I feel like it's a scam. A lot of this equipment doesn't cost anything to run and maintain, it's just making you pay for it. We are going to need a law to protect us from unfair subscription practices at some point. I understand a subscription for updates over the air for some things like maps, access to new or better features/integration but not to use what they charged you for. It's like buying a TV but paying for volume controls
If it's in the car, and I buy the car, I own whatever is there and expect to have access. I would not buy from an auto-maker that paywalls basic stuff like heated seats or driver assistance functions. If they offer a price at purchase , fine, but subscriptions can change ( Amazon, Netflix, etc) , so no-thanks. My humble Chinese car came fully loaded as I opted for the higher trim model.
Your Chinese car came with spyware , they sell all your communication inside the car to U.S. government and sellers of products. They also deliver your speeding and driving actions to auto insurance companies.
@@samijokinen9246 I kinda agree but legions of corporate lawyers will rip you a new one to make an example of you - because there really isn't anything more soulless than a corporate lawyer. Think of the flying monkeys from Wizerd of Oz, but with briefcases.
Yes. EVs aren't the only one that this is happening too, and it's been going on longer than EVs have been a big thing. So I don't buy that it's just a way to cover for them. It's just greed, pure and simple. It's not 'rather than' it's both. They stiff you up front, and try to stiff you in the long run. More doom-mongering: It's also possible that a future OTA update lowers the performance of your car, just like they do/have done with cell phones. 'Aw, did your car suddenly lose 50hp? Well I guess it's time to buy a new one. It's in the interest of saving the battery, we promise!'
Paying for something once is cheaper than paying for it forever. Otherwise, the car manufacturers would give us a choice to pay once for the feature sometime after purchase, and then we'd have the feature forever.
Once upon a time, you didn't own your telephones, you rented them from the phone company. (The way internet providers like to rent you a modem/router instead of you bringing your own.) It didn't become legal to have a customer-supplied telephone in the USA until the 1970s. In 2008, on a trip to my wife's grandmother's house in rural Midwest USA, we discovered that she still had an old rotary wall-mount phone in her kitchen. It didn't work. The ringer would sound, but the speaker and microphone didn't work. She kept it solely because she liked the nice loud ringer over the quiet electronic beeper on her cordless phone that was what she actually used. I immediately had her dig out her last phone bill. Yep - she had been paying $0.50 a month to rent that old wall mount phone. For many many decades after its usability was gone. We got on the phone with the phone company and they were actually good and refunded multiple hundred dollars of rental payments.
...and here I am, the owner of a 2007 Honda Civic with an aftermarket head unit with Android Auto, aftermarket security with tracking, knowing that I don't have to subscribe to a damned thing...
My biggest gripe about subscriptions is that they can change what is offered and for what price. 3 years down the line they may go to a different tier structure so now you're paying 25/month for things you used to be paying 15, and half of the included "benefits" of that increase are things that used to be free but are now in the 10/month plan
Seat warmer as a service years after you buy the car. Sounds like something Toyota Connect might like to do after they “lose” your personal details … to a data hack … for the third time
Everybody is in the rent-don't-own business. An early example was "cloud computing." Why sell software apps and hard drives outright when you can rent them to your computer customers for eternity? Why sell MP3 music files when you can rent them and make people pay for them over and over? Rapaciousness has always been a key feature of capitalism.
I remember reading that Toyota was talking about adding a service fee for use of the key fob, not the phone app. I drive a Toyota but it might be the last one I ever buy.
If I'm paying for a car with less battery capacity, I want a car with a smaller battery! A smaller battery should mean better efficiency because I'm carrying less weight. Also, a smaller battery should have less environmental impact to build it and to dispose of it.
If I am paying for a car with a smaller battery, I want a bigger battery installed to be software restricted. About then I can load it up every time and know that there is still a hefty upper buffer to make my battery feel comfy and long lasting. Charging will most likely be also faster when the battery is coming full, sort of restricted I mean.
Thank you very much for your comments on the difference between convenience and safety, when it comes to driver assist/automation systems. It baffles me how some people trust their safety to an extraordinary degree to complex software systems that have not been safety certified by any competent third party. An analogy would be flying in airplanes with no FAA. People did it once upon a time but only because there was no FAA. If we were to fire everyone at the FAA today, how eager would people be to get on an airplane. Not very much, I expect. To answer your question at the end, all publicly traded companies are anxious to increase their stock price. There are two primary means to accomplish this: increase profitability and growth in sales (and therefore profitability). Software subscriptions--as you say--are one way to increase profitability and the stock price, as long as people want those software services. But this (software services from car companies) really does bug people, me included. I want to own what I paid for. I don't go to a car company for software services. I go to a car company to buy a car. Software services from car companies is a scam.
Which one is it now? How do you know? Will they keep up that support? Better to nip it in the bud via regulation than trust that a corpo won't get greedy.
I believe that the desire to screw over the consumer is pretty universal among major corporations, automakers included. If you know of an exception, I'd like to hear of it.
No. Not paying for subscriptions in my car. We have a few entertainment subscriptions (streaming TV) but nothing else. I buy the car, I should be buying its full functionality. If a brand wants to play those kinds of games then I'll buy something else or do an end run around them by hard wiring the features to make them functional if possible. Another example: Windows wants to be extra nosey about what I'm doing with MY computer. Fine. So for the past 20 years I've been using free Linux. Specifically Mint Linux and lately Kubuntu. Same computer, dual boot. Professionally I only need Windows for Solidworks. At home we only use Windows for a couple of games.
Yes, it is a scam like so many other things in this world. Many years ago, my father bought a car for which the next trim level up offered a light in the trunk. All of the wiring was there. It only needed the fixture that held the bulb which cost a couple of dollars down at the parts store. It turned out the same was true of the light in the glove box. For far less than the price increase for the next trim level, the car quickly grew the features my father cared about. The only new trick the car makers seemed to have learned is that they can get people to pay over and over again for the same thing.
My uncle used to buy the most basic version of used cars - often fleet cars for a great savings. Then he'd visit the junkyard and gather the options he wanted and retro fit the parts to his car. I did that to gain a tachometer in my car. And I certainly put nice aftermarket AM/FM/cassette radios in my cars all through the 80s and 90s. $50 would buy a pretty decent radio back then.
I will never buy a subscription for anything in my car. Ever. And you know how this started... this started with ONSTAR (1996), and DISH (2007). We're talk over two decades for ONSTAR. When we bought our Subaru a long while back it came with satellite radio. And that's where the nagging began. Incessant calls from DISH, mailings, the works. Subscribe, special deal, yadayadayada. Nope. They didn't give up for 2 years. I like to think I cost them a good chunk of cash with all the work they did trying to get us to subscribe. And these days it is car-internet (what, my phone isn't good enough?), and we've already seen Mercedes (and Audi too I think) trying to make basic things like seat heaters subscription. Total absurdities. -Matt
OHH eye lass that's a nice bit of the Hovis Commercial/New world symphony- Largo(Dvorak ) at the beginning lovely! Us old English Canadian immigrants get it.
The features aren't, the subscriptions are. They justify it by saying it saves them money to include and disable, but fuck what saves them money. What about my money? Or time? Or ownership? Fuck them. If they can turn it off with software I can circumvent them. They already sold me the hardware, it's not theirs to control.
I think there should be 3 distinct categories: - installed hardware should be covered by the "On The Road" price. No fees or subscriptions required - new software features - these should be one-off upgrades to things like auto-pilot or major OS revisions. Notably, the version you had at the point of sale or paid to upgrade should continue to work without any features breaking for the lifetime of the vehicle. - Server-side features, things like advanced, up-to-date navigation, remote real-time monitoring, etc., I would be fine with a subscription.
I think it's going to backfire when other companies who don't use subscriptions say that "the cost of ownership of our equivalent featured cars cost is $[ ] less than X's car"
I'm definitely in the old man category and I have very little use for technocrap in general and would rather avoid paying for subscriptions. I've avoided needing to do that with my latest new car, in 2019. I hope I can continue to avoid that with the next one.
I feel like if a feature requires infrastructure outside the car, then a subscription may be necessary, but it the feature is completely internal to the car then a subscription is just the manufacturer looking for more cash flow.
See those are either an extra service (like a tow truck) or content that isn't included with the car. Of course you can listen to over the air radio or pay per use for the tow truck instead.
@@kensmith5694 What is the standard battery replacement plan for most 3rd-party insurers when you have full coverage? Write off the whole vehicle because most insurers cannot source known-good replacement packs or get ludicrous quotes and wait times from the manufacturers. You basically have the choice of getting ~15k$ battery insurance coverage direct from the manufacturer or $EV_price_tag coverage for writing off your EV when your insurer cannot get a cost-effective replacement. My calculation here is that going to insurers with a separately insured battery pack would knock out as much if not more off the premiums as the separate battery insurance costs since car insurers don't have to worry about writing off the whole vehicle for a non-catastrophic battery mishap.
But here's the thing, a "no questions asked" battery replacement is not possible. You might say, "easy, they replace the battery when it stops working." But that isn't always so clear. For example, replacement for degradation. How much? That is a question that must be asked. 70% is warranty standard, but the battery still works. Maybe they decide 50% to force you to pay longer, or 90% to pay more. Also physical damage. How much physical damage? Obviously they would have to cover it if the battery had failed completely due to damage. But what about lighter damage where the battery still works, but could fail? Someone has to make that assessment, which means questions have to be asked. And that's the current problem with insurance and EVs. There are so few people willing and qualified to make those assessments, that insurance companies just go with the known cost/risk of replacing the whole vehicle, versus the unknown cost/timeframe of fixing/replacing the battery. Any such "battery subscription" would only work with those sort of "questions asked" and where there are people qualified to make those assessments, and supply chains capable of providing timely replacements.
@@amperformance7998 Degradation is covered by the manufacturer base warranty, no need for extra insurance on top of that. The "no questions asked" insurance is for everything else that isn't covered by warranty. EVs get scrapped by normal insurers for cosmetic damage to the battery cover because normal insurers don't have the parts, equipment and expertise to assess battery damage. With structural battery packs where the whole pack is an unserviceable monolith, opening the pack for assessment isn't even an option.
You mean there are people who actually don't pay a monthly subscription to make the steering wheel in the car they purchased usable!? That is about how important I think heated seats are in sub-zero weather. How freaking and morally corrupt to tell me it comes with heated seats for "x" price which I pay for and I not actually own it. Was I paying for the 'chance' to have something. Either I opt in to own it or don't tell me it comes with my ownership. A car is not a newspaper I have delivered to my door. Renting a whole car is one thing. Owning a car is a different thing. I think corporations have become used to "owning" consumers in a consumer culture. With slavery abolished, the idea of people as capital did not disappear. EV's center intrinsically is about less consumption of the planet, but corporations use to being at the apex of the pyramid are desperately trying to squeeze the simplicity of electric cars into the familiar economics were all know and many people are enslaved to. Off topic note to Kate- You nearly again had me choking laughing during your intro. Has TE considered making a CD of crazy ev comedy intro's. I would buy at least one a year.
I very much agree that I would prefer an electric vehicle that was as simple as possible. Use the old-fashioned DIN system for the radio, so I can buy it without it if I want, or swap it out. Remove anything but the most basic battery management features to ensure that the car doesn't set itself on fire and allow me to actually own the vehicle. If this is what we mean by having a cheap electric vehicle, then I'm all for it.
The only subscription model I am ok with for cars is “connected vehicle” stuff like OnStar (and equivalent) or having a separate data plan. The only caveat to this that I am giving is that I should be able to choose a provider for the cell service should I want… It should not be locked only to the OEM’s plan. Charging a nominal fee for “ upgraded performance” is also fine with me assuming there is a potential for additional warranty claims with doing that. (i.e. 1.6% of vehicles with faster acceleration may need a warranty claim the high voltage inverter) A subscription for something like FSD is probably fine because you’re getting the continuous upgrades and improvements which does cost money… A one time purchase could be offered, with paid upgrades also but I’m not sure that I would like that since it could leave vehicles that opted not to upgrade on the road for longer potentially making them less safe… It’s give-and-take. Subscription for doing remote start with your key, or heated seats when the equipment is already in the vehicle is just silly.
My Smart #3 comes with everything without any additional cost or subscriptions. Even had the choice of car color or interior without additional cost (except for matte paint).
A large emphasis on rent-seeking is a symptom of corrupted capitalism, in which most of the effort goes to gaming the system on behalf of wealthy stakeholders, to the exclusion of irrelevant parties like customers and workers. I suspect it's one of those things that can't go on forever, though I can't see clearly how it'll end.
I hate subscription as a service. It's a way for a company to ensure that they make more money every year by selling you a product every month. That's why I have disabled the cloud on all my devices, my information is stored on my computer, phone or tablet on their hard drive or on a flash drive. That way I'm not paying someone else to store my information.
you appear to put the trend of subscriptions on electric vehicles, but is that really true? It's certainly more obvious since electric vehicles have the ability to do over the air updates that can change performance and range etc. But isn't this also happening with gasoline vehicles? was the subscription for heated seats Imbroglio only for BMW EV's? I thought it was on a gas car.
if a buyer goes in knowing all of the things that they won't have access to unless they subscribe, and it is made very clear and they want to do it, then that is their right. But we should also have the right to buy a car and own everything on it without it being able to be turned off by the manufacturer. I don't wanna pay a subscription fee, I don't want to have a license that says I'm not allowed to change a car that I bought. Manufacturer wants to be able to have that kind of control, where they can turn off features, they should be required to not call it a sale, and instead call it a lease, rental, or some other word like maybe contract purchase or something. Because there is a definition to the word "buy", and changing it such that buy does not mean own is at least legally gray, and I think it is fraudulent. Subscription features are not a scam, but pretending that you've bought something and own it when you can't do whatever you want with what's inside it is a scam.
I like sensible subscriptions. So things like connectivity and upgrades, absolutely want to see that. They're providing a service, it should be paid for. Added bonus, it means that car companies will get money from older cars. This will encourage them to make them available for as long as possible.
It all started when Gillette boasted that they made their money from selling blades, not selling handles. Ever since then companies have been trying to find their version of “the Gillette model”
Those and inkjet printers. Worse are the ones that have chips with “expiration” dates in their cartridges. It’s why I gave away my HP printer and replaced it with an Epson with refillable tanks.
Yes ask future motion how that worked out for them. They basically ended up suing everyone who ever supported them. And now nobody including USPS will deal with them
Probably did okay if they took car of their machines and invested the savings. With people spending $35K+ on new cars these days I wonder how any of them will be able to ever retire... i know of people who have had a car payment continuously their whole adult life.
The only auto-subscription we use is Tesla's Premium Connectivity. Firstly because we also pay monthly to keep our smartphones and homes online, and because of the reasonable monthly cost of just 9,99€. We think we get full value out of that subscription, with live traffic in navigation, satellite views when we need them, and mainly the music streaming via Spotify, which we only use in the car. Never would I accept having to pay for a subscription for seat heating!
Vinfast allows the driver to navigate using Waze (maybe Google Maps) displayed on the dashboard screen from the user's phone using Bluetooth. Lastest maps ans traffic routing with no subscription required
You ABSOLUTELY do NOT have to use the dealership for service to get warranty coverage in the US. You also can't be denied coverage for warranty coverage because you have a modification unless THE MANUFACTURER (or their proxy/the dealer) can show that the modification caused the fault. Cite the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975
The ATT 4G WiFi connection on my Lemon 2023 Chevy Bolt EUV Premier (that Chevy STILL hasn't bought back) is SIGNIFICANTLY slower than the 4G (much less 5G) ATT, Verizon, or T-Mobile phones I've checked (people I know helped me out before my car crapped out on 12 days). I even got better results with ATT MVNOs. I didn't want and EUV, a premier, Sun & Sound, or light around the charge port, but I had to settle for what was on the lot, I guess the positive side if dealing with this is a that I decided to buy a used EV (then I can give it to my kid when she goes to college, and who knows what we'll have in 4 years- she's doing 2 years community college to save money). I'm thinking a 2020-2022 Kona or similar Hyundai, not sure. Thought about Model 3, but insurance is 40% higher, no thank you. Must be 100% EV (I hate hybrids). CCS or NACS is all that seems to be an option. Medical reasons make the Leaf battery range + lack of DC impossible.
As long as there are other options available, I will not buy a car that requires a subscription for anything except things like Internet or Sirius. As for used cars, I won't buy one of them that requires a subscription or is "crippled" by the manufacturer; if you are trying to SELL your used car you should consider the impact on market size (and therefore price) when considering what subscription options you want. Heated seats are a mechanical system - there is NO world in which they should be a subscription. EVs are currently OVERLOADED with "content" (I blame Elon because we tech guys think all that stuff is cool - and it IS, but it's unnecessary). We managed for DECADES opening our own liftgates and trunks and our own doors, I can play Angry Birds on my phone while I wait to charge (full disclosure, I've never played Angry Birds and if I have to wait somewhere I read on the Kindle app which I would love to have more time for). Stripping the content, the weight, the unnecessary range competition, the "ludicrous" 0-60 times, etc out of EVs MIGHT just make them affordable. We can hope?
I wanted an ev, but I won't pay for subscriptions in cars, and am generally cheap, so bought a Bolt euv Lt (purposely without super cruise). I also cancelled onstar immediately (which makes the GM app limited, but all I care about is being able to see the battery's charge). This makes if difficult for me to upgrade from the Bolt, even to the new bolt in 2025, as GM stopped using android auto and apple carplay, and are charging for... subscriptions.
Software cars are terrible ❤😢 They will update and change your experience of how to drive etc. !! Or ruin your nice experience. Because you have to relearn your car. NO THANKS
We are concerned about subscriptions but ICE car drivers are not worried about their subscription to drive. ICE cars are subscription cars. You have to pay to drive.
I'm on the fence. Some things a subscription makes sense. In car wifi? Sure. However a generic radio that can work at any provider should be mandated by law. Kia for instance requires you to use Verizon. You can get around this by bringing your own device for in car wifi, but as you said in the video the included device has much more signal strength. Services such as remote start and monitoring again make sense as a subscription. Cellular communication isn't free. However looking at pricing for aftermarket solutions such as cellular remote start products from Omegalink the price is $200 for 3 years. Kia charges $200 for their ultimate plan, but the ultimate plan is what you need if you want remote start. It's not included at lower levels making the cheaper plans worthless. As for heated seats that's a scam. Personally I wish that had continued. I'd buy one seat from these cars from a junkyard, figure out a bypass, and sell a switch with preattached wiring and instructions for $50 a pop remembering how the old PS1 modchips were sold.
I realize there's a coincidence in time between the emergence of EVs and the increase in tech in cars (partly driven by the example of that EV leader), however, there is actually no real relationship. Subscriptions - and OTA - is coming to all cars, no matter the drive train. There just isn't the difference that seems to be believed between these. Now, petrol cars are still available at truly basic trims without frills, while EVs remain expensive and therefore "features" are needed to make it appear "worth it". But that's it. Now the question of whether this (subscriptions) is a good direction, well, I'm old, so i say "hell no" for most of it (I don't even have cable or streaming). But unless we sway our governing rules to still this, it is inevitable. I say this after watching this happen over the last 50 years as software went from purchase to "license" (and copyright and patent law was stretched to breaking).
The only subscription model I am ok with for cars is “connected vehicle” stuff like OnStar (and equivalent) or having a separate data plan. The only caveat to this that I am giving is that I should be able to choose a provider for the cell service should I show you… It should not be locked only to the OEM’s plan. Charging a nominal fee for “ upgraded performance” is also fine with me assuming there is a potential for additional warranty claims with doing that. (i.e. 1.6% of vehicles with faster acceleration may need a warranty claim the high voltage inverter) A subscription for something like FSD is probably fine because you’re getting the continuous upgrades and improvements which does cost money… A one time purchase could be offered, with paid upgrades also but I’m not sure that I would like that since it could leave vehicles that opted not to upgrade on the road for longer potentially making them less safe… It’s give-and-take. Subscription for doing remote start with your key, or heated seats when the equipment is already in the vehicle is just silly.
The only time I've taken my vehicle to a dealer is for a recall fix, otherwise, I do all my own maintenance up to including engine rebuilds and replacements, always have and always will. I don't really trust anyone else to work on my vehicle and I sure wouldn't pay for a 'subscription' for anything.
If its a problem, vote with your dollars and buy from their competitors. It could be used to help address the affordability concerns that consumers have, by giving them a basic car that is fitted with everything and they can activate in it what they want. Improves ability to select the car you want without weeding through many dealers inventories for a specific make/model/trim combo. Its a smart move for OEMs- even if it may hurt their brand up front- if more jump on board then its an opportunity to participate in the full lifecycle of the vehicle and be accountable to ensuring its up to standard
Are the subscriptions even optional? What is the usability without the subscriptions as that's what you're paying for with the initial purchase. To a certain extent, subscription services are misleading the consumer as to what they are purchasing, you're simply not getting what's being advertised. As with Sirius XM, my preference would be to not to subscribe to see if I can do without but even so, if you can do without then do without. Ongoing costs such as subscriptions have a much higher net present value or rather cost than up front capital expenditures and the very nature of server provided service is that someone else decides when the service will no longer be available and your vehicle will be EOL'd.
I do not like the subscription model but sometimes you're forced into it like with some software looking at you Adobe. With a car at least for now there are options. Loved seeing the MG5 electric estate B roll. That's the car we have and everything just works no subscription and with them being a Chinese company trying to establish a good name here in Europe the online features are also free forever for the first owner. When we had the Renault the features like pre heating from the app etc, all stopped working after three years and they expected you to pay a fee for these features.
Tesla has always had the most reasonable subscriptions. Premium connectivity is honestly insignificant to most people vs the standard connectivity you get for 8 years free, and aside from that they’ve never forced you to subscribe for a feature. Most of the time it was a one time fee or the option to subscribe instead
If the car companies really want to make profit then they should make turning left a subscription service, so you could drive anywhere you want, as long as you either drive straight ahead or turn right.
It often seems to be the case yeah. I've seen people having issues with for example teslas self driving when the car was sold, since it was tied to the account of the original owner and could not or not easily be transferred!
Wait, what happens after the warranty ends? Your vehicle just drops in value because of no guarantee and having more or less mandatory monthly payments? Why limit HARDWARE installed to anything?
Subscription are definitely a scam. At least, there should be a law against subscription on safety equipment like heated seats, airbags and seat belts. 🙂
This just the beginning of a nightmare. This is why I will never purchase an electric vehicle. It's all about control. How many junk phones do you have in a box somewhere. Wait until you are late for work and the defrost won't work . Yes I would love for my car to be watching my facial expressions all the time. Do not fall for this scam.
I figured out how to get into our used EVs hidden menus and switch off telematics. If that option didn't exist, there is an owner that showed how to physically remove the modem, same effect.
