Just be reading that BMW are introducing things like heated front seats, steering wheel and adaptive headlights as a monthly charge, though you can opt for the full cost for the time being. The hardware is already there, so you are paying for the software as a service. For example heated seats are £15 a month, £150 for one year, £250 for three years or £350 for the life of the car. There ‘s more details here BMW connected drive. While not directly relevant to Tesla, I wonder if we’ll see more of this type of subscription service that goes beyond premium connectivity and, where available, monthly FSD, as I can see the attraction of another income stream?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Car features as a service
- Thread starter Foucault
- Start date
I would say that the devil is in the detail. If the heated seat option has no cost to add during the ordering process, and only costs £350 to purchase outright, then that's not the worst thing I don't think. People might expect to only keep their car for 3 years (or be leased for that period), therefore paying £250 for the option instead of £350 would be beneficial. Also, if there isn't a lock in period people might want to just subscribe to it at £15 a month over the winter months, and not bother with it otherwise.
Obviously if its an option that costs £X to add to the car during the build process then all bets are off.
As it is BMW will probably relent on this one as they're getting a lot of negative publicity for this, but I can imagine other manufacturers are looking closely at this as a potential secondary revenue stream.
Obviously if its an option that costs £X to add to the car during the build process then all bets are off.
As it is BMW will probably relent on this one as they're getting a lot of negative publicity for this, but I can imagine other manufacturers are looking closely at this as a potential secondary revenue stream.
SpareHeadOne
Member
From what I understand it's like the steering wheel and rear seats in the SR, they fit the same components throughout the range because that's more cost-effective during manufacturing and you have the option to pay either a one-off fee to activate them permanently (BMW/Tesla) or a subscription for temporary activation (BMW).
Jason71
Well-Known Member
I have no problem with software as a service since it generally needs to be updated and if it uses internet and remote servers there is a genuine cost.
Clearly self driving features will be going down this road ( no pun intended) but I think the software will have to be constantly updated and there is a big initial cost to creating the software.
But paying a subscription for access to hardware that is already fitted to the car (when no significant software is involved) I am not in favour of. There is no Justification for beyond, because we can. If manufactures think they can get away with this they will fit all kinds of options to cars that we will effectively be carrying around and paying for the cost of the hardware for whether we actually want to use them or not. Either that or the people who do subscribe will be subsidising the cost of the hardware in the vehicles that are not using it.
Either way we are all paying for more physical stuff to be created, installed and carried around that will never be used. Does not seem very sustainable.
Clearly self driving features will be going down this road ( no pun intended) but I think the software will have to be constantly updated and there is a big initial cost to creating the software.
But paying a subscription for access to hardware that is already fitted to the car (when no significant software is involved) I am not in favour of. There is no Justification for beyond, because we can. If manufactures think they can get away with this they will fit all kinds of options to cars that we will effectively be carrying around and paying for the cost of the hardware for whether we actually want to use them or not. Either that or the people who do subscribe will be subsidising the cost of the hardware in the vehicles that are not using it.
Either way we are all paying for more physical stuff to be created, installed and carried around that will never be used. Does not seem very sustainable.
don’t really know why its news now - they did it a few years ago with carplay, Tesla do it with acceleration boost, did it with heated seats (although one off payments not a sub I don’t see the difference - its all paid upgrades)
Arguably the manufacturer may save money with fewer combinations of components, and then if the buyer opts for those at order time they just get SW enabled when you pick the car up, or you can choose to buy later after the initial purchase has calmed down. Assume that is upside overall for BMW.
And they can do like Tesla - if they take back at the end of a lease/PCP they can resell a base spec model and enable the options to make it a more value add for resale.
I don’t have an issue with this at all
Arguably the manufacturer may save money with fewer combinations of components, and then if the buyer opts for those at order time they just get SW enabled when you pick the car up, or you can choose to buy later after the initial purchase has calmed down. Assume that is upside overall for BMW.
And they can do like Tesla - if they take back at the end of a lease/PCP they can resell a base spec model and enable the options to make it a more value add for resale.
I don’t have an issue with this at all
JupiterMan
Active Member
looking at that BMW page, I would say it is money grabbing in its purest form, trying to keep the management happy by increasing recurring income streams, and doubtless adding to the purchase price of the car if paid up front.
I wouldn't buy a BMW anyway, but for sure would not subscribe to those features ... £79 p.a. to keep maps up to date? £10 pm for heated steering wheel? £15 p,m to keep your bum warm? sod off BMW!
subscribing to a fully working FSD will IMHO be different, that is real added value and new software... this is just b@llocks.
I wouldn't buy a BMW anyway, but for sure would not subscribe to those features ... £79 p.a. to keep maps up to date? £10 pm for heated steering wheel? £15 p,m to keep your bum warm? sod off BMW!
subscribing to a fully working FSD will IMHO be different, that is real added value and new software... this is just b@llocks.
Zilla91
Active Member
Fully working FSD
I pay a £20 a year subscription for speed camera alerts from BMW on my X3 and it’s excellent IMO
Stuff like heated seats or high beam assist as a subscription or a downloadable update is good as well as it’ll lower the purchase price (maybe to keep it under 40k for cheaper road tax on an ICE car) and lower the P11D for lower BIK
Jason71
Well-Known Member
Mapping does cost money of course. Someone has to actually keep the maps updated. So the Maps part I have less of a problem with than paying to access hardware I already own.
Pre google maps we all paid for map updates or more likely drove cars with out of date maps since the update CD's were often hundreds of pounds.
With google we pay with our souls instead of cash so the cost is not visible but it is still there.
I imagine the formula looks like
(Revenue from subscriptions) - (cost to fit feature to all cars + software lock mechanism) > (Revenue from Options) - (manufacturing process to control where it's fitted)
It's not hard to believe this ends up more profitable for BMW.
I'm not sure what else there really is to it, other than a residual hang up about whether something is actually owned or not. In the 1970's my Grandad bought a Binatone pong game shown below. It was the lower model that didn't include the shooter game but he found that if he cut the slot further for the game select slider and made a hole in the side to expose the connector the electronics were the same inside.
He was a hacker in that he used a hacksaw.
(Revenue from subscriptions) - (cost to fit feature to all cars + software lock mechanism) > (Revenue from Options) - (manufacturing process to control where it's fitted)
It's not hard to believe this ends up more profitable for BMW.
I'm not sure what else there really is to it, other than a residual hang up about whether something is actually owned or not. In the 1970's my Grandad bought a Binatone pong game shown below. It was the lower model that didn't include the shooter game but he found that if he cut the slot further for the game select slider and made a hole in the side to expose the connector the electronics were the same inside.
He was a hacker in that he used a hacksaw.
Jason71
Well-Known Member
I'm sure his great grandkids will come visit him in the home and tell him all about itFully working FSD
I can understand it (but do not condone) for pure software features, e.g: FSD, AB, etc... as you are essentially paying for the R&D and updates applied over time to your car.
But putting physical improvements on subscription, implying that the *hardware* was already fitted to the car in the factory, but hindered because the manufacturer wants to squeeze more money out of you is just plain wrong.
But putting physical improvements on subscription, implying that the *hardware* was already fitted to the car in the factory, but hindered because the manufacturer wants to squeeze more money out of you is just plain wrong.
Rooster6655
Active Member
The only way it would make sense in paying £250 (71% of £350) is if you think that the depreciation on this feature will be more than 71% over those 3 years, otherwise if you think that depreciation on the £350 feature is less than £250 (71%) over 3 years it makes sense to purchase it outright. Granted it is hard to get good resale value on add ons.
I don’t have a problem with this at all as most options seem to have a life time purchase option which isn’t astronomical and is on a par with what you might pay if you were spec’ing an option when buying new. No doubt some of those things will be included in certain models as part of the purchase price or have the first 3 years included like Map updates.
It’s also good that you can buy a used can and add features the first owner didn’t want.
Tesla do this, they’re introducing EAP and FSD as a subscription option and premium connectivity is already there.
We have to try and get away with thinking how things are priced and just think of the total price. Tesla charge thousands if you want a red car with a white interior, a BMW i4 50 gives you lots of colour options as part of the price, but then BMW charge you for adaptive cruise which Tesla give as standard - they’re all just permutations on a theme. And with more and more people leasing or PCP their cars, a monthly figure makes more sense than having to absorb the full cost of options into a 3 year lease which is often the case.
Sentiment on whether it’s a good or bad things often comes down to existing sentiment on the brand doing it.
It’s also good that you can buy a used can and add features the first owner didn’t want.
Tesla do this, they’re introducing EAP and FSD as a subscription option and premium connectivity is already there.
We have to try and get away with thinking how things are priced and just think of the total price. Tesla charge thousands if you want a red car with a white interior, a BMW i4 50 gives you lots of colour options as part of the price, but then BMW charge you for adaptive cruise which Tesla give as standard - they’re all just permutations on a theme. And with more and more people leasing or PCP their cars, a monthly figure makes more sense than having to absorb the full cost of options into a 3 year lease which is often the case.
Sentiment on whether it’s a good or bad things often comes down to existing sentiment on the brand doing it.
All features depreciate 100% immediately, trade in prices never consider anything other than the make and model, neither does WBAC or Motorway. Maybe a private sale might extract a small amount from a gullible purchaser.
Jason71
Well-Known Member
I've no problem with it, FWIW. This sort of 'unlocking hardware that was already present' stuff has been going on for decades, as @GRiLLA's grandad so awesomely demonstrated! It makes more sense economically and either reduces the cost for those that want it, or increases the profit margins of the manufacturer, ideally both. When the overheads of allowing customisation costs more than the total number of actual customisations, it just makes financial sense. By paying for the feature, you're exchanging money for something you presumably get value and benefit from.
It's not a million miles away from paying for a bluray with bonus features on (they were already recorded, and it didn't cost the manufacturer any more money to etch the extra bits onto the disc), or paying Netflix more for 4K streaming (they already made the content, and whilst they incur slightly more compute and bandwidth costs, it's really not a massive increase).
I'd also ask people who dislike the idea - what would you do if you were running the manufacturing? You know it's going to cost more money to not build the feature into every car. You know if you give it away for free then you'll make a loss. You know if you increase the overall cost of the car, then fewer people will buy the car. So what do you do?
It's not a million miles away from paying for a bluray with bonus features on (they were already recorded, and it didn't cost the manufacturer any more money to etch the extra bits onto the disc), or paying Netflix more for 4K streaming (they already made the content, and whilst they incur slightly more compute and bandwidth costs, it's really not a massive increase).
I'd also ask people who dislike the idea - what would you do if you were running the manufacturing? You know it's going to cost more money to not build the feature into every car. You know if you give it away for free then you'll make a loss. You know if you increase the overall cost of the car, then fewer people will buy the car. So what do you do?
Jason71
Well-Known Member
I am not convinced that the idea that fitting heated seats or heated steering etc to all cars is cheaper than having two separate parts. There are cases where this is true but I am not buying (or renting) that this is the norm.
It would imply that they have made an accurate projection that it costs less to equip each and every car on the line with equipment/feature xyz, for the, said 20% of users who will end up paying for it...
Still I feel 80% of that hardware have been wasted, especially in a time where semiconductors are scarce...
Since you have to fit it, my take would have been to make it a standard equipment and spin this into a marketing selling point...
Similar threads
