absquatulateThe New Audi A3 Is Amess With In-Car Subscriptions
and so the enshittification continues…
That’s not what that word…you know what, fuck it. I give up. Enshittification now just means “becoming worse” and I won’t be able to stop that.
i guess the enshittification of enshittification is part of the enshittification then?!
Doors this apply to Europe too?
Has this been cracked, so people using these features bypassing the paywall?
Seems like this practice is banned in the EU, yeah.
The Dutch article that they look to doesn’t say what they think it says. In Netherlands there are legal implications to change the amount of power of engine after it is sold.
The article doesn’t is solely about engine power. Not about any other subscription option to enable something.
I also wouldn’t see how a stupid subscription would be banned by some EU law. Aside from e.g. engine power.
From the article:
It should be noted that this subscriptions-for-features model applies to the European-spec A3. An Audi spokesperson declined to comment on whether these in-car subscriptions will also make it to the US when the car goes on sale for 2025.
Thanks.
That leaves the remaining question. Is there a cracker scene oh the automobile market?
You will own nothing and be “happy”.
This shit should be illegal. When you buy a device, you own all the hardware and have every right to use it to the full extent of its physical capabilities. Audi has no right to hold your property hostage!
tsonfeirOn the other hand, my car has a cell connection that allows me to find its position, remotely start, un/lock doors, call for emergency, and detect an accident. That’s not free. It ends up being around $160/y—which I think it a little spendy.
I don’t pay for it, because the only thing I really wanted was the gps position, and I just got an Apple tag for that haha.
Things that legitimately rely on an outside service are different. You understand how those are different, right?
Cruise control doesn’t require Audi to maintain a fucking server for you.
I am ok with a charge for things that require the manufacturer to run a server. But it needs to be related to the actual cost , and that cost is unavoidable. Regarding that last point: my Garmin satnav lets me use my own mobile data to get live traffic information. Car makers don’t give you that option.
Car makers don’t give you that option. Except they do if you have Android Auto. Literally none of that has any bearing whatsoever on subscriptions for cruise control though.
According to the article, apple car play and android auto also require a subscription. So no, they don’t give you the choice.
Subscription to a cell carrier maybe? I’ve used Android Auto in particular a bunch. It connects to my phone and uses Google maps, which is non subscription. Admittedly it’s been a bit, I suppose Google could have crippled it since I last used it, but I have my doubts. My mother uses it regularly and I guarantee she’d be throwing a fit if she needed to pay to do so.
Nope. Read the first line of the article. Apple CarPlay won’t work unless you pay Audi a subscription fee. I’m not surprised, I had an A3 a few years ago and that already had subscriptions built in. But they came with a 3 year license and Audi UK would extend that for a year at a time, free of charge as they had not worked out how to charge for it. They have worked it out now.
I have a different look on this, but it’s just the way i see it: if a manufacturer puts a function in your car that requires them to run a server then that server is on them, they put the function in there not me.
I buy the car, it’s mine in all it’s functionality. If they don’t want that, then don’t put it in.
My car has a 4g cell connection that allow me to find its position, check the battery level, lock it, unlock it, call for emergency, play online music, check for update, set up the interior temperature or seat heating and use it as a WiFi hotpsot in the car.
I’m would have prefered no connection but I’m not paying a dime for it.
Nope.
If you are leasing subscriptions it makes sense. Or for certain features.
I couldn’t care less as long as the option to buy remains. I’d almost certainly end up subbing though on my next lease.
Why do you hate property rights?
Mans dad is the regional manager at Audi of Greater Akron
andrewAssistant to the regional manager.
Yeah, that’s what he said. Assistant regional manager.
How else am I, a humble car artisan (cartisan, if you’re feeling naughty), supposed to continue to generate obscene levels of wealth for my shareholders if I can’t continue to milk customers?
That’s the neat part: you’re not!
Absolutely insane to me that you’d pay $35k for a car, and then pay a subscription for basics like cruise control and phone connectivity. The free market free marketing again.
Why? Why is going to buy it?
zaphYou when the only other option is to use public transport in a country with the worst public transportation of any western nation because instead of calling on the government to do something you said “it doesn’t effect me so why should I care?”
Bold to assume anyone has the money for an audi
If it’s profitable and they get away with it you know every other car company will do the same.
I can’t back to my question. Who is going to buy it?
JustEnoughDucksI wish they had a remind me bot here because I think that this comment will age like milk over the next 5 years.
The answer is: enough people to make it profitable.
Lol. Bold prediction.
I predict you won’t come back to admit you were wrong.
But that’s not the only other option. So why would anyone buy it? No reason to create laws for a non-issue.
A fifth of users in the US rent the car itself via lease mechanisms. You aren’t the target.
Assuming there are discounts the folks leasing will use these options.
Why are you all over this thread shilling for a predatory subscription model by a multibillion dollar corporation? Very strange behavior.
Because this thread is an echo chamber. I know pointing out the target use case is very problematic and odd.
I’m not even saying you’re wrong necessarily, but it’s just very weird behavior to take this aggressive of a pro-corporate stance on something I think everyone should agree is a shitty, unnecessary practice. Regardless of the use case, locking features behind a paywall is always a shitty thing for a multibillion dollar company to do.
People like the option. It’s not weird at all to believe that having different options for owning, leading, and renting allows more access to the vehicle and products.
People like the option to have already installed equipment just not work if they don’t pay the subscription? Like the car already has the features and the company is saying “we included this equipment in the price of your lease/purchase already but if you’d like to use it you have to keep paying more.”
Even in the case of a lease, this is just anti-consumer bullshit
With BMW and Toyota it was cheaper to sub for 3 years than purchase outright. Yes, that’s an attractive option.
That’s not what I said. Good strawman/whataboutism combo, but try harder.
A leased car with those options 5 years ago didn’t cost you a subscription, and now they will. You want the option to what? Pay more for something that you didn’t have to before?
Again, on both the Toyota and BMW, it was less expensive than purchasing the options. You did pay for them before. They were never free.
Not true. Just think about what you’re saying for five seconds and you’ll realize how absurd it is. If you buy a BMW or a Toyota that has an available heated seat subscription for example, whether you pay for it or not, they installed the heated seats. it doesn’t cost BMW or Toyota a cent for you to use your heated seats, it costs them to install them. You really think that you haven’t already paid for those heated seats that they’ve already installed in the car? Get real.
It is far cheaper to produce a single trim with most of the features. Customization costs money. There is a reason Porsches are expensive.
Multiple seat types is literally buildings and lines they need to construct. It’s the same concept as binning chips.
Even if that were true, that still means that everyone is paying for that one single trim, including all the optional features in it. By paying for the subscription, you’re just paying more money, not less.
asbestosYou’re worth blocking
I’m so fucking sorry I pointed out the reality of people purchasing these cars. I’ll promise to never point out any data to you again if you just don’t block me!
A fifth
Surely their target would be the four fifths, then?
Have they excluded that audience? As far as I know you can still purchase the vehicle or feature instead of lease.
Only by upgrading to the MMI navigation system do you get access to the app store. From there, Audi forces you into add-ons like adaptive cruise control or Apple CarPlay and Android Auto for a one-month, six-month, one-year, or three-year subscription. Or you can just purchase any of those features permanently—although Audi doesn’t say for how much.
Sounds like you’re right, but people are still right to be wary of this scheme, as the additional market segmentation will likely push up the cost of buying the feature outright.
I will worry when it happens. The car market is very competitive and vehicle reliability, safety, and feature set has improved significantly in the last 15 years.
OhStopYellingAtMeI was considering an A3 for my next new car. Nope. Not anymore.
krimsonI’m in my second Audi but it will be my last. This subscription shit should be boycotted.
This subscription shit should be prohibited by law.
The real problem here is that the FTC is failing to do its goddamn job.
DacoTacoNot only ftc, the eu is as well…
ripcordIn the US we used to at least be able to reply on CA to pass laws to prevent a lot of this shit, which ended up benefitting most of the rest of the country. But they’ve been real tolerant/lazy too.
Such a shame tbh