The issue isn't as simple as not wanting Internet sales or just reacting to the whining of dealers, although these might be 2 of the reasons for the letter from NH. For a dealer, any brand, to stay in business it takes the profits from both sales and service.
The ultimate, logical result of allowing Internet sales is the dealers with the lowest cost of selling would get all the business, leaving the local dealer, both good and bad dealers, probably out of business or trying to survive only on the service side of their business.
Want to see a certain tractor model before you buy, too bad, no local dealer that sells them.
Want to test drive a tractor before you buy, too bad, no local dealer.
Want to try a tractor out on your property, too bad, no local dealer.
Want to trade in your current tractor, too bad, no local dealer to buy it.
I am not defending what NH told their dealers or defending poor local dealers, who 'force' people to long distance purchases. (Like Bob, I think the Kubota policy makes the most sense...making the selling dealer responsible for the entire sale, from start to delivery.) Rather, I'm just pondering a 'what if', 'what if' all sales were over the Internet. Given the business I am in (IT), I am always thinking through what the logical consequences of a change might be and trying to anticipate the unintended consequences.
It's one thing to sell items over the Internet that require none, or very little, pre- or post-sale support like supplies. It's another thing to introduce Internet sales into an environment where there's a need for both of these as well as into an environment containing an established method (your local dealer) for delivering both.
