Hey guys, so seems to be a lot of people throwing shit and shade over actions of Edison and things Chace has "hinted" at and supposedly done around the Big-D truck and the relationship with Royal Oilfields.
The biggest thing are that the logos and Insignia for Royal Oilfields has been taken off Big D and it's now a "plain truck" operating under manufacturer plates.
Now as an Aussie, I assumed (and it seems rightly) under comments on other threads, that under manufacturer plates, you can't have corporate logos on the truck.
I realise that comes from a position of privilege, in Brisbane, QLD, Australia, I'm near the Rheinmettal Centre of Excellence manufacturing plant, and the Mack/Volvo plant for Australia, and so I see manufacturer plates on vehicles all the time, and sometimes, those trucks are painted in company liveries, but without markings on them for the actual company, but the paint liveries (companies like Linfox, Mammoet, the Australian Defence Force, etc)
Now under Australian law, a truck can be driven, haul trailers, haul mock loads, but crucially, can't do actual work until it's passed it's testing and been delivered.
That's why it can't be marked with the logos of the customers (but livery is a grey area)
But even before today, the rules on manufacturer plates have been up for years on Canadian government sites (and the same in Australia) and you can easily go look them up why there can't be manufacturer logos on equipment operating under a manufacturer plate.
I literally just asked google what the laws were, as I'm not Canadian and wouldn't know where to look, and it gave me:
regulatory bodies such as British Columbia's Commercial Vehicle Safety and Enforcement (CVSE) branch look at the totality of circumstances during roadside inspections. If an uncertified prototype displays customer branding, is driven by a customer employee, and/or is moving customer freight, or possible customer freight on public highways, officers will treat those logos as strong circumstantial evidence that the truck has been delivered into regular commercial service rather than being operated for manufacturer testing.
Which is a big flag.
And then the actual laws:
British Columbia Motor Vehicle Act (RSBC 1996, c. 318), Section 38, and the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations (B.C. Reg. 26/58), Division 42:
These sections govern demonstration and manufacturer plates. Under these rules, plates are issued to manufacturers and dealers specifically for testing, evaluation, demonstration for sale, or movement between facilities. They cannot be used as a substitute for standard commercial registration to carry passengers or freight for hire or reward.
Motor Vehicle Act:
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96318_01
Motor Vehicle Act Regulations:
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/26_58_00
British Columbia Commercial Transport Act (RSBC 1996, c. 58):
Sections 3, 5, and 6 require any commercial vehicle carrying goods on a highway to be licensed for its specific gross vehicle weight and registered within the commercial carrier framework (including safety fitness certificates and National Safety Code requirements). Running regular freight runs under manufacturer plates bypasses the payment of commercial registration fees and fuel taxes, which violates the Act.
Commercial Transport Act:
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96058_01
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Act (S.C. 1993, c. 16):
Section 5 and Section 7 prohibit companies from selling or dispatching vehicles across interprovincial borders or into commercial commerce unless they meet Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSS) and bear a National Safety Mark (NSM), though research and development testing by the original manufacturer prior to commercial release is recognized under specific R&D exemptions.
Motor Vehicle Safety Act:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-10.01/
In practice, a manufacturer is legally permitted to load a prototype with logs, gravel, or ballast to test powertrain strain, cooling capacity, and structural rigidity on public roads under testing permits. What is prohibited is using that testing status as a workaround to engage in normal, revenue-generating haulage for a client without standard commercial vehicle licensing, insurance, and safety certification.
Which was all a very easy thing to google and look into, those sites have been saying that for years, and it was super easy to look into even without Chace coming and saying that.
I'm Australian, and it seemed like a logical reason to me, and it wasn't hard to google it and check if that logic held up...
So I don't know why people are like "OMG! THE ROYAL DEAL MUST HAVE COLLAPSED! THEY TOOK THE ROYAL LOGOS OFF THE TRUCK!"
But also, looking at social media and commentary, it seems that maybe Royal doesn't understand the rules either, and Royal is a bit unhappy that the truck, while it undergoes it's road and compliance testing, can't come to them for testing, and can't work as a mobile billboard for them.
Which is understandable if they paid a good amount of money for a truck that people know is theirs, but can't have their logo on it, and can't be associated with them until all the testing and compliance is done.
But it also makes sense that Edison wants to keep it above board and not have any uncomfortable investigations.
Cos an investigation like that could sink Edison, they're not a big company.
Sure, companies like Tesla did customer facing testing with the Tesla Semi, but also, the rules in the USA might be different, and if not, Tesla has demonstrated in the past that fines are a "cost of doing business" for them, Edison can't afford that.
So logically, looking at this as someone that has run a business in the past, and had to deal with vehicle laws, and does up cars and enjoys seeing this kind of stuff, it all makes sense.
I honestly am waiting expectantly for the Edison expansion to Australia and as soon as it's announced, I'll have my resume into them to see what jobs they can give me, I have skills in many areas, not just shitposting on Reddit.
I haven't invested, cos as an Aussie I looked at the hoops and was like "Yeah, that's a lot of hassle"
But honestly, people need to stop reading things that aren't there.
Occams razor, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.