Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--

There is an old saying: the hardcore will eventually pay the price.

In July 2022, BMW launched subscription services based on hardware functions, such as seat heating and steering wheel heating, in the Connected Drive store in South Korea.

The seat heating function can be used for free for a month, but users will have to pay an extra $406 (2732 yuan) to buy out the entire feature; the specific subscription fee is about $18 (121 yuan) per month. the annual package is $176and the three-year package is $283 (1904 yuan).

Who can bear to spend money on using the functions of a car when you buy it? As a result, BMW was severely rushed by the majority of users.

BMW, which has been criticized by countless users, has bowed its head and announced that it will no longer charge users for hardware-based features such as seat heating subscriptions. BMW is now more focused on subscription forms of software and service-related products, such as driving assistance and parking assistance.

It is understandable to charge for driving assistance and parking assistance. But a large number of domestic new energy brands, and even Tesla are free standard, how should you deal with it?

But in any case, manufacturers who do not comply with consumers have to pay a price. After hitting the south wall and seeing the "coffin", BMW has learned to be clever this time.

However, charging services based on hardware functions are still not completely extinct in the BBA array, not to mention seat heating. Some manufacturers even charge for remote control of mobile phones and customized navigation systems in vehicles, as well as hardware-based subscription charges such as active rear wheel steering. I won't say who it is.

There is also a car brand that continues the spirit of charging for hardware functions, with 1999 yuan for ventilation and 1299 yuan for heating for the front seats. In response, the vice president of sales, marketing and after-sales of the global company of the brand said that because the hardware of the smart is pre-embedded, the cost of production and installation does not calculate the retail price of the whole vehicle, and prefers to call it a "flexible choice".

Okay, so, on the contrary, the consumers owe the manufacturers?

If you spend money on hardware, why should you spend more money? For the brand's charging service based on hardware function, the unified caliber of users must be rejected-the car bought with money is supported by the hardware itself, so why spend money to unlock it?

This is the case with manufacturers, and BBA is aimed at the relatively rich, relying on a lot of personalized outfits and paid services to harvest, known as "humanized customization". For the big boss, these subscription fees are used as vehicle maintenance fees, and it is reasonable to spend money for services. However, there are also many ordinary people who consume BBA, and it is difficult to support the long-term subscription expenditure.

It should be noted that this extra expense is not to get a better experience, but to "unlock" the level of experience that the vehicle should have. Now that you have spent money on the corresponding hardware, there is no reason to spend any more money.

If you buy a smartphone, you can enjoy all the functions. Why should you spend money to "unlock" a car that is becoming more and more electronic?

In addition to users protesting against this unreasonable charging behavior, some technicians take action directly. Some hackers directly declare war on car companies and will conquer their paid subscription systems so that all users can use them free of charge. In addition to hardware unlocking, BMW has charged subscribers a subscription fee of $80 a year for CarPlay and $300 for a buyout.

People have mixed comments on this kind of service, and some people think that car companies have embedded the corresponding hardware in their vehicles, which should be free, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a car, and have to bear an extra "installment fee". No one can stand it. Those who hold the opposite view believe that subscription services can be launched on demand and can reduce the cost of using cars to a certain extent.

If it is to save the cost of using a car, then Xiaotong suggests that manufacturers simply make optional configurations such as seat heating and steering wheel heating, so that consumers can think clearly before buying a car, which can also save money. To put it simply, manufacturers either do not match it, and let consumers make good use of it.

Xiaotong is very worried that the car companies that take software services as the main body of revenue will further reduce the profit space of hardware, at the same time, software charges will be intensified. If we don't give the manufacturer "krypton gold", then the car we get will end up with only the most basic driving experience, and everything else will cost money to use. This is not because the car does not support it, but because the manufacturer wants to make such money.

For the issue of car charges, different manufacturers have different views. Some manufacturers think that they need to highlight the tonality of their brands from the level of consumption, while others adhere to the route of large quantities and full management, giving them when they buy a car, and never charge money in the later stage. Li Xiang, the ideal car CEO born in Auto Home, has years of experience with consumers and knows exactly what consumers need.

In his view, autopilot or auxiliary driving of a car is not a value-added function, but a basic function contained in a car and should not be charged. To put it simply, all the functions attached to the car's own hardware are basic capabilities and should not be charged.

At one point, Xiaopeng announced a paid upgrade to the XPILOT 3.0 intelligent driving assistance system, but soon gave up the charge and changed to an all-department standard. Perhaps in Xiaopeng's view, the premise of software charges must at least have sufficient ownership, and users' dependence on intelligent driving assistance is high enough before value-added charges will be possible.

But this does not mean that big BBA have a reason to harvest users, let alone regard "personalized service" as a place to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. Luxury brands rely on choice of clothes and more money to set off the noble income increase formula, which has long been unworkable in the context of today's consumption. If you want to create value-added income, the service must be "everyone has nothing" or "everyone has my excellence".

Software charges may be more popular than hardware? In fact, not most manufacturers take hardware functions as charging items, and automakers whose hardware profit margins are narrowing are mostly focused on software services. This does not affect the core experience of a car, and users also have the choice to get a better experience, which is actually more reasonable from a "eating phase" point of view.

Xiaomi has also been exposed that its hardware profit margin is less than 1%, which means it is difficult to make money from hardware unless automakers rely on the perfect supply chain to control and scale, squeeze out as much hardware profit as possible.

Few manufacturers can achieve this degree, and the pattern of "a hundred schools of thought contend" of new energy vehicle brands will be replaced by headline sooner or later. How can automobile brands survive from the fierce competition? first of all, we must show greater sincerity from the hardware part. Fee-based items focus on software services, on the premise of "improving the user experience".

Manufacturers will not pre-bury the hardware in a car without calculating any cost. whether consumers use it or not, the hardware will already be installed in the vehicle, which will have no effect on the so-called cost. Is it difficult for the hardware function to be powered on? does the manufacturer have any additional "cost"? So the money given by the user is just to get the experience that the car should have, which is better than nothing.

Charging for software services may look better than tough hardware charges. Similar to the member subscription of the video platform, Krypton can watch higher picture quality and more exclusive film and television resources. Without krypton gold, the core experience will not change, which is the meaning of software charging. Xiaomi, which is good at building software ecology, may be more proactive in this respect.

So there is nothing traditional car companies can do about it? The answer is no. Before they have a perfect software charging ecology, they can continue to deepen their customization of hardware options, or start with services such as assisted driving and self-driving. There are many opportunities to make money, and manufacturers have plenty of ways to make money.

It's just that in any case, from the consumer's point of view, except for insurance, energy replenishment and parking, Xiaotong does not want to generate any car fees.

This article comes from the official account of Wechat: ID:dianchetong233, author: shopkeeper of Tea Governor

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.