Subscription based options and features comming to new cars.

[coppercone2]

well Christ why would you want to sell a product if you can get envelopes filled with money mailed to you?

[SiliconWizard]

Yeah, this scheme is a nice cash cow, why would companies not use it?
Three reasons I can think of:
- Ethics (uh what? )
- Consumers not willing to subscribe (of course, it must be a significant enough fraction of them, otherwise companies will not give a shit)
- Regulation (oh yeah, what kind of government will want to stop the cash cow? )

[MK14]

- Regulation (oh yeah, what kind of government will want to stop the cash cow? )

I can well imagine the EU bringing in laws, to outlaw and/or control/limit the subscriptions situation.
Other countries might follow suit.

[MrMobodies]

3:13 In the video. I spoke to a mechanic a couple of weeks ago who said certain newer cars receive updates automatically to the firmware, they think through wifi? or a sim. I asked what if I don't want it to update automatically.

He said well it is to get the best that the manufacturer wants to give. I told him about something I read to do with Tesla pulling features off second cars on transfer to new ownership because the "new" owner didn't purchase them. He admitted in that case it's not always good.

I don't mind if it is to correct a safety issue in the car for it to be absolutely necessary but as soon as they start crippling the features when they feel like that is when I loose trust altogether.

As far as I am concerned, it is no longer my car it, doesn't belong to me when they have the power to do what they like at any moment.


08:20 It reminds me of the leasehold scandals many years ago when some building companies were selling new houses in the uk as "Virtual freeholds" with ground "peppercorn rent" but hidden somewhere in the contract this ground rent to double every couple of years or so with many other unfair clauses.

You think you own your house but not the land it is on.

[wraper]

I told him about something I read to do with Tesla pulling features off second cars on transfer to new ownership because the "new" owner didn't purchase them. He admitted in that case it's not always good.

Misleading. Tesla pulled autopilot from a used car which was sold by Tesla to some third-party dealer without FSD included but it was actually there because they forgot to remove it. Then unscrupulous auto dealer who purchased it, sold it as if autopilot was included and obviously was paid by the customer for the feature. Then shitty dealer blamed Tesla when it disappeared after few weeks and did not own any responsibility. There was no ownership transfer between customers. Tesla restored FSD back FWIW.

[MrMobodies]

Misleading. Tesla pulled autopilot from a used car which was sold by Tesla to some third-party dealer without FSD included but it was actually there because they forgot to remove it. Then unscrupulous auto dealer who purchased it, sold it as if autopilot was included and obviously was paid by the customer for the feature. Then shitty dealer blamed Tesla when it disappeared after few weeks and did not own any responsibility. There was no ownership transfer between customers. Tesla restored FSD back FWIW.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/13/21136699/tesla-autopilot-used-model-s-owner-restored-assistance-features

THE OWNER BOUGHT THE USED CAR FROM A THIRD-PARTY DEALER — WHICH BOUGHT THE CAR FROM TESLA...

Tesla has removed features from used cars in the past, but typically does so before the car is sold off to a third-party dealer or a new owner. Since Tesla pulled these features both after it sold the car to the dealer, and after that dealer sold it to Alec, it caused some fear that the company was setting a precedent for yanking features on a whim.

...Three days after Tesla sold the car to the dealer, Tesla performed a “remote audit” that flagged those features for removal, according to Jalopnik.

Even then, the features were never removed.

I see so they were suppose to removed before being sold off.

I think I read it wrong at the time.

Sorry about that.

[Someone]

Partly consumer laws around support/warranty, cars are required to be provided with spares and support for a "reasonable" amount of time (as in Australian and EU law). But if the electronic service was a separate line item/product and only limited in time then they can end it when it suits them.

Consumer products, TV's, cars, etc have had laughably short support periods for their firmware/apps even where they provide major functions of the overall product. In the bad old days updating the navigation maps was a $$$$$ service item and you'd be lucky to get something a few years out of date even if you paid.

[langwadt]

- Regulation (oh yeah, what kind of government will want to stop the cash cow? )

I can well imagine the EU bringing in laws, to outlaw and/or control/limit the subscriptions situation.
Other countries might follow suit.

I could be interesting here since we have 85-150% tax on new cars and anything added to the car in the first 3 months is technically taxed the same way

[Homer J Simpson]

Two additional perspectives from different channels.