Edit: JFC people. I'm not endorsing spending $100k on a car. I'm saying even if you do it's still a pretty bad deal since it fails to meet the high baseline that is expected of luxury vehicles. WTF did I do to draw your ire?

Nah, even the Porsche Cayman is more prestigious than the Tesla Plaid.

The EQE weighs 5300lbs. The EQS weighs 6200lbs. It is amazing and impressive how quickly they can accelerate, but inertia is still a thing and those things are not going to be even remotely nimble.

By comparison, the 911 at its heaviest (AWD, convertible) is 3800lbs. A porker for sure, but most configs are closer to 3400lbs.

And a Porsche Cayman weighs between 3000 - 3200lbs depending on trim.

Unless/until batteries get a lot lighter, even heavy GTs don’t have a lot to be nervous about in the fun-to-drive category.

A fun EV would first of all be non-SUV but low air drag, non-luxury, non anything that's not needed to move. But even that would only provide higher possible cruising speeds compared to other EVs, but still inferior to ICEs.

Time isn’t a huge concern to me at least. Typical sports cars get maybe 50-100 miles on a tank of gas at a track day, and breaks are nice anyway. Even spirited driving on mountain roads isn’t nearly that tough; you can’t use 500hp all that often.

But that weight…. Ugh. I’m interested to see the new Tesla roadster, but it’s probably still >4000lbs. And weight just takes the fun out of anything.

AMG would like a word: there's always a bigger flex.

It's a matter of principle. This bullshit must be nipped in the bud. Greedy morons.

That's exactly how you drive people away from your brand.

I paid ~2k for Boost for my Tesla; functionally the same thing. But at least if travels with the car if I sell it (if you find someone who values it properly). Subscriptions like this is just burning the $$. Serious feelsbadman.

If I were to make rational decisions when buying a car I would've been a proud owner of previously owned Toyota Corolla in a stylish beige color.

In this particular case I feel like being manipulated into paying more and generally taken advantage off. Just like with any unsubstantiated subscription.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/18/electric-porsche-taycan-catc...

In this case no one was hurt but there was another owner in China who wasn't so lucky.

with ev's it seems the less premium brands like hyundai + others have seen their opening and are taking it and it's working the ev6 seems to be really well liked online.

These companies are giving them what they want. A cheaper lease but it looks the exact same as the more expensive one.

GM and Stellantis plan on adding subscription services to their offerings in the next 5 years and Ford hasn't ruled out the possibility (or at least they're playing coy at the moment). I haven't heard anything about VAG, and the rest of the Japanese makers, but I assume they're keeping an eye on how the market will respond to this idea.

The important thing is to keep the basic features free from this method.

And for basic features I mean all the safety stuff/ADAS. You can pay more to gain speed but not to gain safety!

Close, but not quite. You have the car that can do that speed. You're paying for permission to use it.

Sorry expedited charging is a premium feature, standard charging will take 10 hours.

The average speed limit across the US is 35 mph in order to go above that please purchase the "Premium Roadster Package" that will allow you to go up to 45mph for up to 30 minutes a day. If you need more than that for only a small price increase you can get the Unlimited roadster package that will allow you to use your 45 mph speed as much as you want (meaning 10 hours a day as statistically speaking almost no one uses it more than 5 and those that do are responsible for excessive wear and tear on roadways.)

What's that you need to go more than 45 mph. I'm sorry in order to travel faster than 45 mph you'll need a special driver's license, it was discovered that too many people die above 45 mph so the government restricted that privilege to only individuals specially licensed to operate a vehicle above 45 mph. The good news is anyone can get that kind of license just please complete the 8 hour safe driving course, accumulate 45 hours of driving time at the training track, and submit your application to get approved, which will be returned to you in less than a year. Unless you are a member of state or federal government then it will be given to you in taking office and be granted in perpetuity.

Really, speed governors should be required. If that's only politically possible with a fee to opt out, I'll take it. We let people pay to stay out of jail after all (cash bail), this seems far more palatable than that.

...except at least Spirit Airlines is cheap. The Mercedes EQS sedan starts at $102k for relatively middling performance of 5.9s 0-60 and range of 350 milse. I have no doubt that the EQS is a more luxurious car, but the Tesla Model S is $105k for significantly better performance of 3.1s 0-60 and better range at 405 miles.

I doubt anyone is cross-shopping a Model 3 against a Mercedes, but the economics are almost comical in favor of the 3. Model 3 $63k for 3.1s 0-60 and 315 miles of range.

I can only wonder who would buy this. Pay a significant premium for a Mercedes and then stuck with a $100/month subscription? I'd love to hear from someone who is into this, and why.

The Model 3 is ridiculously expensive. Base price RWD $47k. You can get into a Prius for $25k. At 58mpg there will never be a breakeven for the Model 3. Economics will be different with this upcoming $7,500 tax credit, but that obviously doesn't apply to any current owners.

I personally want the choice of Apple CarPlay and not be stuck with whatever Tesla thinks is “okay” for me to use..

I have heard from several friends who has a Tesla that the car comes packed with minor defects in for and finish that they don’t bother bringing to service because they know it will be a horrible experience.

I’d rather give my money to a car company that builds quality cars, and not have a cult following, gets a good Euro NCAP safety rating, and allows me to use Apple CarPlay and get out of the way. I have my eyes on a Kia EV6 when I decide to replace my current car in a few years.

Mercedes is the car you buy your wife to signal that you're a person of means. A person of means does not scoff at the wishes of their wife, especially not for such a paltry sum.

Supercharged, 525 ft lbs of torque on tap, tire murdering machines. I really, really liked my E55. Had it for 3 years and sold it before anything expensive broke. Went through like 5 sets of tires. Couldn't corner for shit, but onramps and any straight line, look out.

It would be fine to just say "Mercedes is the car you buy to signal you're a person of means".

Heh.

My wife can buy her own car...

Will there now be a New Jersey spec of the vehicle software in a similar vein as having a CARB spec for ice emissions?

I’m pretty surprised regulators aren’t already on this given that car subscriptions is a pretty massive story already.

Auto companies are pushing propaganda around this and exploit the less informed among us.

that's one very viable scenario to control "your" car. for your safety, of course.

If I was looking at two identical cars on the lot for the same price, but one was an EV and one was ICE, I'd pick EV today no hesitation.

Wonder if any open source EV projects have started.

For those wondering whether this is just a joke, it most certainly is not.

Perhaps with some funding & technical assistance they could be convinced to do so for EV Vehicles.

https://www.opensourceecology.org/

"We’re developing open source industrial machines that can be made for a fraction of commercial costs, and sharing our designs online for free. The goal of Open Source Ecology is to create an open source economy – an efficient economy which increases innovation by open collaboration."

This approach does not address the value model of a vehicle. I think subscriptions work well as a method of price differentiation—if you don’t want it, don’t subscribe, and if you change your mind down the road you can add it without fuss.

https://comma.ai/

I expect the answer is no, but I would like to know how the answer is no.

TL;DR: cryptography and secure hardware (think TPM)

This is a very interesting talk from Microsoft about how they made Xbox immune to physical attacks (modding) like you proposed. Now they are working on getting this tech into regular computers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7VwtOrwceo

Of course, we don't know if the solution Mercedes used is as robust. For all we know it can be hacked in 1 minute.

There is clearly a separate set of rules for physical goods vs purely software. that expectation hasn't changed just because vehicle manufacturers have started using more software in their vehicles.

People understand why GPS needs a subscription, there's no reason for physical performance to need a subscription except purely for segmentation and profits.

It will eventually become illegal to do.

Subscriptions also make software more affordable for those breaking into industries. I, along with many peers, pirated Photoshop for years. That’s not necessary when I can get Creative Suite for $10 per month. It’s actually been free for me for the past couple years because I upload stock photos.

Both Adobe and the consumer come out ahead in a world where the consumer doesn’t have to pirate software.

You left out the option of "Purchase the full software package for a single flat cost equal to 1 year's subscription fee today". Taken from the brief period when companies offered offline packages.

The truth is that a lot of users don't need the latest and greatest. They need the software to do a few things, and if that software is 5 years old it doesn't matter.

Software companies don't like this, so they instead switched to a subscription model that forces users to constantly upgrade despite not needing anything new. It's a truly scummy business model.

The vehicle is a physical thing and the maintenance of that physical thing is paid for by the consumer by taking it to a LOCAL shop. When I can get the software in my vehicle maintained by a local shop such that I choose the price points, then we can talk.

Until that happens, this is about profits and lockin and will eventually become illegal in the same way that it became illegal for car manufacturers to sell their own vehicles in many (most?) states.

This is plain old lobbying from car dealers. It has nothing to do with customer protection.

Or maybe you support making it illegal in a similar way for Apple to have Apple stores and instead demand that Apple sells it's Macbooks and phones in non-Apple stores, together with Microsoft and Samsung.

If you were consistent, then you would support making it illegal for Apple too.

If you were consistent, you'd argue that it should be legal to have sex with a 5 year old since it's legal to have sex with a 25 year old.

If you were consistent, you'd argue it should be ok for anyone to send your children to a room in their house since you're ok with sending your children to a room in your house.

If you were consistent, you would be ok with anyone sleeping with your spouse since you sleep with your spouse.

---

Well it turns out I'm not consistent, sue me.

With the IntelliJ analogy, we never paid for the original software and purchasing additional features is reasonable.

Whereas a download of IntelliJ Community Edition is almost 200 MB lighter than the Ultimate Edition, so even though "it's just software", you don't have to haul around "useless" features (if you don't pay).

I'm so sick and tired of getting asked to subscribe to yet another service. For electricity, there's no choice, and we're used to it; for mobile phone service, it's a modern necessity too; for internet connectivity, also; for video streaming services, sure; for music streaming services, sure; for email applications, sure; for office software, sure; for news outlets, sure; for web applications and services, sure; for webcam services, sure; for food delivery services, sure; and now, for "car performance" services too?[a] There's no obvious end to it.

It seems we're on the path to a hellish future in which we all have to pay up for hundreds (thousands?) of subscriptions to go about our daily lives.

--

[a] For a while, Tesla has been charging extra for a software update that enables greater acceleration: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-mobile-app-upgrades-accelera... -- Mercedes is just going the extra mile, so to speak!

“The door refused to open. It said, “Five cents, please.” He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. “I’ll pay you tomorrow,” he told the door. Again he tried the knob. Again it remained locked tight. “What I pay you,” he informed it, “is in the nature of a gratuity; I don’t have to pay you.” “I think otherwise,” the door said. “Look in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt.” In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing it he had found it necessary to refer to the document many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip. “You discover I’m right,” the door said. It sounded smug. From the drawer beside the sink Joe Chip got a stainless steel knife; with it he began systematically to unscrew the bolt assembly of his apt’s money-gulping door. “I’ll sue you,” the door said as the first screw fell out. Joe Chip said, “I’ve never been sued by a door. But I guess I can live through it.”

It's only a matter of time before smart locks start charging a subscription fee. "Pay to manage your home's entry/exit security."

Without a doubt, smart-lock makers are thinking about and want to figure out how to get consumers to subscribe.

Search online for "smart lock subscription".

That's the dream of many who actually own the things, everyone else coming into this world and leaving it exactly the same, owning nothing and paying for every moment they exist.

This said, your point largely stands.

Because that's what it is.

Every utility does this. They all tack on extra fees for imaginary purposes.

I can assure you maintaining all the infrastructure so gas can still be delivered in the winter is not imaginary.

It's not like during the summertime all the gas company workers get laid off and nothing happens at the utility.

Plus, you're making the very large assumption that all of these fees are actually being used for infrastructure. I think you'll find in most cases that the amount spent on infrastructure is vastly lower than the amount of fees collected.

I pay a service fee for my internet connection, and so do the other several million people the utility services. So why do new customers have to pay thousands of dollars to have a new fiber run down their street? Why is infrastructure not upgraded to handle the actual load? Lines are so oversold that you typically get a tenth of your rated bandwidth, on fiber.

Always remember that the utility is a for-profit company. Their goal is not to maintain high standard infrastructure and service, it's to make money. So they add on little fees that sound reasonable and hope you never think about it.

Technically, internet connectivity is usually not considered a "utility" in the US. They have far fewer regulations than a utility like a gas company. It is not really accurate to compare a gas company to an ISP in the US.

The rates and fees which the gas company can charge me are controlled by government regulatory bodies here in Texas. I can't say the same for internet. The gas company needs to get approval for all their work, they can't arbitrarily add or change fees without approvals, and the rates per CCF are determined based on negotiations with regulators. And I'm in one of the most deregulated utility places in the US.

This reminds me of the survey fatigue I experienced 10+ years ago. All of a sudden it seemed that every company and organization was attempting to get you to do email or phone surveys. I made a hard rule then I've stuck to ever since - if your for-profit company wants valuable time and information from me, pay me first.

That said, you haul your own water and run off-grid electricity if you really wanted to.

sounds like theres a product gap and a market need; lets make a subscription "subscription service" service - the last subscription you'll ever have to manage!

what if there was an open protocol with a public API where you could just purchase fungible subscription primitives and then disburse them into any SaaS like Netflix, JetBrains, or M365? you'd probably want an immutable transaction log for both consumer and business protections, and it would be better if the system were distributed and trustless so you don't have to worry about any funny business on anyones part. also you dont have to count on those privateering, regulatory-captured bankers to prevent or replace erronerous double-spends and manage payment disputes - all the records are chained together and auditable!

I am no longer having fun writing this post. fungible subscription primitives - i made myself sad.

There is also group wondering whether early access users could potentially do crash testing betas

/s

The car industry can similarly say, we can't legally stop you from modifying the software in a car you own, but we can get the government to outlaw anyone running un-govt-approved/unlicensed auto software on public roads.

Really what bothers me even more is that people are so apathetic about this. They are just lying down and taking it.

Of course barely anyone took the 182BHP version considering every other mechanic could perform the necessary upgrade.

One friend of mine even did that during the lease.

Considering 2/3 of premium brands' stock is usually leased and returned after that period anyway, I think this trend will only continue.

Sucks to be the third owner of such a vehicle I guess, but the manufacturers never cared too much about the used market, considering they make most of their money on the initial sale/lease and authorized dealership maintenance.

Personally I'm now even less likely to ever get a premium brand car, because it's becoming increasingly obvious that I'm not the target market.

And without subscription scam.

This is why I don't use services such as Spotify. This is also why I still buy DVD's and Blu-Ray. You can make fun of me all you want but at least I own these things and I don't have to keep paying for them ad infinitum.

That's also why I use software such as LibreOffice and Gimp. These tools are installed on my machine and I can use them whenever I want for as long as I want. I don't have to keep paying to continue using them. I pay them when I upgrade.

Bottom line, I'm not against paying for things so long as I own them. I'm against subscribing to durable goods. At the rate this nonsense is going Ryobi is going to start demanding a subscription for me to continue using my mitre saw. Nonsense!

That includes running water, access to the internet, electricity and also, for me, music and media in general. It's very rare for me to want to own a TV show or particular music album, I kind of just browse and consume and move on to something else.

Maybe for some very specific movies or albums I rewatch/listen to a lot I'll go ahead and purchase them individually.

But the key is that in none of those valid cases I'm purchasing anything outright. Once I do, I expect no subscriptions for it or any of it's features.

Otherwise what was the point of buying it? Just let me rent it.

Heh...I'm very much the opposite.

I don't want DVDs and Blu-Rays taking up space, especially since I rarely watch a movie more than once or twice. I'd much rather pay for Netflix.

When it comes to music, while I have a few favorite bands, I also like the discovery that something like Spotify has, where I can just tell it to play a bunch of music from a specific genre and not have to purchase individual songs/albums and create playlists and folder structures to organize it all.

Music streaming is here to stay. If Spotify dies, it'll be because it's getting replaced by something else, and then I'll just switch to them.

> Bottom line, I'm not against paying for things so long as I own them. I'm against subscribing to durable goods.

Agreed. I think the difference is that I'm not really interested in buying music, and instead, I'm perfectly happy renting access to a massive music library.

> At the rate this nonsense is going Ryobi is going to start demanding a subscription for me to continue using my mitre saw. Nonsense!

100%

If something costs $0 for the company to maintain, then there's no valid reason to charge a subscription beyond increasing profits.

It's pretty annoying, but most people don't care enough about their music libaries to need to own a real copy. The convenience is real and for things like music the benefits outweigh the costs.

I probably watch at least 2-4 movies a week and a few episodes of some TV show. Each movie on Blu-Ray would probably cost at least $10, probably at least a season a month of TV so maybe $30-40 for TV? In total at least $150/mo if I were to buy that content on physical media for just video media just for things I'll probably never care to watch again. But in the end I just have two $10/mo streaming subscriptions at a time and maybe rent a movie or two for $5/ea, so probably $25/mo on average. Extrapolate that out for a year and that's $1,800 for plastic discs I'll probably never use again versus $300 for streaming. Across 5 years that's $7,500 extra to have a bunch of physical media I'll probably never put back in a player.

Its even more insane to think about with music CDs. I probably listen to 20-30 new albums a month. If each of those were needing to buy physical CDs at $10/ea, that's $200+/mo. Instead, I pay Spotify $12/mo for two accounts between my wife and me.

I still buy the occasional album or movie on physical media and treasure it. If I were to limit myself to only physical media it would drastically change my listening and viewing habits though, to an absolutely massive effect. I wouldn't listen to nearly as much music and I wouldn't watch nearly as many movies. If the library near me closed, I'd probably also not read nearly as many books.

====================

U.S. public national big box stores look to capitalize on the rent seeking model with new internet of thing toolings. No longer will this industry miss out on the technology explosion and revenue opportunities that being smart brings. Formerly dumb tools are being modernized with cellular connectivity and features that will bring significant revenue for this brand while setting in motion the modernization of this overlooked industry. Revenue will come from the unique features and hidden charges that clients cannot live without such as in the case of the smart shovel in current testing that bills per scoop. There are no talks at the moment on bulk scoop discounts however if enough revenue is generated they stated it would not be considered. Currently protected under NDA several of the smart tools are in smart testing and the smart customers have provided overwhelming smart feedback which is showing great signs of significant income for the brand even in limited deployment. One client's happiness sums it up below.

B.K. states: "I am overwhelmed at the simplicity of using my smart shovel which doesn't really help me dig more but certainly adds weight to the tool use but I don't mind since I am strong. I do have to charge my shovel daily and the firmware updates have been a burden at times taking up to an hour of my day per update per shovel but I understand cybersecurity is important and I would hate for my shovel to get hacked. The best time is at the end of the month when I have to pay my bill for data use and features such as with each hole I dig as it charges per scoop so I have really optimized my hole digging process. The smart app is the best as it shows me nothing but I do have a cool avatar and I can connect all my shovels as well as my friends shovels into my "YouBeenScooped" social network. I have given feedback that the social network should be all tools in one place but I don't understand the internet so that may not be possible but I trust them to not rip me off or waste my time. As a local home building contractor just getting by I cannot wait to replace all my dumb tools and make them smart but I will have to adjust and sacrifice my family's life style to afford the benefits of being smart. I really look forward to the smart hammer which I have not yet tested but I am informed it has biometric authentication, remote lockout with electric shock and a gps find feature. There are even rumors that the hammer may have regenerative capture so while each swing will cost me plenty the more I swing it the longer I can go without charging! Of course I have to pay more for this regen feature which is another monthly charge but it will save me money since I also have to pay them to charge my shovel currently. All in all I am all in on being smart!"

Well folks there you have it from the anonymous testing clients feedback. The era of dumb tools is coming to an end so all hail the smart shovels, smart hammers, smart trowels, smart crowbars, smart screwdrivers and more which will be released in phases starting in the Spring of 2023 timed with the next housing building boom. We cannot wait to see the improvements that these smart tools will bring as we move into the new era of smart home building!

*edit spellcheck

- OR - (inclusive or)

Subscriptions should be sub-to-own. Unlock a feature for the same price as it would have been on the original purchase. This smooths out purchase price, so it may be worth it for some consumers.

His answer "they can shut your machine down with the click of a mouse. You miss your payment? Shut off. New software update you don't want or need, but they can legally do? Pay or you're off.

I hate the modern tech world in a lot of ways. It is ridiculous.

OEMs: "oooh.. EVs are just computers with Wheels. I bet we can do the same thing everyone else is doing!"

I really, really hope there is so much backlash that they drop it. It should be illegal to purposefully gimp something like a car just to milk more money out of it.

I can understand something that has to be maintained like sat radio or OnStar etc. Those are actually "value-adding services". But freaking performance? It's like the bullshit with Tesla and restricting battery capacity.

What next? your cellphone wont charge past 50% without a subscription? Your car's headlights will only operate at 60% brightness without a fee? Your fridge's ice-maker will make ice slower without a "premium" addon?

You can't use certain colors without paying a fee... oh wait.

/smh

Which suggests we could be on the verge of a golden era of automotive simplicity, modularity, tinkering, etc.

But no, this is what we will get. Locked subscription-only features, pay-per-mile, spyware, crapware, bloat, software-enforced maintenance and obsolescence, software-certified components (no 3rd party replacements), etc, etc, just like printers, but even worse.

The manufacturers should restrain themselves, or ownership will become so onerous that people don't bother and just use uber etc.