.

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#86

Post by larrys »

Steko wrote: post #71
jarek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most people who can afford $120k Mercedes vehicles really care who's driven them before. If it was a Ferrari driven by a rock star, maybe , but people who drive Benzes are generally boring and reasonable.

Honestly "most people" don't have to care. Only a few people need to care enough to affect prices for something with such a limited supply. It's not hard to find pre-owned by celebrity car sales fetching a premium. For all we know though there's some loophole that lets the dealer resell the exact same car to Jobs every 6 months which somehow keeps it under the no-plate period.

"there's some loophole that lets the dealer resell"

Exactly. The way the law was written, the exact wording, it would never be expected that someone would not want to do something like put on a license plate and go to the added expense that Jobs did.

The law probably reads "x" time period from the date of title.

Even if that time period was only 30 days there is nothing to prevent someone from selling the car to their wife, buying it back, and re-titling. And a transfer to a family member in many states including California is exempt from sales/use tax:

http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/howto/htvr1.htm

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#87

Post by [deleted] »

jellicle wrote: post #68

Except there's no loophole. Registering the vehicle at purchase (or at beginning of lease) is required. Cal DMV will then send you plates. At which time your paper stickers expire. Besides, his vehicle wasn't displaying the temporary plates either. Look, MacObserver and all the rest of you fanboys: Steve Jobs just decided to disobey the law. There's no loophole. There's just a guy who thought the lines of his car wer…

[deleted]

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#88

Post by blhack »

nlh wrote: post #82
zach wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not upset about it or concerned with the financial arrangements, I'm just kind of amazed by the concept. On top of the self-expression of never having license plates, he got one of the finest cars in the world delivered to his driveway, brand new, twice a year. I'm guessing not only did he never have car trouble, he never needed to take it in for maintenance either. That's hard to beat as far as perks of being a…

Don't overly idolize the concept. The SL55 is, relatively-speaking, a fairly modest car (brand new, the SL55 was a bit over $100k vs. the SL65, which looked the same but had a bigger motor and was almost _double_ the price). Among car nerds, Jobs' choice of the 55 model showed a lot of restraint. It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world. And lastly, I'd bet that he didn't actually get a brand…

>The SL55 is, relatively-speaking, a fairly modest car [..] a bit over $100k

Are you out of your fucking mind? $100,000 is a fairly modest car? That's as much as a lot of us make in two years.

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#89

Post by felipemnoa »

nlh wrote: post #82
zach wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not upset about it or concerned with the financial arrangements, I'm just kind of amazed by the concept. On top of the self-expression of never having license plates, he got one of the finest cars in the world delivered to his driveway, brand new, twice a year. I'm guessing not only did he never have car trouble, he never needed to take it in for maintenance either. That's hard to beat as far as perks of being a…

Don't overly idolize the concept. The SL55 is, relatively-speaking, a fairly modest car (brand new, the SL55 was a bit over $100k vs. the SL65, which looked the same but had a bigger motor and was almost _double_ the price). Among car nerds, Jobs' choice of the 55 model showed a lot of restraint. It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world. And lastly, I'd bet that he didn't actually get a brand…

>>It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world.

I'm not trolling and this is a sincere question. Which car would you consider among the finest in the world?

Edit: Thanks for the replies.

Re: California DMV Loophole Allowed Jobs to Drive Sans-Plates

#90

Post by blhack »

felipemnoa wrote: post #89
nlh wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't overly idolize the concept. The SL55 is, relatively-speaking, a fairly modest car (brand new, the SL55 was a bit over $100k vs. the SL65, which looked the same but had a bigger motor and was almost _double_ the price). Among car nerds, Jobs' choice of the 55 model showed a lot of restraint. It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world. And lastly, I'd bet that he didn't actually get a brand…

>>It's a nice car, but far from one of the finest cars in the world. I'm not trolling and this is a sincere question. Which car would you consider among the finest in the world? Edit: Thanks for the replies.

There are certainly cars that go above this one, but once you cross the $100k threshold, you're basically in the "I don't care what it costs" territory.

(Personal dream cars that cost more than this):

Ascari A10

Koenigsegg CCX

Ariel Atom V8

Post reply on HN