[UlyssesSKrunk]

I hadn't considered paying people to fly out, good idea PR wise.

I was thinking more just refusing to sell to any dealership in a state that doesn't allow Tesla to make their own. That way no new sales of Teslas would happen in that state and Tesla could show stats from their stores in neighboring states near the border showing how many people from the Tesla prohibition state are crossing over to buy. Considering this is one of those black and white cases where one side of the legislators(those who oppose direct to consumer sales) are against it for purely corruption reasons, it should take long or be hard to get the public to turn on the idea and demand the law act in the interest of the people as opposed to artificially jacking up prices for kickbacks.

Then again they could just set the price for their cars at one value that they will sell it for in all of their direct to consumer dealers. They should then make ads using this value so that everybody knows damn well that the latest Tesla costs $X. Then they could simply work with the middlemen dealerships but jack up the price they sell to the dealership for so that the dealerships have to charge a very noticeable amount more than $X. Then everybody sees the ads, which btw should mainly be played in states that are fighting Tesla and realize the dealerships are screwing them. Imagine seeing ads that clearly say a big mac is $2 yet when you go it actually cost about $3.50 in your state because your gov't gets kick backs from big beef to have a law that keeps it that high. Again the public will turn since they want the cheap Teslas that come from the official source rather than the expensive ones from some worthless middleman.

Which strategy is better I don't know for sure, but the former is what I hope they do, it seems more respectable and more effective since in the second way the corrupt states still get some revenue from the overpriced sales.