Vehicle Diagnostic Protection SFD

[Viking]

Subscription payments might be interesting, like if your heated seat fails and you're paying for it to work, VW would possibly be obliged to repair it for you.

 

[DV52]

Don, I think you're right here. For VW Golf 8 they're already selling features after market that we have normally used to just enable with coding.

@downtime: Exactly!!!

If we distill the essence of the problem to its bare essentials by stepping back from the matter and if we view VAG and third party diagnostic manufacturers as players in a simple game - this is what game theory calls a "net sum game" ; one player's gain is equivalent to the other's loss, so the net change in wealth or benefit is zero!

Alas, the outcome of this particular game appears to be win-win with both wins accruing to VAG !!

Don

 

[Shawa12002]

@lijetta18t: Thomas - Just to extend the debate a little further, I read the following hypothesis this morning on another forum:



I reckon that it's drawing a bit of a long bow to make too strong a connection between the 2 x facilities, but the link does expose some of the VAG Board's strategic thinking about forward direction of the company - IMO of course!

And, the pay-as-you-go philosophy does raise some fairness questions (not that "fairness" is a business construct); does the car owner pay for any portion of the extra smarts that are fitted to the car to enable the "function on demand" facilities in the initial purchase - or are these costs (i.e. CAPEX +OPEX) fully recouped in the subscription fees? I hope the latter - but I guess the buyer will never know !

Don

I’ m pretty sure car owners already pay for features they don’t have, the hardware costs cannot be avoided in most cases.
I am just worried about how information is going to be sold fir marketing purposes by car makers. These on demand features and connectivity features will definitely steal profiles from the user. “It’s a trade-off” is probably what car makers would say

 

[Hawkeye9723]

I see this scenario happening:

1) Person A buys a car.
2) Person A Then pays for features to be activated
3) Person A trades in car for a new one
4) Dealer deactivates the features before putting the car up for sale
5) Person B buys the car used and has to pay for the features the person A paid for.

 

[downtime]

Yes, exactly. Naturally the features are per owner and car. The activated features are not following for the new owner.

This is ingenious way to make money.

 

[DV52]

Yes, exactly.......... The activated features are not following for the new owner.

Why not? The new car owner expects (is entitled - I suggest) to receive the car in the condition in which it was presented for sale by the old car owner! If this doesn't happen, then Shirley the old car owner MUST be obligated to disclose what features are not enabled after sale? And if it does happen, then the new car owner is fully informed before the financial transaction is completed - so, no problem!

And, if the old car owner doesn't fulfill this obligation (in writing I suggest to address the risk of subsequent action by the new car owner), Shirley the old car owner would need to pay for any re-subscription costs!!

This is ingenious way to make money.

Nothing "ingenious" about it - "nefarious" is a much more appropriate term IMO

 

[Uwe]

Why not? The new car owner expects (is entitled - I suggest) to receive the car in the condition in which it was presented for sale by the old car owner!

Not if there's a intermediate owner, which was implied in the post by @Hawkeye9723. The original owner traded in the car for a new one at a dealership. In that case the new owner is entitled to receive the car in whatever condition the dealership represents it to be in. Dealers often do work on traded in cars before the resell them. Normally that work consists of improvements (performing maintenance, replacing worn-out stuff, and a thorough cleaning) rather than feature downgrades. I rather doubt that dealers would have much incentive to downgrade features, although I supposed the "factory" could require that if the dealer wanted to sell the car as a factory "certified" used car, with the warranty that entails.

Now if there is no intermediate (dealership) owner, i.e. the second owner bought the car privately from the first owner, and the dealer or factory downgraded the features simply because it changed hands, then I do believe the new owner might be able to challenge that in the courts.

-Uwe-

 

[DV52]

^^^Uwe: I entirely understand your point about dealers as the intervening owner of the car before eventual transfer of ownership. In this instance (and ONLY if the dealer presented the car for sale in it's factory-set option state), the new owner receives the car after purchase in its presented state! No problem at all because the new owner can have no expectation of subscription options fitted !!

However, this is a special (albeit, not uncommon) case - for every one else including non-dealer used-car yards, an obligation (and therefore, a liability) for disclosure Shirley rests with the entity selling the car -nes par?

Don

 

[Uwe]

However, this is a special (albeit, not uncommon) case - for every one else including non-dealer used-car yards, an obligation (and therefore, a liability) for disclosure Shirley rests with the entity selling the car -nes par?

Sure, but if it's not a dealer reselling the car, i.e. if it's a private transaction between individuals, or if there's a private used-car yard, how does the factory even know that the car has been sold?

-Uwe-

 

[DV52]

Sure, but if it's not a dealer reselling the car, i.e. if it's a private transaction between individuals, or if there's a private used-car yard, how does the factory even know that the car has been sold?

-Uwe-

Uwe: at the risk of making this an inordinately long topic - I suspect we are talking at cross purposes.

That's exactly my point; the factory doesn't know about the sale if a dealer isn't involved. This means that unless the selling entity makes specific mention - the new owner blissfully enjoys the previous owners subscriptions until the first visit. Then the reset happens and bingo- the new owner realizes that the car wasn't as presented.

If the selling entity does inform the buyer of the reset facility, the new owner should attempt to avoid taking the car to a dealer for as long as possible (albeit If SFD is fitted to the vehicle, eventually a dealer connection must be made when an allied component fails). This assumes that the Government process for registering car ownership isn't shared with VAG - no reason why it would!

Don

 

[Uwe]

Then the reset happens and bingo- the new owner realizes that the car wasn't as presented.

If the selling entity does inform the buyer of the reset facility, the new owner should attempt to avoid taking the car to a dealer for as long as possible

I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but here in the US, if dealers were to de-feature cars that had been purchased on the private, used car market when they eventually visited the dealership, I would expect a class-action lawsuit. I don't think VW would dare to do that here.

-Uwe-

 

[lijetta18t]

Funny you mention that, didn't Tesla just do this?

Tesla seems to be stripping software features when cars are resold

Jalopnik has run stories on the experiences several people have had after buying used Teslas, in which features on their car's Monroney had been removed.

www.autoblog.com

 

[Uwe]

so the dealer sold the sedan to Alec on December 20 believing the car contained what was on the Monroney.

Uhm yeah... If it was on the original window sticker it would be unwise to remove it. Notice that they folded and put it back?

-Uwe-

 

[mtl]

I see this scenario happening:

1) Person A buys a car.
2) Person A Then pays for features to be activated
3) Person A trades in car for a new one
4) Dealer deactivates the features before putting the car up for sale
5) Person B buys the car used and has to pay for the features the person A paid for.

The point here is also that a used car without x options is worth less than a used car with x options. So, maybe a dealer will remove some options, but that does not guarantee him that he will sell those options to the new buyer, because maybe he will not want to pay for them. But if he sells the car with x options he will sell it for a higher price (thoug less than car without options and afterwards activation of them). So, I do not see much case for the dealers.
But this could be easily done by a manufacturer, where for them there is no downside of connecting the options to an owner and not to the car, and this is exactly what Tesla has done. They do not get any additional revenue if the car is resold with or without options, but if they connect the features to an owner, there is only kachning for them .

 

[downtime]

But this could be easily done by a manufacturer, where for them there is no downside of connecting the options to an owner and not to the car, and this is exactly what Tesla has done. They do not get any additional revenue if the car is resold with or without options, but if they connect the features to an owner, there is only kachning for them .

Exactly! This is how most of the software features are sold nowadays anyway. They are tied to user account and not to the physical hardware. Again I repeat, it's an ingenious way to make more money. You can get money from the same features over and over and over again. I just wish I've invented that, I've would be a millionaire

 

[Hawkeye9723]

Exactly! This is how most of the software features are sold nowadays anyway. They are tied to user account and not to the physical hardware. Again I repeat, it's an ingenious way to make more money. You can get money from the same features over and over and over again. I just wish I've invented that, I've would be a millionaire

So, by that theory. If I were to purchase an option then trade the car in for a newer model that purchase should transfer to the new car. Unless of course there's some fine print when you make that purchase that you can't transfer it to another car.

 

[Danners74]

I already connected to 2 Golf 8 but i can't change anything yet. It needs for every module a inlogcode wich is not the previous ones. I have full scan from every module incl the autoscan. But that's it.

Most off the adaption from 09 and 5F for instant are almost the same as the Golf 7 with a few changes. I talked with the engineering from the local VW garage and they tell me that there wil be a few people from every dealer who gets registrerd for coding on the new Golf. every thing they do will me monitored by VW. Every code the put in the car the free a option will be done with Odis and will be noted on the cars chassis. so when there is something wrong everything could be traced the a certain person and so on.


Iff there is anyone interested in those files let me now

Everyone has to be registered for SFD in workshops in the brand that are now using this software. It sucks but on deeper delving its looking like what i said about FOD. Yes you're spot on with the accountability parrt of the softwware.

 

[DV52]

Everyone has to be registered for SFD in workshops in the brand that are now using this software. It sucks but on deeper delving its looking like what i said about FOD.

@Danners74: Yes, the prevailing intelligence regarding SFD seems to be growing in the community in spits and spurts and there certainly is much more that needs to be understood about these new protocols.

But at least there is a feint ray of hope for us non-professionals with this morning's public announcement of an anticipated solution to SFD by Q1 2021!!!

Definitely good news - and a tentative (strong?) message to us users that if one company can do it, so can others!!

Yes you're spot on with the accountability parrt of the softwware.

Yep "accountability" does indeed seem to be major feature of SFD. The interesting thing about this (for me) is how it would work for non-ODIS users (assuming of course that independent diagnostic devices worked on SFD cars).

Would a stream of change records from these devices still be sent to VAG to flag any potential warranty claims? Or would there be a general classification for these changes as being "unauthorized" ? And ultimately, how would the registering of these changes with the "mother-ship" affect the use (and therefore the market value) of independent diagnostic devices?

We live in interesting times!!

Don

 

[PetrolDave]

Massachusetts voters pass right-to-repair expansion opening up car data

One election night issue that has appears to have an answer already is the passage of Question 1 in Massachusetts, which asked voters to strengthen laws guaranteeing people are able to repair things they own. In this case, it focused on cars, preventing manufactures from locking third party repair shops and car owners out of advanced telematics data that’s increasingly being collected by vehicles via driver assistance tools.

Massachusetts voters pass right-to-repair expansion opening up car data