@downtime: Exactly!!!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.
I’ m pretty sure car owners already pay for features they don’t have, the hardware costs cannot be avoided in most cases.@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 !
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!Yes, exactly.......... The activated features are not following for the new owner.
Nothing "ingenious" about it - "nefarious" is a much more appropriate term IMOThis is ingenious way to make money.
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.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!
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?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?
Uwe: at the risk of making this an inordinately long topic - I suspect we are talking at cross purposes.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?
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.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
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?so the dealer sold the sedan to Alec on December 20 believing the car contained what was on the Monroney.
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.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.
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 millionaireBut 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