Mercedes locks faster acceleration behind a yearly $1,200 subscription - The Verge

gusone

Well-Known Member
First Name
gus
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Threads
21
Messages
595
Reaction score
621
Location
South East London
Vehicles
BMW Series 3 XDRIVE M SPORT
Country flag
Inevitable for Porsche?


Mercedes is the latest manufacturer to lock auto features behind a subscription fee, with an upcoming “Acceleration Increase” add-on that lets drivers pay to access motor performance their vehicle is already capable of. The $1,200 yearly subscription improves performance by boosting output from the motors by 20–24 percent, increasing torque, and shaving around 0.8 to 0.9 seconds off 0–60 mph acceleration when in Dynamic drive mode...


Mercedes locks faster acceleration behind a yearly $1,200 subscription - The Verge
Sponsored

 

mutanthands

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2021
Threads
5
Messages
397
Reaction score
541
Location
N.Yorkshire
Vehicles
Taycan GTS, Suzuki Cara
Country flag
This is where the whole industry will go. Tesla have been doing similar for years.
From a manufacturing standpoint it makes sense. Less hardware variation, the easier / cheaper it becomes.
 

proficient_mathematician

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2022
Threads
0
Messages
136
Reaction score
196
Location
Finland
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
It was pretty egregious IMHO when they locked rear wheel steering behind a paywall, seems they’re going ever further in the same direction
 

f1eng

Well-Known Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Aug 19, 2021
Threads
40
Messages
3,679
Reaction score
6,269
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
Vehicles
Taycan CT4S, Ferrari 355, Merc 500E, Prius PHV
Country flag
This is a development I really loath.

As an amateur photographer I disliked Adobe going from selling software to monthly rental and very strong push towards cloud storage.

Apple similar. I have stuck with iPod function but cancelled my trial of the streaming service.

Since I am an old bloke with many terabytes of storage already I don’t use cloud services much, but it gets increasingly difficult to avoid being ripped off in this way as already profitable companies develop new ways to gouge their customers.

I am not selling my current car or sports car when the Taycan comes to make sure I find the experience of the software and on line requirements personally acceptable.
 


TaycanHero

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2022
Threads
14
Messages
984
Reaction score
907
Location
United Kingdom
Vehicles
Porsche Taycan GTS Sport Turismo (2023)
Country flag
It will probably be coined with some cringe techy term like "FaaS" - Features as a Service - and be seen as the next big thing in EV automotive.

Ultimately every car is going to become the same. Same motor, same fuel (electric), same performance, similar c(d) value and so on.

Distinct from ICE where mechanics and even fuel had a huge impact on performance.

Perhaps in a near future what differentiates marques will be their "feature packs" that you subscribe to.

If Kia can now produce an affordable car that outperforms a Lambo, then ultimately that's probably where things are headed.

Heated seats and steering wheel is included as standard with a Toyota, but you have to subscribe to it in a VW. Now which EV do you choose where they're otherwise the same go kart only with different subscriptions?

I'm not saying I agree with this, but it could be where things are headed.
 

David Bennett

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Threads
8
Messages
116
Reaction score
114
Location
UK
Vehicles
Taycan 4S, Golf 8r
Country flag
Inevitable for Porsche?


Mercedes is the latest manufacturer to lock auto features behind a subscription fee, with an upcoming “Acceleration Increase” add-on that lets drivers pay to access motor performance their vehicle is already capable of. The $1,200 yearly subscription improves performance by boosting output from the motors by 20–24 percent, increasing torque, and shaving around 0.8 to 0.9 seconds off 0–60 mph acceleration when in Dynamic drive mode...


Mercedes locks faster acceleration behind a yearly $1,200 subscription - The Verge
Much as I hate the model, a 24% increase would basically convert my 4S into a turbo. I’d pay 1200 USD per year for that
 

WuffvonTrips

Well-Known Member
First Name
Paul
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Threads
35
Messages
1,821
Reaction score
2,063
Location
Up North
Vehicles
Taycan Turbo CT
Country flag
The current Taycan variant pricing structure would be hard to justify if Porsche were to charge that sort of "subscription" price per performance increment.
I guess that every EV can be "tuned" in this way within a significant range, it's more about heat and power management than absolute limits. Presumably manufacturers have made it as difficult as possible for third parties to hack the systems.
 


Jhenson29

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeremy
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Threads
35
Messages
2,771
Reaction score
4,125
Location
St. Louis, MO
Vehicles
2016 Macan S; 2021 Taycan 4S; 2023 911 GTS Cab
Country flag
It will probably be coined with some cringe techy term like "FaaS" - Features as a Service
FaaS is already taken by “Functions as a Service” for things like AWS Lambda. 😜

If something is legitimately a service, like the company that mows my lawn, or Netflix, or serverless computing, then a subscription model makes perfect sense.

And there is definitely software that falls into this category. I’m working on several projects in AWS right now that are sold to end users as subscription services.

However, features like heated steering wheels or motor performance do not and I agree this is disgusting.
 

f1eng

Well-Known Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Aug 19, 2021
Threads
40
Messages
3,679
Reaction score
6,269
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
Vehicles
Taycan CT4S, Ferrari 355, Merc 500E, Prius PHV
Country flag
Much as I hate the model, a 24% increase would basically convert my 4S into a turbo. I’d pay 1200 USD per year for that
Problem is the rear motor capacity is pretty well used up by the 4S and you won’t get a turbo rear motor for $1200!
OTOH if you bought a GTS it has the big motor limited and could presumably get more power easily.
The CT4 also could get 4S performance in a similar way, perhaps.
 

David Bennett

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Threads
8
Messages
116
Reaction score
114
Location
UK
Vehicles
Taycan 4S, Golf 8r
Country flag
No doubt about that. However, I’d even pay something to have access to the launch control power on demand and accept there might be circumstances where there was thermal limiting of power.
 

WasserGKuehlt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
4
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
1,777
Location
WA
Vehicles
4CT, 996C2, MacanS
Country flag
Too many posts in this thread to address individually, so here's a generic, different perspective. (rolls up sleeves)

You're not renting it. You haven't paid for it. You are picking on an implementation detail, which just happens to be trivially evident in some cases - but if you didn't know, you wouldn't have a problem with it.

As others pointed out, "deviations" are costly for a producer (irrespective of they provide 'software' or 'hardware' products), so it's increasingly more reasonable to ship the same software/hardware and lock functionality. Users who don't want/aren't paying for the functionality are, in effect, given better equipment than they paid for. The profit is made from those who do need/pay for said functionality. The alternative would be to ship the same functionality to all, and raise prices across the board (less/unit, but to maintain overall profit margin): would you like it better to pay for something you don't need/want?

It's a fairly well-known human psychological trait that the probability of losing a given amount is perceived to be worse than the same probability of winning the same amount ("loss aversion"). In this case, the knowledge that the capability exists in the product warps loss aversion - incorrectly - into an "I'm being screwed" reaction*.

Having said that, I do want to add the following disclaimers:
- it's pretty clear the industry hasn't found a way to message/present this correctly; partly because the "implementation details" are painfully obvious (the seat heating _is right there_), and partly because they are somewhat removed from the consumer: it's the dealer you're talking to, not a product manager, and the TV ads can't talk about the pros/cons of business models
- Porsche, as the most profitable manufacturer, has a really weak position to use this argument; they could clearly give out all FoD/subscription-based features for free in every car they sell, without increasing the price and still retain their profit margin. Perhaps this is what angers people, but that, too, is "ulterior knowledge"

*As an example, and to leave the history bit for the end, there was the same reaction to the introduction of the 986/996 models: 911 buyers felt short-changed, and that they were paying a premium for basically-a-Boxster. In reality, Porsche was recovering from a drunken, inefficient decade of producing 3 lines of cars with virtually-0 sharing of .. anything. The decision to share the front end between the Boxster and the 911 was an extreme swing towards efficiency, and, at the time, Laagaj justified it as the Boxster (sales) paying for the parts, and the 911 paying for the development (of both models).

(edited to fix the grammar)
 
Last edited:

Jhenson29

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeremy
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Threads
35
Messages
2,771
Reaction score
4,125
Location
St. Louis, MO
Vehicles
2016 Macan S; 2021 Taycan 4S; 2023 911 GTS Cab
Country flag
You're not renting it. You haven't paid for it. You are picking on an implementation detail, which just happens to be trivially evident in some cases - but if you didn't know, you wouldn't have a problem with it.
I don’t have an issue with paying to unlock it. I have an issue if the only option is an ongoing subscription with no option to just purchase.
 

WasserGKuehlt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
4
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
1,777
Location
WA
Vehicles
4CT, 996C2, MacanS
Country flag
I don’t have an issue with paying to unlock it. I have an issue if the only option is an ongoing subscription with no option to just purchase.
Thanks for the clarification, and that makes sense - but only for products which are fixed/frozen/stateless (and since words fail me, the example would be the ubiquitous seat heating: it's done (once) and shipped - there is nothing that would ever change about it). For products which have or require an active lifecycle post sale, I would contend it's actually quite reasonable to say it's never yours/you have to pay to use, because they are an ongoing cost to the producer. An example here would be level 2 (or higher) autonomous driving capabilities - the capability is not all in the car, that's just the hardware.

And, I left this out in my original post, TBF Porsche seems to be less egregious about this business model than BMW; for assistance systems, they charge an upfront fee and ship a basic level of functionality. I'm not aware of any 'inert' systems (shipped with the car but locked).
Sponsored

 
 




Top