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

[Mctaff]

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?

It’s a good question.

Of course it’s passed to the consumer! Just a greater number of consumers over an extended period.

This will benefit some consumers, but not others ( who can of course still just buy the option of they prefer)

It’s liable to be worse for second hand buyers if the rental costs don’t decline with the age of the car…

However, they are banking on greater take up, as per an earlier post - lower cost to entry, free trials etc - so you’ve got more customers paying for heated seats that would not buy as an upfront option.

I can only assume their analysis suggests this greater uptake plus reduced costs through single design, simplified production process, and economies of scale makes sense.

I don’t think the system is very complicated- it’s bolting a bunch of existing stuff together

 

[EspritGuy]

And me. 100 pounds a time to clear my Golf Windscreen of ice in 2 years ownership
I'd have had more fun paying my missus a 100 squid to do it in a bikini freezing her proverbials off!

Two words: Hot pants.

 

[EspritGuy]

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

Kinda cheeky of them..

 

[Leonard]

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?

As said previously it's cheaper to design, manufacture and fit one item than many unique items. Ultimately meaning that manufacturing and more importantly production costs are kept lower which matters to you as a consumer. Those costs due to complexity of manufacturing and more lengthy production times are then NOT passed on to you.
There are no software or software maintenance costs to speak of comparatively speaking. As I said BMW connective services started in 2008. As technology improves costs will just get lower and user CX will increase

 

[Porter]

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?

This is absolutely not a thing. Automobiles are a durable good. Cell phones are not. The type of obsolescence model you are talking about presupposes a solely lease/rental model for all private passenger vehicles in all scenarios on a worldwide basis, and no private ownership of cars. That is not going to happen. Someone who buys a $75k asset outright will not tolerate a 3 year or 5 year or even 7 year de-operationalization timescale for the functional utility of the asset they purchased, and to suggest that they would is not reasonable or credible.

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

An API update of a software-driven client system is NOT simple. Not at all. It seems simple maybe because we've become accustomed to software updates on our phones or our laptops or even our cars in a limited way... but the kind of breakage that I'm talking about is quite different and occurs when the technical pre-requisites that underpin the software become breaking-obsolete because the things they need to talk to don't simply don't support the connection and authentication methods any longer.

And even in cases where such evolutionary updates to firmware and software are technically feasible, if a given vehicle hasn't maintained ongoing and consistent network access and performed all the updates through all of those changes, there will be a point where it will not be possible to directly update older-versioned firmware to the newest versions because it can no longer connect. And the car companies aren't going to backport new software updates onto old, obsolete onboard computer systems. They will become quickly obsolete no matter how new/shiny they seem right now. You can't run Windows 11 on a 5 year old laptop... there's even less reason to expect that a car will carry software support of old hardware on even longer timeframes.

All of this "it's all software now, it's easy" stuff is a lot of hand-waving that minimizes the significant operational and technical complexity of designing, implementing, and consistently delivering this type of internet-connected service over long periods of time. It fails to mention or recognize the significant ongoing, escalating security risks to the business that are inherent in operating aging services that are encumbered with technical debt. The realities of business and technology change will kill off legacy systems of this kind with near-100% efficiency at (in my view) around a 10-year time horizon.

 

[Mctaff]

An API update of a software-driven client system is NOT simple. Not at all. It seems simple maybe because we've become accustomed to software updates on our phones or our laptops or even our cars in a limited way... but the kind of breakage that I'm talking about is quite different and occurs when the technical pre-requisites that underpin the software become breaking-obsolete because the things they need to talk to don't simply don't support the connection and authentication methods any longer.

And even in cases where such evolutionary updates to firmware and software are technically feasible, if a given vehicle hasn't maintained ongoing and consistent network access and performed all the updates through all of those changes, there will be a point where it will not be possible to directly update older-versioned firmware to the newest versions because it can no longer connect. And the car companies aren't going to backport new software updates onto old, obsolete onboard computer systems. They will become quickly obsolete no matter how new/shiny they seem right now. You can't run Windows 11 on a 5 year old laptop... there's even less reason to expect that a car will carry software support of old hardware on even longer timeframes.

All of this "it's all software now, it's easy" stuff is a lot of hand-waving that minimizes the significant operational and technical complexity of designing, implementing, and consistently delivering this type of internet-connected service over long periods of time. It fails to mention or recognize the significant ongoing, escalating security risks to the business that are inherent in operating aging services that are encumbered with technical debt. The realities of business and technology change will kill off legacy systems of this kind with near-100% efficiency at (in my view) around a 10-year time horizon.

We'll have to agree to differ. API updates are simple in my experience.

of course there are other bits... whatever service is generating subscription tokens is no longer secure. Google upgrade and provide a new one as part of the cloud subscription I'm paying for. Perhaps I have to do some upgrades myself too. The API is different on the new service. I update the car management software to call the new API and distribute it over the air to all the cars.

10 years may be fair, but the costs per customer of doing an upgrade every 10 years will be very small assuming I get a decent customer base. if I wanted to avoid the upgrade cost I could just enable everything to prevent the need to upgrade older cars (and the sales issues I'd foresee)... new cars will come using the new tech.

on a different note... can someone please post an update to say they have a delivery date so I can escape this thread?!?!!!

 

[NicolasB]

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

Fact: I would never buy a car with a heated seat subscription. I would rather pay $1,500 to have them than to rent them from time to time. Screw that. There are people still driving classic cars around that are 50-100 years old! Amazing! However, if most of the car was run by a website you had to input your credit card, then they would all have just been sent for scrap instead of being maintained by enthusiasts.

It really, really sucks. After buying that Hyundai years ago, only to find out the remote start was a yearly subscription, I was livid. If this comes to the states en massé, I will personally start a company that will permanently unlock it for you for a ONE time fee.

 

[kitkat]

Fact: I would never buy a car with a heated seat subscription. I would rather pay $1,500 to have them than to rent them from time to time. Screw that. There are people still driving classic cars around that are 50-100 years old! Amazing! However, if most of the car was run by a website you had to input your credit card, then they would all have just been sent for scrap instead of being maintained by enthusiasts.

It really, really sucks. After buying that Hyundai years ago, only to find out the remote start was a yearly subscription, I was livid. If this comes to the states en massé, I will personally start a company that will permanently unlock it for you for a ONE time fee.

Pretty sure you can just code it in permanently.

 

[Cutting42]

In items like cars, the cost of manufacture and the cost to the consumer are pretty much unrelated. although some basic rules need to be followed like keeping cost of manufacture under selling price for obvious reasons unless you are selling a loss leader to buy market share.

To try and make a case that you are buying an option twice in any real terms is fairly pointless. The real manufacturing cost of a simple heating element and a bit of wiring and another page on the Connected BMW page will be pennies or at least surprisingly few pounds, probably under a fiver at the scale of 100's of thousands of cars.

The selling price is based purely on the perceived value to the purchaser and what the market will stand. Some options will have a higher manufacturing cost of course like a sunroof however the difference in cost of an electric sunroof vs a manual sunroof is probably tiny. I would guess it is actually cheaper to make an electric sunroof but perceived value is higher so they charge more because they can.

We don't offer rental in my industry but we do install options on all versions of some products and only switch it on upon extra payment. It is cheaper to have a std build/manufacturing process with extra features/option in every box than to custom build each instrument.

 

[dgrace]

I'm still fuzzy on the input method. Do the cars all ship with buttons for heated seats that are just non-functional if you don't subscribe? Or have they moved all the controls to the touchscreen and there are no physical buttons?

 

[kitkat]

I'm still fuzzy on the input method. Do the cars all ship with buttons for heated seats that are just non-functional if you don't subscribe? Or have they moved all the controls to the touchscreen and there are no physical buttons?

Both would work.

Button checks coding status and you get an upgrade now prompt on iDrive connected drive.

 

[Porter]

To try and make a case that you are buying an option twice in any real terms is fairly pointless. The real manufacturing cost of a simple heating element and a bit of wiring and another page on the Connected BMW page will be pennies or at least surprisingly few pounds, probably under a fiver at the scale of 100's of thousands of cars.

The selling price is based purely on the perceived value to the purchaser and what the market will stand. Some options will have a higher manufacturing cost of course like a sunroof however the difference in cost of an electric sunroof vs a manual sunroof is probably tiny. I would guess it is actually cheaper to make an electric sunroof but perceived value is higher so they charge more because they can.

Don't get hung up on the seat heater thing, the objection is to the idea generally, which includes a lot of option scenarios at a much higher cost than the seat warmers.

Example: sunroof installed on all cars, but it won't open unless you pay a monthly fee. Or auto radar cruise control (with the expensive ranging sensors in the bumper) in the same scenario.

 

[R1272]

Everyone is paying for heated seats. The only question is whether BMW allows you to use them or not.

Anyone that thinks economy of scale is going to pay for heated seats, sunroof(as mentioned), power mirrors, rear view camera, ambient lighting, ADAS, etc. etc. etc. is kidding themselves. The price of a 'base' car just went up.

 

[Cutting42]

Don't get hung up on the seat heater thing, the objection is to the idea generally, which includes a lot of option scenarios at a much higher cost than the seat warmers.

Example: sunroof installed on all cars, but it won't open unless you pay a monthly fee. Or auto radar cruise control (with the expensive ranging sensors in the bumper) in the same scenario.

I agree there will be parts that are still a custom build option, all visual stuff like sunroofs, physical stuff like sports suspension and stuff that has a very high parts costs. Anything electronic is a key potential for this, usually a very low parts cost just like the seat heaters.

 

[MCS]

Firstly the option is “High Beam Assist” not the high beams themselves…

Secondly most manufacturers charge for this so that’s not new either. Actually clicking through and using this as an example

3 year subscription - £150
Unlimited (old fashioned purchase) - £200

THEY ARE NOT REMOVING YOUR ABILITY TO PAY FOR OPTIONS LIKE YOU ALWAYS HAVE!!! THEY ARE SIMPLY OFFERING ANOTHER PAYMENT MODEL THAT WORKS FOR QUITE A FEW USE-CASES (LEASES IN PARTICULAR).

I paid extra for that on my macan and it’s awful. If they’d given me a free week trial I wouldn’t have switched that option on

 

[Porter]

I agree there will be parts that are still a custom build option, all visual stuff like sunroofs, physical stuff like sports suspension and stuff that has a very high parts costs. Anything electronic is a key potential for this, usually a very low parts cost just like the seat heaters.

That's not the claim being made. The claim is that manufacturers will move to a single build for all variations, and that options will be unlocked as appropriate with software. And that somehow, the economy of scale from the standardization will offset the parts cost.

 

[Leonard]

That's not the claim being made. The claim is that manufacturers will move to a single build for all variations, and that options will be unlocked as appropriate with software. And that somehow, the economy of scale from the standardization will offset the parts cost.

Within reason.
Sunroof is a bit extreme...
Who knows what may be possible in future tho! Pop in, pop out..

 

[Cutting42]

That's not the claim being made. The claim is that manufacturers will move to a single build for all variations, and that options will be unlocked as appropriate with software. And that somehow, the economy of scale from the standardization will offset the parts cost.

Well that claim is not possible then as there are many options that clearly cannot be accounted for such as visual differences, spoilers, colour, wheels, tow bar, leather/alcantara seats, different hifi options, engine options etc etc.

I have a Tesla and they closer than most to this world. With the exception of colour, wheels, motor/battery, leather and a tow bar, there are no options. New features such as steering wheel heating and rear seat heaters were installed on all cars and have actually been activated in software updates (for free on some models). They can deliver performance upgrades remotely as well. I get software updates modifying the screen layout, menus and new features such as rear side camera activation when indicating suddenly made an appearance. Fortunately Tesla are not pursuing a charging strategy for this currently but I sure it is only a matter of time.

 

[Eagle7]

All I see with this idea of milking the customer under the guise of convenience, is the opportunity that will provide a Korean or Chinese manufacturer, to include all those features standard that these other car company geniuses think they can charge a subscription for. They'll all be included in the price of the vehicle, and it will be less than the base price of the subscription foolishness vehicles.

Japanese and Korean companies have done this in the past with their vehicles, and I have no doubt the Chinese companies will do the same thing. Including features as standard that American manufacturers were trying to charge extra for, as part of expensive bundles and options, hurt the American automobile manufacturers because they got locked into stupid-think, and had difficulty competing. Combined with their poor quality of manufacturing, all they did was open a huge window of opportunity for the Asian companies who jumped through it and the rest is history.

If the German manufacturers think they can just dance through the tulips of subscription revenue and that's going to be a continuing source of revenue, they'll get caught by surprise by the aggressiveness of the Chinese manufacturers. In addition, lurking in the background as they gain experience.... the next competitor will be India.

 

[Leonard]

All I see with this idea of milking the customer under the guise of convenience, is the opportunity that will provide a Korean or Chinese manufacturer, to include all those features standard that these other car company geniuses think they can charge a subscription for. They'll all be included in the price of the vehicle, and it will be less than the base price of the subscription foolishness vehicles.

Japanese and Korean companies have done this in the past with their vehicles, and I have no doubt the Chinese companies will do the same thing. Including features as standard that American manufacturers were trying to charge extra for, as part of expensive bundles and options, hurt the American automobile manufacturers because they got locked into stupid-think, and had difficulty competing. Combined with their poor quality of manufacturing, all they did was open a huge window of opportunity for the Asian companies who jumped through it and the rest is history.

If the German manufacturers think they can just dance through the tulips of subscription revenue and that's going to be a continuing source of revenue, they'll get caught by surprise by the aggressiveness of the Chinese manufacturers. In addition, lurking in the background as they gain experience.... the next competitor will be India.

You say that. Asian car makers will probably out Tesla Tesla before long.
Subscription services are on the way. It's only one step removed from lease/hpi that everyone does now.
Subscription is better than both as you can swap outbyour car as required. Volvo does it already but the pricing isn't quite there yet to make it competitive. Now imagine if they only had 3 models and you just choose the options you want to take on your Subscription and get priced accordingly