Is This For Real? BMW Charging to use heated seats?

[Mctaff]

Why is everyone completely ignoring ANY FACTS. Anyone would think this is a forum on the internet

Facts are quite inconvenient when you’ve got a weak argument!!

 

[Mctaff]

50 each, one off payment should do it

Come on that will barely get you a warm arse in your bmw for a couple of years!!

 

[idleuser]

50 each, one off payment should do it

Is that a subscription based pricing or a 1 time purchase?

 

[Leonard]

Is that a subscription based pricing or a 1 time purchase?

Oooo not considered that
I should have gone for the subscription model and just been even more annoying

 

[eriegz]

they are not charging upfront for the hardware, which their website clearly indicates they are not doing.

I didn't click through to their website, but I trust you that it says this.

However, I don't believe BMW for a second when they say this. I mean, of course they say this, in order to quell any consumer push-back from introducing this feature. But in my mind there's no way that the costs of building the internet padlock hardware itself, plus the salaries of the software engineers who built the activation system, plus the data centre costs to host the system, is NOT being passed along to the consumer.

Or, if they truly aren't being passed along to the consumer — at first — then they'll just get baked into the new monthly subscription fees. So, still being passed on to the consumer.

 

[Leonard]

I didn't click through to their website, but I trust you that it says this.

However, I don't believe BMW for a second when they say this. I mean, of course they say this, in order to quell any consumer push-back from introducing this feature. But in my mind there's no way that the costs of building the internet padlock hardware itself, plus the salaries of the software engineers who built the activation system, plus the data centre costs to host the system, is NOT being passed along to the consumer.

Or, if they truly aren't being passed along to the consumer — at first — then they'll just get baked into the new monthly subscription fees. So, still being passed on to the consumer.

They have had their BMW Connected Drive services for 15 years now.
This will cost no more than adding a SKU to your B2C website

 

[eriegz]

They have had their BMW Connected Drive services for 15 years now.
This will cost no more than adding a SKU to your B2C website

Alright, so they can add it to their existing system. That just means then that the costs of adding it to the system, plus the cost of maintaining this portion of their system, plus the cost of manufacturing the internet padlock, are passed on to the consumer.

Look, I'm hearing what some people here are saying, which is that they personally only use seat warmers for 1 or 2 months out of the year, and that they WISH there was some way to not have to pay for it the other 10 months out of the year when they're not using them.

What I'm here to tell you, is that this is not possible unless a BMW technician physically comes to your home to remove the hardware from your car when you're not using it. THAT would truly be a subscription model.

But that's not what's being sold by BMW here. What's being sold by BMW is a bunch of hand-waiving and promises of "futuristic convenience" to make you THINK that you're only paying for it 1 or 2 months out of the year.

But hey, ultimately it's your life and your decision! Just remember what they say about a fool and his money.

 

[Leonard]

Alright, so they can add it to their existing system. That just means then that the costs of adding it to the system, plus the cost of maintaining this portion of their system, plus the cost of manufacturing the internet padlock, are passed on to the consumer.

Look, I'm hearing what some people here are saying, which is that they personally only use seat warmers for 1 or 2 months out of the year, and that they WISH there was some way to not have to pay for it the other 10 months out of the year when they're not using them.

What I'm here to tell you, is that this is not possible unless a BMW technician physically comes to your home to remove the hardware from your car when you're not using it. THAT would truly be a subscription model.

But that's not what's being sold by BMW here. What's being sold by BMW is a bunch of hand-waiving and promises of "futuristic convenience" to make you THINK that you're only paying for it 1 or 2 months out of the year.

But hey, ultimately it's your life and your decision! Just remember what they say about a fool and his money.

Have you read anything contrary to your standpoint.
If its CHEAPER and offers consumers MORE Options then there is nothing foolish about it

 

[eriegz]

Have you read anything contrary to your standpoint.
If its CHEAPER and offers consumers MORE Options then there is nothing foolish about it

All that I've read so far in this thread is that you and others THINK that it's cheaper.

What I have YET to read, however, is anyone explaining how the cost of manufacturing the internet padlock hardware, plus the incremental costs of maintaining the software subscription system that powers it (both of which are NOT present in the Evora power mirrors example!) — not to mention the revenue lost from including these features in cars where the owners don't activate them — aren't simply being passed on to the consumer.

 

[Leonard]

All that I've read so far in this thread is that you and others THINK that it's cheaper.

What I have YET to read, however, is anyone explaining how the cost of manufacturing the internet padlock hardware, plus the incremental costs of maintaining the software subscription system that powers it (both of which are NOT present in the Evora power mirrors example!) — not to mention the revenue lost from including these features in cars where the owners don't activate them — aren't simply being passed on to the consumer.

Omg
1) the price of the car is not going up. In fact this business model probably helps keep inflation down
2) the cost of the option if purchased permanently remains the same price as now. But u don't HAVE to take it now if you are 50/50 about it. You also don't have to spec even if tou don't want it just because you are told you have to for resale
3) if u lease or finance and would otherwise have to pay full RRP for expensive options without ever owning the car IT IS CHEAPER
4) If you buy the car without an option and regret it, you then have the option to reinstate it!
5) if you are in the market for a car that has to have certain options this gives you more choice and ultimately means that you pay less 2nd hand value
6) if you are a dealer this is a win because base cars won't sit around on the forecourt taking up your capital
7) it's good for bmw for a myriad of reasons, not just all financial
Oh but wait I'm paying the lowest price possible for a base spec physical car with options that can be enabled and that's unfair!!!

 

[Porter]

It's an encypted on off switch in the ECU nothing more

If that were the case, a customer could pay for a single month, then disable the comms system on the car and discontinue the subscription, thereby getting permanent "on" state for the options. BMW would never tolerate that scenario if they have operationalized a rent-to-use model.

 

[Leonard]

If that were the case, a customer could pay for a single month, then disable the comms system on the car and discontinue the subscription, thereby getting permanent "on" state for the options. BMW would never tolerate that scenario if they have operationalized a rent-to-use model.

Obviously that would be detectable and how many folk are going to do that and risk their warranty, standing in the community etc etc

 

[Porter]

I’d think a token with particular lifespan and permissions are provided at subscription, which is stored in the car. Once it expires - eg at the end of the month - the controller in the car needs to connect and get another token… with some grace period in the event of comms failure.

This means you don’t need a regular connection to keep the features enabled.

And what happens when the infrastructure the car attempts to connect to no longer exists?

I'm not aware of a single online service that operates on a subscription model that still uses the same auth and token exchange methods today that they used 10 years ago. Every service on the web has experienced breaking API changes in the interim. The cryptographic ciphers that they used 10 years ago are fundamentally compromised today, so it's a security-audit-failing business risk to maintain public-facing infrastructure of any kind that uses them (ex. MD5). It will happen again in another 5 years as the pace of cryptographic development continues to accelerate.

A car company WILL NOT continue to use and maintain and serve legacy authorization APIs to the internet, at really significant ongoing operational and human cost, to support the long tail of a subscription options service on 10+ or 15+ year-old vehicles. It's simply not going to happen. It will all go dark.

I don't understand how folks are not understanding this inevitability. Nothing continues to exist like this without an active business case for it, and the new flavor of the same thing will be materially and functionally different in implementation every ~5-ish years.

 

[xen]

All that I've read so far in this thread is that you and others THINK that it's cheaper.

What I have YET to read, however, is anyone explaining how the cost of manufacturing the internet padlock hardware, plus the incremental costs of maintaining the software subscription system that powers it (both of which are NOT present in the Evora power mirrors example!) — not to mention the revenue lost from including these features in cars where the owners don't activate them — aren't simply being passed on to the consumer.

Take a minute to actually read what's being posted. Actually think this through.

Model A - One off fee of $200
Model B - One off fee of $200 OR Free trial then a monthly fee of $18

Which model do you expect will generate more revenue for you as a business?
Which option offers the larger window to monetise the feature over the lifetime of the vehicle?
Have consumer studies shown trials to be an effective way to improve conversions?
Does lowering the cost barrier of a feature tend to increase or decrease uptake?
Is it possible that any additional revenue generated will offset the additional cost of installation in all cars?

The cost of manufacturing the padlock as you refer to it is trivial over the lifetime of the product. The hardware already exists and the software can be amortised over the number of units sold with the feature. The software once finished is infinitely replicable at zero marginal cost.

 

[xen]

And what happens when the infrastructure the car attempts to connect to no longer exists?

I'm not aware of a single online service that operates on a subscription model that still uses the same auth and token exchange methods today that they used 10 years ago. Every service on the web has experienced breaking API changes in the interim. The cryptographic ciphers that they used 10 years ago are fundamentally compromised today, so it's a security-audit-failing business risk to maintain public-facing infrastructure of any kind that uses them (ex. MD5). It will happen again in another 5 years as the pace of cryptographic development continues to accelerate.

A car company WILL NOT continue to use and maintain and serve legacy authorization APIs to the internet, at really significant ongoing operational and human cost, to support the long tail of a subscription options service on 10+ or 15+ year-old vehicles. It's simply not going to happen. It will all go dark.

I don't understand how folks are not understanding this inevitability. Nothing continues to exist like this without an active business case for it, and the new flavor of the same thing will be materially and functionally different in implementation every ~5-ish years.

This is a fair point. Thing is you're applying the concept 10 years back instead of 10 years forward - the arrow of time in this instance does actually matter. Cars 10 years ago were differentiated by hardware, in the future it's likely to be software.

The idea is that all cars will be electric and upgradable via software till the hardware is too old and then rendered obsolete. This already happens with phones, computers and laptops and should the theory hold be no different with cars. The infrastructure that supported phones 10 years ago doesn't exist today but how many people have phones from 10 years ago?

I'm not predicting this will be the case by the way, just explaining some of the rationale behind this thinking. Taking this idea to it's extreme, and imagining a future where all hardware is commoditised...your subscription would be tied to you the user. You would have a subscription for heated seats and be able to apply that to any car you purchased or leased or drove.

 

[Mctaff]

And what happens when the infrastructure the car attempts to connect to no longer exists?

I'm not aware of a single online service that operates on a subscription model that still uses the same auth and token exchange methods today that they used 10 years ago. Every service on the web has experienced breaking API changes in the interim. The cryptographic ciphers that they used 10 years ago are fundamentally compromised today, so it's a security-audit-failing business risk to maintain public-facing infrastructure of any kind that uses them (ex. MD5). It will happen again in another 5 years as the pace of cryptographic development continues to accelerate.

A car company WILL NOT continue to use and maintain and serve legacy authorization APIs to the internet, at really significant ongoing operational and human cost, to support the long tail of a subscription options service on 10+ or 15+ year-old vehicles. It's simply not going to happen. It will all go dark.

I don't understand how folks are not understanding this inevitability. Nothing continues to exist like this without an active business case for it, and the new flavor of the same thing will be materially and functionally different in implementation every ~5-ish years.

Sure, but an api update is simple. Car comms hardware will be a swap out if required. Backend auth services - assuming suitable and perhaps not - available and maintained by Google et Al at low cost (ironically on a subscription model )

I’d suggest the bigger problem is getting consumers to subscribe for a 10 yr old car

as someone suggested previously they can avoid legacy problems by full enablement at a given point

 

[Leonard]

And what happens when the infrastructure the car attempts to connect to no longer exists?

The car will be dead long before that happens and if for any reason the support does have to be deactivated, you will be given a final SALE offer to turn all options available on, or similar..

 

[Leonard]

Sure, but an api update is simple. Car comms hardware will be a swap out if required. Backend auth services - assuming suitable and perhaps not - available and maintained by Google et Al at low cost (ironically on a subscription model )

I’d suggest the bigger problem is getting consumers to subscribe for a 10 yr old car

as someone suggested previously they can avoid legacy problems by full enablement at a given point

Beat me

 

[Mctaff]

Beat me

Let me get my stick!

Oh damn it, my stick subscription has expired

 

[eriegz]

7) it's good for bmw

Finally, something on which you and I agree!

In any case, you seem to be getting frustrated at how I just don't seem to "get it". I think that maybe there's some miscommunication here, or maybe some confusion around the exact question is being asked...

What I'm trying to ask is:

Can somebody explain to me how the manufacturer's cost of producing the internet-padlocked seat heaters, plus the cost of maintaining the internet subscription service that goes along with it, plus the lost revenue from shipping said options to cars that don't enable them, isn't simply passed on to the consumer?

And there are really only two options here:

1. If no additional costs are being passed on to the consumer, then all is good and I'll take back everything I said about consumers being double-charged for the same feature. (However, I'll still stand by this system being stupid, over-engineered, designed to become obsolete, and a violation of consumer autonomy!)
2. However, if the costs ARE being passed on to the consumer, then this means that consumers are being double-charged for the feature(s).

Note: when answering the question, answers like "Used cars will be easier to sell" or "New cars won't sit on showroom floors as long" have no impact on the manufacturer's cost of producing those items. How hard or easy it is for a dealer or for a private owner to sell the car to someone else is a completely separate question that has no relevance to the above question I asked.

Next, another thing that makes me suspect some miscommunication here is, some of your points are just you explaining how the system works to me yet again. I GET HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS: You buy a car today, and then enable the heated seats tomorrow. It's not rocket science. However, this still does not address the question of how the costs to produce this overly-complicated system aren't passed on to the consumer.

Just think about it in terms of the most basic building blocks:

• Imagine on the left you have a "dumb" seat-warming mechanism
• Now imagine on the right you have the same mechanism, except this one's connected to the internet (and for no other reason than to lock you out!)

How could producing the second item, along with maintaining the software system to handle locking and unlocking it, plus all of the lost revenue from including all of this new hardware + software inside of cars that never enable it, possibly cost LESS money than the first item?