That's completely relatable. I was in the market for a new car in 2019 and ironically chose for VW despite the emissions scandal.

For me, buying a car remains a multi-year investment, because I bought it to serve a purpose over an extended period of time. I ran the numbers for 10 years between different manufacturers, each with different base prices, but also prices for subscriptions, service and repairs, and contrasted against long term costs of alternatives like public transportation. What exactly defines an investment is somewhat of a grey area and I guess the same logic would disqualify a home as an investment. The only real difference is that a car is always a bad investment (unless you take Elmo at his word).

It's unfortunate that the dealership situation has weighed in to your decision, as Tesla abused their position as a new entry into the market to be exempt from state franchise laws. Most other car manufacturers have been selling cars longer through the conventional dealership model and are literally forbidden from adapting. Some states have maximum market share requirements which were put into place after the popularity of Tesla took off, effectively squeezing new entrants like Rivian out of state markets like Washington. This issue is more about state regulations and how Tesla uses and abuses its power to increase their profit margin.

I'm not at all arguing in favor of dealerships—don't get me wrong. But the fact that Tesla doesn't have them is not because of any innovation, but an unfair competitive advantage.