Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 215 posts

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#51

Post by chrisseaton »

charles_f wrote: post #32

I can somewhat understand the logic of charging me a recurring fee for a service that costs the provider a recurring cost, gets regular improvements, and where data is maintained. TV/sat radio? Ok (not that I would buy that). Remote tracking / start? Why not. Internet access in the car? Sure. Satellite maps with updates? Maybe. I would hope that given how much you charge me for the product, these come included, but M…

> That's blackmail-powered greed.

I really don't get people's revulsion to this model.

As long as you know the deal up front, what is the ethical issue? How can it ever be 'greed' or 'blackmail' to offer a service or product (a luxury one at that)?

Do your sums and then either the total cost is worth it to you or it isn't. Why does the payment model get people so riled up?

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#52

Post by tunap »

arielweisberg wrote: post #12

As long as competition remains real I think there will always be a manufacturer or model that gives you close to what you want. Mazda for example has stuck with physical controls and hasn't been making any noises about pushing a bunch of things behind a subscription. There is a subscription for remote start and some useless notifications, but at the moment it's nothing to worry about. I don't think they can afford to…

>As long as competition remains real I think there will always be a manufacturer or model that gives you close to what you want.

Like a 3.5mm heaphone jack, expandable storage, replaceable batteries & a physical keyboard on my smart(sic) phone?

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#53

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

cma wrote: post #46
charles_f wrote: post #32

I can somewhat understand the logic of charging me a recurring fee for a service that costs the provider a recurring cost, gets regular improvements, and where data is maintained. TV/sat radio? Ok (not that I would buy that). Remote tracking / start? Why not. Internet access in the car? Sure. Satellite maps with updates? Maybe. I would hope that given how much you charge me for the product, these come included, but M…

> I wasn't surprised that BMW, Tesla or Ford would do something like that. But for whatever stupid reason, Toyota is a disappointment, because I thought they would be part of a few manufacturers not playing that game I didn't think Sony would follow Microsoft in charging a subscription for online play, but they pretty much had to because buyers didn't weight the hidden costs of it appropriately and Microsoft was alre…

But Sony is already charging others for everything. Just to appear on PS4 bar, you have to pay a premium. I sincerely doubt, they were bleeding money ( unlike MS at the beginning of Xbox ) providing free online play. In fact, it was their differentiator.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#54

Post by user-one1 »

arielweisberg wrote: post #12

As long as competition remains real I think there will always be a manufacturer or model that gives you close to what you want. Mazda for example has stuck with physical controls and hasn't been making any noises about pushing a bunch of things behind a subscription. There is a subscription for remote start and some useless notifications, but at the moment it's nothing to worry about. I don't think they can afford to…

If their competition is able to lower their prices at point of sale due to increased subscription revenue, it's going to hurt Mazda's sales. If the subscription model is successful, I expect Mazda an other auto-makers to follow through.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#55

Post by ok123456 »

This just means that circumvention will be an lucrative industry.

For heated seats, someone will add a bypass that just adds a physical switch that is spliced directly somewhere between a power source and the actual heating element. Just have to figure out an aesthetic place to mount it. The only downside being, in this case you can't control it via an aPp or through the tablet that replaced the actual console controls. Big loss.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#56

Post by neogodless »

chrisseaton wrote: post #51
charles_f wrote: post #32

I can somewhat understand the logic of charging me a recurring fee for a service that costs the provider a recurring cost, gets regular improvements, and where data is maintained. TV/sat radio? Ok (not that I would buy that). Remote tracking / start? Why not. Internet access in the car? Sure. Satellite maps with updates? Maybe. I would hope that given how much you charge me for the product, these come included, but M…

> That's blackmail-powered greed. I really don't get people's revulsion to this model. As long as you know the deal up front, what is the ethical issue? How can it ever be 'greed' or 'blackmail' to offer a service or product (a luxury one at that)? Do your sums and then either the total cost is worth it to you or it isn't. Why does the payment model get people so riled up?

> As long as you know the deal up front

I suspect this is... not always the case.

> I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further

There isn't much from stopping the manufacturers from changing the "up front" deal under this model. (Unless it becomes egregious enough to become illegal.) We'd like to get out in front of this and stop it from getting to that point.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#57

Post by sokoloff »

charles_f wrote: post #32

I can somewhat understand the logic of charging me a recurring fee for a service that costs the provider a recurring cost, gets regular improvements, and where data is maintained. TV/sat radio? Ok (not that I would buy that). Remote tracking / start? Why not. Internet access in the car? Sure. Satellite maps with updates? Maybe. I would hope that given how much you charge me for the product, these come included, but M…

Is the objection to the turning a one-time payment into a series of monthly payments? Or is the actual objection that the net present value of those monthly payments is too high?

If you want to turn something that used to cost me $400 one-time into a subscription that costs me $1.49/mo, I'll be happy that you've offered me the subscription and will buy it in subscription form. Charge $9.99/mo for that same subscription and I'll be incensed.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#58

Post by [deleted] »

LanceH wrote: post #42

Something which can be helpful when trying to avoid features is looking for "work" versions of the vehicle. It's frequently a different sales manager who is more amenable to plain vehicles. You'll be looking for "fleet" sales, which is generally for corporate clients or maybe high end clients. Some places will insist you go through regular sales. For example, I bought a pickup but didn't want 4 wheel drive. Being in…

[deleted]

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#59

Post by adventured »

sbf501 wrote: post #36
jacooper wrote: post #4

The smarter cars get, the worse they are for consumer rights and Privacy. Unfortunately its a general trend, everything that is getting "smartified" is becoming an anti consumer black box, and If you care about your privacy or owning the device you bought, you are out of luck. It happened with TVs, and now its coming for cars too, there might be options now but they won't last long, is there a dumb TV in your local s…

> The only way to stop this is with regulation This is a controversial point, but a salient one. If EVERY manufacturer makes a smart TV, then there are no longer dumb TVs. It is collusion of a sort, not a monopoly. One could argue: just don't buy a TV, but there is some weird kind of inertia behind the purchasing of a TV that is immune to that claim. It is not essential to own one, but it shouldn't have to be a surve…

No post body was provided.

Re: Auto giants like BMW, GM and Toyota make drivers ‘subscribe’ for basic features

#60

Post by cameronh90 »

switch007 wrote: post #15
josephcsible wrote: post #2

> BMW currently requires car owners in some countries to pay roughly $12 per month to access a safety feature called “High Beam Assistant,” which automatically turns off a car’s high beam lights when it senses another car to avoid blinding other drivers at night. > “Safety should come standard,” Wallace said of adaptive headlights. “Some automakers might think that those are simply a convenience feature, but there’s…

High Beam Assist is a dangerous anti feature imo. Kind of glad for it to be gated behind a paid subscription, saves having to turn it off. I’ve driven various cars with this feature and they never turn it on and off when I would. I’ve nearly been crashed in to because a car at a junction thought I was flashing them to pull out, as I was doing 60 mph, and they did. (Also, I’m assuming the automatic turning on of the h…

Confusing scenarios like you mentioned are why highway code rule 110 says you should only flash your headlights to let drivers know you are there, not to convey a message, and rule 111 says never assume flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed.

Obviously, it's not your fault that someone else interpreted the headlight as an invitation to pull out. And indeed, it's probably one of the most widely ignored rules in the highway code. Nevertheless... it's still the other driver's fault. I've personally had it where other drivers think I've flashed them out, but I had actually just gone over a bump in the road.

(I'm assuming you're British because you say junction.)

Post reply on HN