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

101–110 of 215 posts

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

#101

Post by KennyBlanken »

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…

All Ford vehicles, including fleet vehicles, have telematics built-in and it's active whether you're paying for it or not.

Ford even offers free fleet telematics services and you don't have to do anything to activate it. Source: worked for a company that had a bunch of vehicles. Boss was unaware we could automagically see fault codes, mileage, oil change status, etc.

People don't get it: any vehicle with telematics is transmitting a ton of data the entire time it's running, whether you pay for telematics or not.

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

#102

Post by smnrchrds »

sokoloff wrote: post #57
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 subscripti…

In the software world, we have seen things that used to cost a one-time payment of 60$ turn into a 100$ PER YEAR subscription [0]. I'm sure no manufacturer will make a subscription system that will make them less money. It will, in all likelihood, end up being an order of magnitude more remunerative for them compared to the one-time payment.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20150316090012/https://purchase.... https://www.youneedabudget.com/pricing/

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

#103

Post by josephcsible »

vasco wrote: post #65
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…

This is less to do with blackmail than to do with optimising manufacturing. It is cheaper for manufacurers to produce all the cars with the same heated seats, but not allow you to use them if you don't pay the recurring charge (as long as enough % of customers opt-in), than to manufacture two versions of the car, one with the seats and one without, just so that you can feel like you aren't being blackmailed. You shou…

It's one thing when two cores of an 8-core CPU fail QA, so it gets sold as a 6-core one instead (since the alternative would be throwing it away entirely). It's another to disable perfectly good equipment purely out of greed.

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

#104

Post by api »

the_other wrote: post #96
vasco wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is less to do with blackmail than to do with optimising manufacturing. It is cheaper for manufacurers to produce all the cars with the same heated seats, but not allow you to use them if you don't pay the recurring charge (as long as enough % of customers opt-in), than to manufacture two versions of the car, one with the seats and one without, just so that you can feel like you aren't being blackmailed. You shou…

This is dumb and a sign that the system we have created to operate in is broken. Another sign. Programmers talk about code smells. This is a code smell about our resource extraction and sharing, and money systems. It's like how it's "cheaper" to farm some foods and ship them half way around the world via plain and ship, than it is to farm the same food and ship it 100km across land. The "cost" doesn't reflect _in any…

I like the general idea of societal "code smells." I think a full list of these would end up getting very long.

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

#105

Post by rfiat »

ok123456 wrote: post #55

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 contro…

I think a much bigger downside would be its effect on the price of your insurance. I can't speak for any other country but in the UK insurers have a reputation for being petty about modifications. Even something as minor as a DIY heated seat switch would have to be declared to your insurer who could refuse to cover you or charge a silly premium for cover.

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

#106

Post by FpUser »

I can guarantee that I will not ever pay a dime for those monthly billed extras that have no recurring costs to manufacturers. Go away vultures. Next time I buy car I will first look if company uses monthly fee in their vehicles and if it does off to the next one. If they all do then as previously said - I just will not subscribe.

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

#107

Post by chrisseaton »

omniglottal wrote: post #93
chrisseaton wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is all the anger in this thread based on a hypothetical that they might break their contract? If it's an ongoing payment they're actually incentivised to not do that!

No, the contract is already broken when what is purchased is not owned.

That’s not what the article says - they aren’t going back on features you already purchased. It’s for new purchases only. They aren’t breaking any contracts.

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

#108

Post by MerelyMortal »

ok123456 wrote: post #55

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 contro…

Not everything will be that easy to bypass.

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

#109

Post by mattnewton »

sokoloff wrote: post #79
ARandumGuy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The objection is, if I own a car, then the car manufacturer shouldn't be able to disable functionality. If I buy a car with heated seats, I should be able to use them as much as I want, and the manufacturer should have no control over that. The cost concern is secondary to losing control of devices that we ostensibly own.

I agree, provided the purchase arrangement of the car included the perpetual (at least until it broke) heated seats functionality. If the car was instead sold/bought with the heated seats as a subscription, I don’t see any problem with them being, well, a subscription.

The problem is that, since subscriptions are more profitable and look better to accounting, soon I may no long be able to get that deal of buying basic functionality of my car upfront. It’s the classic subsidized printer gouged ink model, except it’s entirely artificial here (no new ink is being shipped to me, the printer is just turning on or not) for increased profits and hiding the trust cost to the customer.

Strong and broad consumer rejection is the only recourse for people not being ripped off by turning what was an owned asset into a rental through this method of cost hiding, which is why I think people are being worked up.

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

#110

Post by doodlesdev »

AlexandrB wrote: post #37
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…

I hope you're right, but the TV market gives me pause. There's plenty of competition, but all the major brands include advertising and spyware in their TVs.

Because most people don't think "is there spyware or adware on this smart TV" before they choose to buy one. In fact most people don't even really think a lot before buying a TV. This is the kind of thing that indeed regulation could be awesome, even though from a purely financial/objective point of view removing all of this would be kind of bad, I think it would be in the best interest of humanity.
Post reply on HN