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

471–480 of 555 posts

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

#471

Post by kelnos »

entrox wrote: post #148
beerpls wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for being a voice of righteousness in a sea of simps. It’s hard to tell on this site, are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills? Even with what you said there are still so many people defending this behavior. The world is full of weak and/or deceitful people.

Take a look at the profit margin (and market valuation) of automotive companies and compare them to tech companies. Now also make a comparison of average developer/engineer salaries at both. Is it not OK for the automotive folks to get to the same level as their FAANG brethren? Disclaimer: I work for an automotive OEM.

What does that have to do with anything? If you sell a product and then try to put a subscription on hardware that is already in the customer's hands, that's scummy.

If you put a subscription on something where you have to continuously maintain server capacity and build and distribute new features, then that... seems fair?

Not gonna claim that there's no rent-seeking going on in the software industry, certainly. And they're scummy.

But once I'm sold a car, every bit of hardware in that car should work without artificial limits (well, modulo safety and legal concerns). Sure, it's fair for a car maker to charge for map updates for the navigation, real-time traffic information, remote functionality, etc. -- stuff that requires on-going cost to the manufacturer. But charging a subscription to send a few bits of information to the software in the car to give the motor more power? Robbery.

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

#472

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

dh2022 wrote: post #373
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best solution is for people to exercise good judgment. Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement. Guess which phase we're in now.

"Experience comes from bad judgement." Are you speaking from your own experience???

In the culture I grew up in its a well-known aphorism.

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

#473

Post by ShroudedNight »

foxyv wrote: post #100

The best EV is an electric bus with trolley lines or a tram. I hate that I have to own a monstrous depreciating asset to have reliable transportation. If you think people are buying this to drive on a track you are naive. They are paying $60/month to make their already unsafe overweight vehicle even more unsafe. I hope they go bankrupt.

If you do a lot of driving on rural 2-lane highways, I could see reasonable justification for investing significantly in being able to pass quickly, having seen more than a few situations where a prolonged pass exposed the parties to considerable risk of harm.

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

#474

Post by atleastoptimal »

gambiting wrote: post #258
beerpls wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for being a voice of righteousness in a sea of simps. It’s hard to tell on this site, are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills? Even with what you said there are still so many people defending this behavior. The world is full of weak and/or deceitful people.

A lot of people here think building a successful subscription based product is the absolute goal in life. To them Mercedes (and BMW and others) doing this isn't dumb - it's super smart and worth applauding. Otherwise you're just leaving money on the table /s.

Everyone here is a temporarily embarrassed SAAS billionaire and god help anyone trying to step on their future hypothetical probable profit margins

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

#475

Post by kelnos »

entrox wrote: post #167
jwilber wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re completely ignoring the customer (people like you) in favor of the (already mega rich) corporations. What a mindset.

> You’re completely ignoring the customer (people like you) in favor of the (already mega rich) corporations. What a mindset. No, I want the company I work for to have similar profit margins as FAANG and thus increase my compensation. Do you also attack those employees because their companies are charging extra for pure software unlocks or subscriptions?

If you want a higher salary, find a job and a company that will give you one. Don't advocate for your company to charge their customers for something that costs them $0 to provide. I guarantee that things like that will turn the world into a place none of us want to live in over the long run.

Also, if you think that your employer is going to increase your compensation due to anti-features like this... well, hate to break it to you, but they won't. They'll pocket that money and/or distribute it to shareholders. Your salary is, roughly, the smallest number that they can offer you to get you to do the job, and has very little to do with their profit margins.

> Do you also attack those employees because their companies are charging extra for pure software unlocks or subscriptions?

I would attack any company that charges customers extra for nothing.

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

#476

Post by lumb63 »

slg wrote: post #214
smnrchrds wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Because most of the free market theory that most normal people believe is based on the assumption of perfect competition[1]. However, that almost never actually occurs in the real world and even ends up being impossible in most cases. For example, there is always going to be a huge barrier to entry for automakers. They need to invest an enormous amount of time and money in design, factories, raw materials, labor, etc…

What are our alternatives? I’ve said in posts before that legislating against each anti-consumer product or feature is a fool’s errand. The legislature cannot keep up the rate at which corporate entities produce consumer-unfriendly products. I also don’t trust it to represent citizens rather than corporate donors, at least here in the US.

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

#477

Post by ShroudedNight »

wcarron wrote: post #309
bluGill wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even want the GPS: my phone already has maps that are better than what is in the car: they update in real time for current traffic.

Sure, even that's a luxury, but cars already have a display for audio, and it makes sense to have an in-built nav system (would be great if you could simply select the mapping/nav software from a list like a: goog, b: apple, c: OSM, and have it only do directions). This reduces the need for a 2nd, handheld or mounted device which has the potential for increased distraction. Navigation is a core function of travel, wh…

Why do you need direct access to your phone? Just dock the phone and have the screen work like Samsung's Dex.

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

#478

Post by ryandrake »

jrockway wrote: post #370
Entinel wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered that most people can't afford to upgrade to first class? The choice is either deal with the shit seat or not go on vacation.

Of course. It being cheaper is why people like it. Same reason that games are free and offer DLC, or Mercedes offers a car that could go faster if you have extra money laying around this month. I hate the nickel and diming but it does make things more accessible in general.

Just because somebody buys something, that doesn't mean they like it. I don't like my ISP. It's shit service at a ridiculous price. I pay for it because the glorious free market has failed to provide acceptable options. No ISPs provide good service for a reasonable price. Therefore, my choice is to pay for something I don't like, or not have Internet.

Every time a company finds a way to make the product worse but increase profits, they will do it, and all other companies will eventually have to do it in order to remain competitive. It's an inevitable force that is built into the so-called free market. Nearly every product available today is worse and/or more expensive than an otherwise comparable product 10 years ago.

Mark my words, bookmark this comment and come back in 10 years. If these subscriptions turn out to be profitable, then in 2033, every car manufacturer will have functionality locked behind monthly subscriptions. And people will buy them because they have no other choice besides not buying a car. There will be no way to vote with your wallet--you'll just have to abstain with your wallet.

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

#479

Post by ShroudedNight »

umeshunni wrote: post #453
alpaca128 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> remote access, security notifications Or just don't put so much software in it that you need security updates for remote access in the first place, how about that? > navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? Why would I pay to have the same features as my phone/tablet/laptop but with the added disadvantage of not having access outside the car?

> remote access, security notifications > Or just don't put so much software in it that you need security updates for remote access in the first place, how about that? They're talking about being able to get notifications about the security of your car (e.g you left the trunk open, someone is opening the door etc). I'm guess you don't have a modern car, but having a security system for your car is super useful, espec…

> Because you can access it on a 15-30" screen rather than a 6" phone screen

Displayport over usb-c would also solve this problem.

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

#480

Post by jrockway »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #428
jrockway wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. It being cheaper is why people like it. Same reason that games are free and offer DLC, or Mercedes offers a car that could go faster if you have extra money laying around this month. I hate the nickel and diming but it does make things more accessible in general.

A $60/month difference is not what's going to make or break someone buying a Mercedes. Flying economy is cheap enough that many people can do it, there is no right Mercedes subscription model that will get people into one of their cars.

That's exactly right. If they want $6000 dollars more for the car over the lifetime of the car, the $6000 being right there in the sticker price might dissuade some buyers. But if they say it's $60/month, now you're only looking at the sticker price, and the Mercedes is cheaper than the everything-included BMW, so you buy that instead. (Sorry, I don't know enough about cars to know if Mercedes vs. BMW is a comparison that people make. I never even got a driver's license.)

This additionally acts as a nice A/B test; you sell the same car and get data on whether or not people would pay $6000 more for it to be faster.

I reflexively hate this, but it seems so rational to me.

Post reply on HN