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

181–190 of 215 posts

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

#181

Post by horsawlarway »

chrisseaton wrote: post #158
horsawlarway wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own my cars forever (until death do us part - either me or the car). This winds me up because it's a raw, shitty deal: $18/m * 12m/y * forever = infinity. Even assuming a short lifespan for the car (10 years) it's STILL a raw, shitty, dumpster fire of a deal: $2160 vs the $500 for the actual heated seats today. BMW knows this. They are double dipping - optimize production costs, ream consumers, violate doctrine of…

If the price doesn't make sense to you, then don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it they'll bring the price down until they people do. Something being too expensive for you doesn't make the seller unethical (unless it's a necessary good maybe - but not a luxury car.)

It's not about too expensive for me - it's about why a manufacturer is able to pick a method of "sale" that has unbounded costs for the "purchaser".

This is an unbounded cost. That makes sense when the service provided has an unbounded cost associated with it that the manufacturer is paying, but that's utterly untrue in this situation.

This is about a manufacturer taking a cost saving measure - simplified manufacturing lines

Then manipulating a digital device to also take a profit increasing measure - creating a digital on/off switch for heated seats that they refuse to provide a key for.

Do you think it's ethical for the previous owner of your home to keep the keys? "Hey - you own this house now, but if you want access to the basement - I got the keys and you have to pay up! It's only 25 bucks per month!"

That's clearly hostile. What makes you bend over so far backwards to let BMW ream you up the ass here in exactly the same way?

Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own?

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

#182

Post by kgermino »

gnicholas wrote: post #177
kgermino wrote: post #95

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. But th…

I believe BMW did offer this option, at least for some of the features. Heated seats were $450 or so, or $18/mo. It would be ironic if manufacturers were roasted for offering more options for payment rather than fewer. I would not feel this way if the one-time cost were higher than before (I think $500 is about standard), or if purchases were locked to the original purchaser. And I recognize that some of these exampl…

> I believe BMW did offer this option, at least for some of the features. Heated seats were $450 or so, or $18/mo.

That's a good call-out. I don't think there's anything wrong with offering a monthly option (it seems weird and I think there's probably some social commentary in there, but whatever), I just don't want to be forced to pay monthly.

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

#183

Post by horsawlarway »

chrisseaton wrote: post #168
AlexandrB wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it hurts the second hand market. Now when you buy a used car you're paying new car prices for a given feature. Meanwhile, the seller can't charge a premium over a less-equipped car.

But you can also sell the same car to people who want heated seats and those that don’t and wouldn’t want to pay a premium for it.

And how does this that help you at all?

They absolutely won't be paying you any extra money for those heated seats... they're already going to have to go pay BMW for the freaking subscription anyways.

At best you could argue you're slightly increasing the interested market for your car, but even that feels incredibly flimsy. The market for used cars is vibrant, and very rarely is trim level a deciding factor on used car purchases.

Usually you can negotiate price on trim - but this decidedly removes that option. You just get fucked right round as the original buyer.

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

#184

Post by chrisseaton »

horsawlarway wrote: post #181
chrisseaton wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the price doesn't make sense to you, then don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it they'll bring the price down until they people do. Something being too expensive for you doesn't make the seller unethical (unless it's a necessary good maybe - but not a luxury car.)

It's not about too expensive for me - it's about why a manufacturer is able to pick a method of "sale" that has unbounded costs for the "purchaser". This is an unbounded cost. That makes sense when the service provided has an unbounded cost associated with it that the manufacturer is paying, but that's utterly untrue in this situation. This is about a manufacturer taking a cost saving measure - simplified manufacturi…

> Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own?

I wouldn't want it myself. I don't get why people think it's unethical though. Someone called it a 'crime' elsewhere. That boggles my mind. It's their product - they can offer whatever payment model they want. If it's a crap one then don't buy it. If enough people think it's crap the market will adjust. It's a luxury car, not baby formula.

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

#185

Post by JeremyNT »

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…

As somebody who wants a world with more buses, cycling, and walking, I welcome the car companies declaring war on their own users.

Maybe it feels like there is no hope but to pay auto companies to abuse you, but there are alternatives, and we can all help try to build the world we want to live in.

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

#186

Post by horsawlarway »

chrisseaton wrote: post #184
horsawlarway wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about too expensive for me - it's about why a manufacturer is able to pick a method of "sale" that has unbounded costs for the "purchaser". This is an unbounded cost. That makes sense when the service provided has an unbounded cost associated with it that the manufacturer is paying, but that's utterly untrue in this situation. This is about a manufacturer taking a cost saving measure - simplified manufacturi…

> Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own? I wouldn't want it myself. I don't get why people think it's unethical though. Someone called it a 'crime' elsewhere. That boggles my mind. It's their product - they can offer whatever payment model they want. If it's a crap one then don't buy it. If enough people think it's crap the market will adjust. It's a luxury car, not…

> they can offer whatever payment model they want

This is a distinct misunderstanding of acceptable capitalism. To be very blunt, it's simply not true.

We accept the idea that "greed is good" when it comes to capitalism only because we regulate the cases where the market fails to align the interests of the customer and manufacturer.

In cases where interests are aligned: Greed is good. The seller wants to take actions that increase profit, and that usually means either reducing the cost to produce the item, or increasing the real (or perceived) value of the item for consumers. Both of those are good things for all parties.

In cases where interests are not aligned we regulate the ever-loving shit out of the market because we have incredibly detailed historical evidence that shows that it devolves to straight abuse.

Things like

- Cartels

- Monopolies

- Fraud

- Misleading advertising

- Contractual abuse

- Unequal bargaining

- Regulated goods (black markets)

and several hundred other specific laws we have that only exist because without them people end up killing each other due to real (or perceived) injustice without them.

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

#187

Post by jacooper »

JeremyNT wrote: post #185
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…

As somebody who wants a world with more buses, cycling, and walking, I welcome the car companies declaring war on their own users. Maybe it feels like there is no hope but to pay auto companies to abuse you, but there are alternatives, and we can all help try to build the world we want to live in.

Eh, i doubt this will affect the amount of cars being bought or how popular Public transportation is.

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

#188

Post by [deleted] »

horsawlarway wrote: post #186
chrisseaton wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own? I wouldn't want it myself. I don't get why people think it's unethical though. Someone called it a 'crime' elsewhere. That boggles my mind. It's their product - they can offer whatever payment model they want. If it's a crap one then don't buy it. If enough people think it's crap the market will adjust. It's a luxury car, not…

> they can offer whatever payment model they want This is a distinct misunderstanding of acceptable capitalism. To be very blunt, it's simply not true. We accept the idea that "greed is good" when it comes to capitalism only because we regulate the cases where the market fails to align the interests of the customer and manufacturer. In cases where interests are aligned: Greed is good. The seller wants to take actions…

[deleted]

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

#190

Post by kkfx »

chrisseaton wrote: post #67
kkfx wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The previsible absence of alternatives it's the main blackmail issue. The second is the fact that you can sell something packed with services and full of proprietary crap. That last is not blackmail but a crime against humanity committed by politicians and citizens who allow that.

> a crime against humanity I feel like I can't take these reactions to an alternative payment plan for the heated seats in your luxury BMW seriously.

It's not much a matter of heated sits in a car or rear wheels steering etc. It's a model problem. Did you know the famous McCarthyism-era Barkley scandal lifted by Ernst Kantorowicz [1]?

He was a German ultra-nationalist, member of hitler Freikorps who flee his country to the USA when his Jewish origins became a life-threatening issue in Germany. He became a famous UC Berkeley teacher and when the UC Regents demanded a loyalty oath against the Communism he resign stating that he surely be not a Communist, he fight them in the army, got blessed many times and decorated few times but as a historian he also see the nazi rise and see that any regime start with small low importance stuff like a simple dummy oath, an annual one, who get slightly changed at a slow peace trapping people slowly (what we all now the Chomsky's frog principle.

So far we see small things like in-car-infotainment systems ads, ads on phones, smart TVs even in some proprietary OS you pay for a EULA, connected devices who need a remote service (from Roomba to Kobo) and can't work without them etc after we start seeing ideas about legal IDs on smartphones, smart lock, ... a step at a time we will be entrapped and unable to correct the aim.

That's not a Luddite prediction and that's not a natural, unplanned evolution. Big of IT, conglomerates, financial cartels etc know very well this model and have always practiced it. And that's the crime you can't accept. The fact that we transition slowly to a society WEF/2030 alike [2] a small "innocent" step at a time.

If such kind of evolution hadn't been published here and there everywhere from WEF to G8 etc than yes, call it a crime would be a bold statement, but being published years ago and keep slowly evolving it is.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Kantorowicz

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/s...

Post reply on HN