Downtown Fiat Display Closed
Last month the downtown display-only showroom for Lou Fusz Fiat closed.
The store was not a licensed dealership — a costly process that involves permission from the auto manufacturer, in this case Chrysler, and usually a sizable investment — but rather a display not unlike what you might find in a shopping mall. It also enlivened a storefront downtown that had sat empty for several years, so much so that the building’s owner let Fusz occupy the space rent-free. (stltoday)
Indeed the cars inside the corner space of 1015 Locust more interesting. Once again, it is empty.
I wrote If It Sounds Too Good To Be True… in January 2012 when others were splitting hairs between “dealership” and “full-service dealership.” With a staff person and availability of test drives this was more than a simple display, though well short of a full dealership. The Missouri legislature must have thought it was too close to being a dealership and tightened up laws to clarify displays.
Of course, Lou Fusz could build an actual dealership. I could picture an urban dealership at Tucker & Cass, easily reached by downtown residents/workers and visible to the thousands that’ll come into downtown on the new I-70 bridge when it opens next year.
— Steve Patterson
Looking at the state’s rules and regulations, it looks like it may be possible to make this work, but it would be expensive, requiring a permanent sign with letters at least 6″ high and creating a separate entity to hold a license for this location. It appears that the rules are intended to protect consumers from unscrupulous, “temporary”, “fly-by-night” operations. And it seems like the real issue is/was not the static display of vehicles, it’s the availability of test drives and the use of dealer plates – you need to actually sell vehicles to buy dealer plates: http://dor.mo.gov/forms/Dealer_Operating_Manual.pdf
Bigger picture, I’m intrigued by your interest in “an urban dealership at Tucker & Cass”. I’m guessing that you’re envisioning a showroom with windows facing the sidewalk “holding the corner”. A much, much more likely scenario would be what the new Mini store and the newer BMW stores look like on S. Hanley, or the new Mercedes dealership under construction at I-64 and Hampton – they all have surface lots between the street(s) and the new building, for outdoor vehicle display and customer parking. Should fit in well with the inevitable gas station / mini-mart that will be on the other corner . . . .
You’re wrong, the Mercedes dealership under construction is an urban structure — no parking lot between the building and public sidewalk. The building will shield raking behind it. Because of the size of the site, it’ll have more than one level. See http://nextstl.com/central-corridor/mercedes-returns-to-st-louis-city-after-15-years
I stand corrected on the new Mercedes store, but I still stand behind my statement / belief that we probably won’t see this type of density at Tucker and Cass, at least not initially. I fully expect that it will look more like a typical autocentric, suburban intersection than an “urban” one, with one or more of the following: gas station / mini-mart, chain drug store with drive-thru, bank with drive-thru and/or fast-food restaurant with drive-thru (can you say Starbucks?). This is / will be an auto-focused, commuter gateway and the businesses that choose to locate here will cater to that demographic. The intersection is more than a dozen blocks from Washington Avenue, and it’s going to take time for “downtown” densities to catch up with any sort of “urban” vision that you or the city can come up with.
So this begs the questions: why did such a bill pass? who instituted it and why? Was it someone from the City that didn’t think a car dealer was appropriate or was it from a competing dealer? mmmmmmmm…
Good questions, I looked but couldn’t find the specific bill to see the language and sponsor.
It appears that the Dept. of Revenue sets the rules that dealerships operate under (see link in previous comment). My guess is that a bureaucrat there interpreted the rules and decided that the way Lou Fusz Fiat was operating downtown was not in compliance, and that the management of Lou Fusz simply decided that they did not want to jeopardize the licenses for their multiple other locations by fighting the decision. Yes, you can “fight city hall”, but you need to weigh the risks versus the rewards. But, then again, I wouldn’t put it past our esteemed state legislators to delve into an issue like this and a pass a law to “fix” something that really isn’t a problem . . . .
This is unfortunate as the Fiat display was an asset to the city, downtown, and presumably to the dealership. The residents of the city are the car’s market so it makes sense to display them where your market actually lives. I imagine that some of the other dealerships were complaining?
I am a St Louis transplant now living in Gulf Shores, AL. When the Fiat first became available in the US, I wanted one. But the nearest dealer was 4 hours away in New Orleans. Fiats then were sold and serviced ONLY at boutique dealerships, and not even the local Chrysler dealer could perform as much as an oil change I figured it was too far to go for an oil change or even for 4 month checkups (especially given the FIAT reputation) ! I had my heart set on a 500 convertible–all for less than $25K! But it didn’t happen. My wife and I had a baby instead…..and now I drive a………minivan!
I believe the state implemented this law to try to slow down Tesla Motors which dealerships and Detroit automakers are doing across the country. Elon Musk is disrupting the entire auto dealer network and automotive industry and in the long run Fiat and other car makers will be opening display rooms and selling cars over the internet like http://www.teslamotors.com.