New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions • Hacker News Board

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#81

Post by dahfizz » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:11 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #54

leereeves wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in a nation where, on aggregate, their platform is unpopular Many polls report that the Republicans are more popular than the Democrats at the moment.[1] Sadly, refusing to acknowledge the existence of differing views seems to be rather common these days. 1: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-...

That's the congressional vote, which suffers from gerrymandering. In raw numbers, far more people support the Democrats than the Republicans.

Its polling data, not an actual vote.

According to this CNBC poll[1], on the question of "party preference to control Congress", the Republicans come out ahead. Its close, but hardly the landslide Democrat victory you would expect if nobody supports the GOP.

I would recommend you take another look at the polling data[2]. It might help pop some bubbles.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/20/gop-holds-big-leads-on-key-e...

[2] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-...

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#82

Post by leetcrew » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:16 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #56

I think this is great, and though I agree that determining whether there is an "on-going cost to the manufacturer" will be a gray area that automakers will try to game, I think that's a solvable problem. The heated seats example is a great one. There is no reason for this not be a one-time charge. On the other hand, I think it's fair to offer autopilot/"full self driving" on a subscription, or at least the upgrades a…

> The heated seats example is a great one. There is no reason for this not be a one-time charge.

if you're referring to BMW, the heated seats are still available as a one time charge. they're just also available as a subscription if you didn't option then upfront. heated seats seem like a weird fit for the subscription model, but as long as the upfront purchase option is reasonably priced, I don't really see the issue with this.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#83

Post by Retric » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:16 PM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #71

Retric wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many races only have candidates from a single party. Which discards votes in any such count not just from the election tallies but also likely voters.

Pollsters know that, so they phrase questions to avoid the issue, like: "Would you rather see the Republicans or the Democrats in control of Congress, or doesn’t this matter to you?" (from Monmouth)

That doesn’t help when you ask if someone is a likely voter and they say no because of who’s running.

Granted it doesn’t say it’s asking likely voters, but somehow they got 95% of responses say they are registered voters when only 50% of Americans are registered voters.

(Page 8) https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmout...

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#84

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #78

Retric wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many congressional elections are unposed due to extreme gerrymandering this zeroes out voters from that party in a nationwide count. Going alphabetically Alabama 2 of 7 races without Democratic candidates which means Democratic voters in those districts will obviously not vote for a Democrat. https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_House_of_Representativ...

This is polling data. You have to read the question. In this CNBC poll[1], the question was "which party do you want to control Congress?" and the Republicans came out ahead. In this[2] Harvard poll, the question was "would you be more likely to vote for a Republican or a Democrat in the midterm" and it was a 50/50 tie. Generally, I think OP's conclusion is correct. There is a tendency in this bubble to assume that t…

[deleted]

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#85

Post by leereeves » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:26 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #83

leereeves wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pollsters know that, so they phrase questions to avoid the issue, like: "Would you rather see the Republicans or the Democrats in control of Congress, or doesn’t this matter to you?" (from Monmouth)

That doesn’t help when you ask if someone is a likely voter and they say no because of who’s running. Granted it doesn’t say it’s asking likely voters, but somehow they got 95% of responses say they are registered voters when only 50% of Americans are registered voters. (Page 8) https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmout...

> somehow they got 95% of responses say they are registered voters

That's 95% of people who are old enough to respond to the poll (under 18 are excluded without reporting) and don't hang up.

I don't find it strange that people who aren't registered to vote hang up without responding to the poll.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#86

Post by jasonsb » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:28 PM UTC

mission_failed wrote: post #60

bearcobra wrote: post #53

I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand the idea of subscriptions for components that are physically present in the car and don't require ongoing cost by the manufacturer to support them is annoying. On the other hand I think that there could be some advantages to that model. The costs of cars seem to going up considerably because of all the advanced features. If it is possible to standardize some of the manufactu…

I challenge you to find a single example of introducing subscriptions reducing costs

Driver assistance systems for example. I don't want to pay for those features, but if I don't get them when I configure the car it's going to be much harder to sell the car a few years later. If those features can be activated later on, I won't lose money when I'll sell my car. So it reduces the initial cost of the car and then I also get a better resale value.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#87

Post by sublinear » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #17

sublinear wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. The cost of the hardware is always necessarily still passed on to the customer before they even pay for the subscription to "unlock" it. It's double dipping. It makes no sense to gamble that upsells will be successful in exchange for a more competitive price. There's guaranteed loss with that idea. The components pre-installed must cost something and it's not possible for the manufacturer to get that money back…

> The cost of the hardware is always necessarily still passed on to the customer before they even pay for the subscription to "unlock" it. That's not true. Razors are the canonical example of a product sold below cost, there are many others. > The components pre-installed must cost something They must cost something, but there's also a significant cost to creating multiple SKU's, and that cost is likely more than the…

> That's not true. Razors are the canonical example of a product sold below cost, there are many others.

Trivially wrong. Heated seats are not required for a vehicle to function.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#88

Post by diebeforei485 » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

scotuswroteus wrote: post #37

diebeforei485 wrote: post #35

I tend to agree for heated seats, but not for driver assistance. I think there will be a chilling effect - New Jersey customers might be forced to pay upfront for driver assistance features that residents of other jurisdictions could pay for on a monthly basis.

You're saying that only New Jersey is doing this for New Jersey-specific reasons. No other state's legislature thinks it's entirely bullshit. Yeah, that's definitely a smart, informed understanding of how each state's legislature works and is motivated and not at all a stupid took-Econ-101-before-I-developed-common-sense take. Totally agree. Chilling effects.

It would take the company extra legal work to figure out if they can offer a driver assistance subscription in New Jersey or not.

Perhaps New Jersey customers would have to wait longer than others for the whole product (because there is too much complexity in having a NJ-specific SKU)..

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#89

Post by leetcrew » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:40 PM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #34

sokoloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would happily pay $10/mo for 5 months a year for the 4 years I expected to own the car rather than $250-500 to buy heated seats. I don’t care about someone else’s costs; I care about the value I get and the price I’m asked to pay. If someone else makes a profit because they structure the deal smartly, good for them.

The problem is that you're still paying some subset of that $250-500 (in addition to the subscription fee), because in order to offer the subscription option to anyone, they have to include the hardware in every car, even if a particular owner decided not to buy the subscription. The carmaker has to defray that cost somehow, and that means every car gets a little bit more expensive up front, regardless of whether or…

I really doubt the per-unit hardware cost to install heated seats is anywhere near what they cost to option. it's not a complex technology, and plenty of cheap cars come with them standard. the manufacturer might even break even on the additional parts cost by only making one kind of seat. or they might make up for it by increasing the margin in some other option that you may or may not choose. who knows?

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#90

Post by forthefuture » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 9:48 PM UTC

jasonsb wrote: post #86

mission_failed wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I challenge you to find a single example of introducing subscriptions reducing costs

Driver assistance systems for example. I don't want to pay for those features, but if I don't get them when I configure the car it's going to be much harder to sell the car a few years later. If those features can be activated later on, I won't lose money when I'll sell my car. So it reduces the initial cost of the car and then I also get a better resale value.

It’s already priced in. You’re just paying more for the features you aren’t using.