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

Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 555 posts

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#131

Post by entrox »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #90
entrox wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You will be charged fucking $6000 dollars for a item that is already present in your car. How so? The one-time fee is $1950. Also, this is nothing new: top end Mercedes-AMG cars always had an optional "AMG Driver's Package" [0] for years now, which did nothing but electronically unlock Vmax from 250km/h to 290km/h. No changes in hardware at all. It used to retail for around $2500. Now you have the possibility to or…

> You might not like it, but it's actually a better deal than before. So if Apple would ask you for a nice $10/m to use their famous iPhone camera features you would be okay with that, because otherwise you would be fine with 8MP photos or pay additional $10 * 12m * 3y = $360 upfront? Of course, no changes in hardware at all. And the price of iPhone is the same, not $360 cheaper.

Try looking at it from the other side: you're getting a product at a lower base price and can upgrade to a higher model at a later point in time. It's more like buying, and paying for, an iPhone 14 and then having the possibility to upgrade the camera to the iPhone 14 Pro version afterwards.

There's ton of precedent for products that are artificially locked to a lower version. The difference between a NVidia GeForce and the much more expensive Quadro used to be just a bunch of ID resistors. Processor speeds are locked in a similar way.

Same thing with software. There's many cases where you purchase a piece of software and can later buy a feature or "Pro" unlock. You already downloaded all the bits & bytes to you device. Are you not OK with that?

I'm a bit surprised that the people on Hackernews of all places has such a reaction to this. Subscription models and SaaS have been practically invented here.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#132

Post by r00fus »

ajross wrote: post #104
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

> RENT FUCKING SEEKING. That's not rent seeking. Rent seeking is when an entity has control of something that can't be traded in a liquid/efficient way (this part is important!) and tries to leverage this uncompetetive situation into revenue that isn't subject to market forces. Cars are pretty liquid. Subscription products are very liquid. If people don't want this they won't buy it. If they don't want cars with this…

> That's exactly the opposite of rent seeking.

Untrue. They aren't monopoly rents but they are rents. Can you get better performance from your Mercedes EV through another provider? No? It's rent.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#133

Post by dh2022 »

smnrchrds wrote: post #117
atlantic wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't like it, just don't buy cars whose performance is artificially limited. Let the market decide the issue.

It's curious that the market (almost?) always decides what is bad for the consumer and profitable for the companies. As a person who is a person not a company, I would rather we don't let the market decide so much about our lives. Examples: Smart (spying ad-showing) TVs, non-compete agreements, water heater rentals, not-really-unlimited "unlimited data" cell plans, surveillance economy, only-rentable-not-buyable soft…

I already decided I will not buy cars with touch screens or cars that limit my usage (for ex. Tesla limiting how you can use its battery). I am guessing I will keep driving my 12 years old ICE car for another 5-6 years. It seems to work: car makers are starting to go back to buttons instead of touch screens [0]. Maybe the same will happen with these features (charging $/month for extra engine power / remote car startup / heated seats)?

[0] https://slate.com/business/2023/04/cars-buttons-touch-screen...

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#134

Post by matwood »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #90
entrox wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You will be charged fucking $6000 dollars for a item that is already present in your car. How so? The one-time fee is $1950. Also, this is nothing new: top end Mercedes-AMG cars always had an optional "AMG Driver's Package" [0] for years now, which did nothing but electronically unlock Vmax from 250km/h to 290km/h. No changes in hardware at all. It used to retail for around $2500. Now you have the possibility to or…

> You might not like it, but it's actually a better deal than before. So if Apple would ask you for a nice $10/m to use their famous iPhone camera features you would be okay with that, because otherwise you would be fine with 8MP photos or pay additional $10 * 12m * 3y = $360 upfront? Of course, no changes in hardware at all. And the price of iPhone is the same, not $360 cheaper.

There are a number of pay for apps like Halide that make the iPhone camera more useful beyond what Apple provides using the same underlying hardware.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#135

Post by stusmall »

atlantic wrote: post #111
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

If you don't like it, just don't buy cars whose performance is artificially limited. Let the market decide the issue.

Seriously. It isn't like anyone needs a Mercedes. There whole brand is around flashing wealth around and crap like this is inline with that. Buy something else.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#136

Post by entrox »

yamtaddle wrote: post #129
ajross wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> RENT FUCKING SEEKING. That's not rent seeking. Rent seeking is when an entity has control of something that can't be traded in a liquid/efficient way (this part is important!) and tries to leverage this uncompetetive situation into revenue that isn't subject to market forces. Cars are pretty liquid. Subscription products are very liquid. If people don't want this they won't buy it. If they don't want cars with this…

They're charging extra for something that would cost them nothing , deny them the use of nothing , require none of their resources, if you could use it without paying them. I can see an angle for calling that rent-seeking.

Is charging for a feature unlock in a piece of software also rent-seeking?

The feature has already been developed, I have already downloaded the software to my device. It would cost the developer nothing, deny them the use of nothing, require none of their resources for me to use the feature and yet they charge for it.

How is that different?

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#138

Post by r00fus »

josefresco wrote: post #116

Reminds me of the old Celeron days 25+ years ago. The premise of paying different amounts for the same hardware always gets us hackers riled up.

Should rile up any rational consumer. Corporation can flex their market power to ensure you pay more for something they can provide for free.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#139

Post by lykahb »

I think that the solution to that has to be in taxation. Legislation that bans something profitable is going to encounter a lot opposition. Taxation is easier to introduce than a ban.

A high tax on connectivity for certain classes of goods could make this less appealing. Add in the requirements for privacy and keeping records that are as stringent as HIPAA, and that could change the calculations of risk and benefit for such rent seeking.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#140

Post by rootusrootus »

vannevar wrote: post #113
rootusrootus wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it have to be a startup? You can buy a dumb EV for under $30K today from GM. And yeah, it does sell pretty well. The vast, vast majority of EVs sold today are not forcing subscriptions of any kind on their customers. A couple minor carmakers are trying a new business model.

It doesn't have to be a startup, no. But GM is discontinuing the Bolt, which I assume is the car you're referring to. And as far as I know, most EVs are evolving in the direction of more software complexity, not less. When I say a dumb EV, I'm talking analog knobs and buttons, no touch screen, no over-the-air updates. A disconnected vehicle.

You're asking, then, for something that really no longer exists at all, and it is not an EV thing.
Post reply on HN