Automakers Are Making Basic Car Functions A Costly Subscription Service… Whether You Like It Or Not
from the steering-as-a-service dept
Automakers are increasingly obsessed with turning everything into a subscription service in a bid to boost quarterly returns. We’ve noted how BMW has embraced making heated seats and other features already in your car a subscription service, and Mercedes has been making better gas and EV engine performance something you have to pay extra for — even if your existing engine already technically supports it.
There are several problems here. One, most of the tech they want to charge a recurring fee to use is already embedded in the car you own. And its cost is already rolled into the retail cost you’ve paid. They’re effectively disabling technology you already own, then charging you a recurring additional monthly fee just to re-enable it. It’s a Cory Doctorow nightmare dressed up as innovation.
The other problem: absolutely nobody wants this shit. Surveys have already shown how consumers widely despise paying their car maker a subscription fee for pretty much anything, whether that’s an in-car 5G hotspot or movie rentals via your car’s screen. Now another new study indicates that consumers are unsurprisingly opposed to this new effort to expand subscription features:
A new study from Cox Automotive this week found that 75% of respondents agreed with the statement that “features on demand will allow automakers to make more money.” And 69% of respondents said that if certain features were available only via subscription for a particular brand, they would likely shop elsewhere.
Automakers of course couldn’t give any less of a shit what you want. They’re trying to please Wall Street investors’ often myopic demand for improved quarterly returns, often at any cost. It doesn’t matter that you’re angering customers or harming your brand, the idea that you can promise Wall Street a massive, ever-soaring, additional source of new revenues is all they give two shits about.
The problem, of course, is that this opens up the option for an upstart disruptor to come in and “innovate” simply by not being an annoying asshole. But still, if the industry does this persistently enough, over a long enough time frame, the window of what dictates “acceptable” automaker behavior shifts in their favor, resulting in opinions like this one:
“I don’t think [features on demand] is going away, and also as the cars get more and more sophisticated, get more and more functionality, then it just feels like a natural progression,” Edmund’s Weaver says, also noting he too has gotten used to these add-on features, and their costs, for his personal vehicle.
There’s a whole bunch of additional unintentional consequences of this kind of shift. Right to repair folks will be keen on breaking down these phony barriers, and automakers will increasingly respond by doing things like making enabling tech you already own and paid for a warranty violation.
And, of course, instead of our regulatory gerontocracy getting out ahead of it to protect the consumer from bullshit fees, they’ll incompetently figure out it’s a problem a decade after the fact, then pass terrible laws, likely co-written by the auto industry, making everything decidedly worse.
Filed Under: cars, fees, subscriptions
Comments on “Automakers Are Making Basic Car Functions A Costly Subscription Service… Whether You Like It Or Not”
Let's expand this
Can’t wait for this to be expanded to homes as well.
– “Sorry your monthly subscription for a flushable toilet has expired”.
– “You will be limited to the ‘low’ setting on your microwave until you expand to the ‘ultimate microwave bundle’ option”.
– “Your AC temperate has been set at 80 degrees, please call to activate the ‘Cool Air Setting’ for the next 3 months”
Re:
DON’T GIVE THEM IDEAS, GODDAMN YOU!!!
boycott now
We, the consumers, need to start boycotting BMW and Mercedes now! Regardless of whether the specific model you’re interested in has these egregious anti-features or not.
This has got to start hitting their bottom line as soon as possible. This is just about the only power the consumer has, so let’s use it.
Re:
And Tesla, who expect people to pay extra to use their full battery capacity. Probably most of the other car manufacturers, too. They’ll likely miss the point of a boycott and blame declining sales on environmentalism or something.
Re: Re:
Tesla locking out part of the battery is a slightly different case.
Tesla marketed, sold, and even made a few with the smaller battery size. Then they decided they didn’t want to make the smaller batter packs anymore.
They could have just delivered cars with bigger batteries than had been paid for. Instead they chose to be total dicks and use software to restrict the battery size. And just to make sure they maxed their dick points, they continued to sell the cars with the restrictions.
This should be considered more foreshadowing than anything else.
Re: Re: Re:
What’s amazing is how they manage to get good publicity from this. A hurricane comes and Telsa pushes an update to magically increase the range of the cars. (In reality: to let people use the batteries they already own, and had been lugging around uselessly till then.)
Re: Re: Re:
At least with Tesla there is a minor argument for keeping the battery locked. Batterys work best in the range of 80% to 20%. If you have say 10% of the battery locked then your getting a deal as the battery decays your still going to get your full range for longer.
This is by no means a defense, over provisioning of the battery is common for other auto makers now.
Re: Re: Re:2
That would make sense, and I’ve got my laptop set up to do the same. But Tesla are selling a more expensive full-capacity “version” that’s the exact same hardware. And apparently those who buy the cheaper one can pay several thousand dollars to “upgrade” (i.e. change a software setting) later.
If they were doing this for the benefit of their customers, they’d let the customers override the setting e.g. for a long road trip. Range is, after all, one of the top concerns of potential buyers.
Re:
I’ve been biycotting Mercedes and BMW my whole life, along with a couple of million of my fellow poors. They don’t seem to have taken notice though.
Re:
“start boycotting BMW and Mercedes now”
Start? I never stopped 🙂
“Edmund’s Weaver says, also noting he too has gotten used to these add-on features, and their costs, for his personal vehicle.”
There’s the real problem, dickheads with more money than sense who will pay.
Re:
The question will be whether there are enough rich idiots to keep the business model afloat.
Next up: in-car advertisements “in exchange for a lower cost vehicle”.
Re: Re: Actually like the Kindle
That is certainly going to happen… when you start the in-console ipad, it will first display a minute of ads., and only then you can start the car.
Open source?
Hopefully right to repair laws and open source will rectify this
Re:
Considering what I read out of Cory Doctorow, and how DMCA Section 1201 leads to what he calls “Felony contempt of business model”, I think BMW and Mercedes are taking advantage of it in the most insidious of ways possible.
Re: Re: BMW/Mercedes
..following in the footsteps of HP and other printer manufacturers as well as Tesla.
Re: Re:
The DMCA does not applly to the end user becuase of requuirement that is be for financial gain. It was designed that way so that it does not crminalize half the country.
Financial gain means making money.
that is why, for example, it is not illegal for an end user to bypass geofencing on web sites, becuase that could not be construed as being for financial gain.
One example is when I digitized all my VHS tapes into files long ago, and I am glad I did when my tapes got stolen when I got burglarized.
Some tapes with Macovision would be copied using video recording software on my PC. becuause I was doing that for my own personal use, I was not violating the criminal statues of the DMCA because I was doing it for pereonal use and not financial gain.
Also, the DMCA does not apply in Mexico, so any shops in Mexico that that were to hack the car for any Gringo that took their car there would not be subject to prosecution in the United states, as the DMCA has no jurisdiction in Mexico.
And Gringos like me would also be not subject to prosecution under the DMCA because the requirements for financial gain not be met, on top of the fact the DMCA is no jurisdiction in Mexico.
When I wanted to get one phone unlocked a friend gave me so I could chnage it from Verizon to Mexico, I drove the 500 miles to Mexico to a phone shop that unlocked for me, no questions asked.
The DMCA did not apply because I went to Rosarito to get it done, and since I was doing that for my own personal use, the DMCA did not apply since I was not doing it for the purpose of making money.
Re: Re: Re:
Another thing about that was when I was doing online sports broadcasting and went to countries that re\quired you to use a sim card from their local providers.
North Korea is an example. Before travelling to or through the the USA (my station was in Australia and I am a USA/Australia dual national) I would put the original sim card back in then wipe and reset my phone so any evidence that I ublocked my pbone to use it in DPRK would never be found if my device was examined by CBP upon entering the United States.
And I did not break any laws doing that to prevent my use of an unlocked phone, while I was in the DPRK, from ever being found.
Hiding the fact that I ublocked my phone to use a North Korean sim card, from US Customs did not break any laws in the United States.
Re: Re: Re:
Could you post A. an excerpt of DMCA 1201 or B. an exemption from the Library of Congress which supports your claim? I’ve never heard that the DMCA doesn’t apply unless there’s financial gain involved. If your claim were true, wouldn’t I be allowed to bypass the DRM on the ebooks I buy from Amazon?
Re: Re: Re:2
In order for the felony statues to apply, you have to be doing it for financial gain.
So. going to Mexico to get my phone unlocked so that I coupld use it in North Korea with their sim cards (required by North Korean law), I would not committing any felony crime under the DMCA because I would not doing it for any kind of financial gain.
As ling as you do it for your own private use, that does not involve financial gain, meaning making money, you are not committing any felony crime.
Keeping in mind...
That the main reason they can hold off consumer-oriented disruptors is the anti-cracking elements of the DMCA. Yet another instance of the IP protections of the DMCA being used pretextually by manufacturers to create artificial barriers in the market.
Without the DMCA the technical barrier to entry for a disruptor would be to reverse engineer the encryption and engine controls to modify existing vehicles. With the DMCA in place, they most likely have to setup a hardware manufacturing supply chain for at least the engine computers.
Re:
And for any encrypted sensor modules, and then develop the management software from scratch.
Re: Abetted by the Librarian of Congress
Unfortunately, the DMCA exemption for auto repair has provided the roadmap to automakers by including the phrase “except for programs accessed through a separate subscription service” in describing with vehicle programs may be “cracked” for purposes of diagnosis, repair or modification. As long as a particular feature/function of a vehicle is accessed through a separate subscription service, the software behind that feature/function cannot be accessed without violating copyright law. As a result of this “walk this way” hint provided by the Librarian of Congress, we should expect that more and more features of vehicles will be behind paywalls. And, as most right-to-repair efforts are focused on state laws, Federal copyright law will always prevail thanks to the preemption doctrine!
Re:
However, that part of the DMCA only applies if done for financial gain, meaning making money
Fed Up with Fru-Fru Anyway
A few years ago, I bought what will either be my last vehicle or my last non-vintage vehicle. All of the added crap is just more stuff to break and more distraction from driving. If I have to get another car, I’ll go to one of the consignment shops where car restorers sell to fun their next restoration projects.
“as the cars get more and more sophisticated, get more and more functionality”
All I need in a vehicle is to get from point A to point B.
As vehicle manufacturers continue the unsophisticated greed, the consumer gets less functionality.
Will a steering wheel that does not fall off also be a subscription service?
Re:
Steering wheels are an indulgence. You can do just as well with a spanner.
Pretty soon the car itself will be a subscription service. “Oh, you thought you owned the car? No, you just bought a license for that particular vehicle. You still need to pay $20/month to actually be able to drive it. Any any features like the radio? Another $5/month.”
Re:
In California, this is sort of a thing if you want a hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle. New ones are lease-only, and there’s a hefty fuel subsidy. Right now, there’s only one vehicle, the Toyota Mirai, but Hyundai will offer one or two models plus a semitrailer.
Re:
Probably the most effective contribution car manufacturers will make to fighting climate change. Decrease the number of people willing to have their own vehicle.
Re: Re:
FTFY.
Makes you wonder though: there’s already car rental and leasing and rideshare programs. Possibly this will push everything to car manufacturer-run rideshares, with the option to be the sole customer for a vehicle if you pay extra?
Re:
We used have a good version of that, called public transportation.
Re: Re:
NYC still does.
Re:
If they do that, just take the car down to Mexico and get that circumvented. I could see a market for shops in Mexico to that if you have to pay for all that stuff.
The DMCA crminal statutes do not apply to the end user because of the requirement that it be for financial gain. Taking your car to Mexico and having someone down there hack it to circumvent that would not rise to the level of financial gain. Doing it for personal use cannot be construed as being for financial gain.
Financial gain means making money, so personal use cannot be argued as fiancnai gain.
Add to thqt the fact that the DMCA does not apply in Mexico. Shops in Mexico could do that and would be not subject to prosecution in the United States.
Just like with Vista and earlier versions of Windows where cracks were aqvaiable to bypass prodict activation, very handy if you have to put in new hardware. When I did that to avoid product activation if I put a new component in, I was not violating the DMCA anti circumvention states because I was doing that for my personal use and it was, therefore, not being done to financial gain.
Re: Re:
Hang on. You may not be violating the criminal provisions of the DMCA if it’s not for financial gain, but you’re still violating the civil provisions and could get sued for actual or statutory damages.
Warranty violations could be illegal?
Isn’t making this a “warranty violation” a violation of the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act?
I know that the automotive industry gets a lot of their own special treatment but… Surely this (or something similar) would apply here? I mean, “consumer rpoduct” means “any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes (including any such property intended to be attached to or installed in any real property without regard to whether it is so attached or installed)” but I’d think that an automobile would fit in that definition, no?
Re:
Yes, automobiles are covered by the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. If I recall correctly, they were one of the major targets. I can’t find a reference for the intent, but lots of sites talk about its applicability to cars and aftermarket parts; some even call it a federal “lemon law”.
(The “a warranty violation” link in this Techdirt story leads to another story that makes no reference to the word “warranty”, so I have no idea what false claims manufacturers may have been making.)
Hack it.
Its your car. IANAL but I dont think you can be charged for hacking something you own.
Re:
DMCA §1201 disagrees with you.
Re: Hack it.
IANAL either, but I beg to differ. In many cases you certainly can be charged, seriously fined, and/or jailed for hacking something that you own. Since someone else has mentioned/quoted Cory Doctorow in this thread, I will not feel bad about quoting him here as well:
‘It’s not uncommon for manufacturers to have commercial preferences that are at odds with the interests of owners of products. Your auto company would really prefer that you only get your stuff fixed by its authorised mechanics because then it can charge more to mechanics to join its authorised mechanics programme. But historically, those commercial preferences were not enforceable as a matter of law. You had to entice people to do the things that the manufacturer wanted you to do rather than force them to. The laws that protect DRM… make it a crime to tamper with or remove DRM even if you’re doing it for a legal purpose. Even if the thing that you’re doing is otherwise completely allowed, if you have to remove the DRM, it’s not allowed. This has been an opportunity for companies to convert their commercial preferences to legal rights.’
Now I understand that the above quote is related to right to repair, and not vehicle features as subscription services, but I suspect that Mr. Doctorow’s point is a valid in this instance as well. The auto manufacturers are almost certain to assert that while you own the vehicle, that you do not own the rights to the software that runs it, and if you hack it, you are in “felony violation of their business model.”
I am not a Doctorow evangelist, but he has a lot of very well considered writing about this very issue. If you’re interested, just google Doctorow and “unauthorized bread.”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Switch Gears
There’s now a small industry for defeating the pollution controls on diesel vehicles in order to get better performance. While I don’t particularly support this due to the environmental concerns, my hope is that they can be repurposed to defeat the subscription services.
Re:
I’m afraid not while the auto industry has such a lobbying hold on DC. While the DMCA, as currently regulated by the Librarian of Congress, does have what looks like a nice exemption for “hacking” intended to diagnose, repair or modify a motor vehicle, this exemption has an explicit exception for subscription services. So, if you modify the software installed in a vehicle to enable a feature that would otherwise only be available via a paid subscription, you will have violated federal law (DMCA 1201). Since this federal law preempts state laws such as right-to-repair, state-level laws regarding right-to-repair won’t help either.
Carmakers still can’t remove my money from my pocket though. If we as consumers allow this ‘subscription madness’ to continue, then we deserve what we get.
Stop bending over for shinny things!
Re:
Again, fuck downloading cars.
Download a bike instead. Or workable public transport.
Re: Re:
Realize that public transit, workable or shitty, is mostly operating costs (i.e., shit you have to pay for all the time in order to keep it). And 70% of operating costs are labor; at least 50% is the driver alone.
Re: Re: Re:
And it’s still cheaper than a car lease.
Still can’t be too sure about created jobs, though…
Re: Re: Re:2
For the transit system?
It comes down to two choices: Do you want the transit system employees on the public ledger or off the public ledger?
Transit will always be a labor-intensive endeavor. Let me pre-empt any discussions of driverless vehicles coming to save the day. Bus drivers are a vital resource beyond just piloting the vehicle; they offer customer service, help secure wheelchair passengers, monitor safety in and out of the bus … for the relatively high compensation they earn, they are also very productive for the work they do.
There are also the invisible front-line workers: the mechanics, cleaners and call center workers who are also needed to ensure orderly operation of the fleet.
These workers will require a bureaucracy to allow them to work effectively.
The caveat is that public employees’ costs will always outgrow ridership productivity. Fares will never be able to cover the kind of high-frequency, high-ridership service riders want or need. In Asia, transit systems achieve profitability by also being in the development and property management game. (The land and buildings are always much more profitable and serve to stabilize the transit systems’ operating finances.)
The other alternative is to outsource operations to a private contractor. The costs are lower because the wages are lower. That’s it. Same work as a public employee, at much lower wages and worse benefits. And yeah, there’s always the risk that the tender changes hands and the entire workforce has to be laid off and re-apply with the new contractor.
The purported cost savings of contractors have diminished over the years. For one thing, in the U.S. and Europe, there’s a cartel of private companies. In the U.S., Transdev (which late last year bought competitor First Transit) and MV Transportation dominate the private market. Two other French companies, Keolis (which is the French high-speed rail operator) and RATP (which is Paris’ bus and rail system) are also minor players.
With a shortage of transit workers that is now global, the cost basis for private contractors is converging upon public employees and not offering the same bargain.
Re: Re: Re:3
In Singapore, the government does both, outsource it to a “private contractor”, who also do land and property management.
…It was so profitable they managed to cut all sorts of maintenance on the public transit infrastructure for over 20 years before the whole thing started breaking down.
Re:
You don’t have the ‘choose’ to bend yet. All the varied makers can just implement these programs.
You’ll pay for the heated seats that were factory installed and disabled in software Eventually, or the bluetooth options that were greyed out in the infotainment screen. Something. Eventually, as long as the manufacturers are not stopped, you will see things like this across the board.
Re: Can't remove money from my pocket ...
I think that I hear Elon Musk, Mary Barra and Jim Farley singing “Hold My Beer” in three-part harmony!
Seriously, you make a very good point. We have the power to quash this nonsense if only we will use it.
Fuel Economy As A Service
I would tend to think that paying a subscription for fuel economy would be a diminishing source of income due to increasing minimum fuel economy standards. This would prompt lawmakers to make increased fuel economy retroactive where applicable.
Optional
It’s funny how many times I’ll be driving along and see another car not signal and think, wow, an expansive car like that doesn’t come with directionals! Now it may be coming true.
Cuba, USA
then it’s about to get like Cuba up in this piece…classic, analog-ish, pre-subscription-type cars everywhere
Bad ideas spread like a fungus
Pretty sure I’ll get a text any day now from my pacemaker manufacturer…
hand writing...
I can see it now:
subscription based parachutes
subscription based GPU’s
subscription based water…wait A MINUTE!
Simple solution: third party aftermarket onboard computer or custom OS. Replace the existing system that nickel & dimes you to death with one that has all features unlocked for one up-front purchase.
Modding their software violates your license, but just like they can’t stop you from installing Linux on your home computer or replacing the monitor they sold you with a better one, hardware is subject to first sale doctrine.
Re:
I can’t believe that we’re forced to hope that the insurance people take a long, hard look at this nonsense and go “Jesus fucking Christ, we can’t insure THIS”…
Re:
It really isn’t.
No biggie
“…automakers will increasingly respond by doing things like making enabling tech you already own and paid for a warranty violation.”
This isn’t the threat they think it is. We are, after all, talking about Mercedes and BMW, whose products are generally good enough they really shouldn’t need a warranty claim.
Re:
A colleague used to own a BMW, traded it for a Merc …
he had troubles with both of them and used a lot of four letter words too. Just sayin.
Not so simple solution
As simple as installing a Linux distro in your pocket computer.
As long as there’s no access to the drivers that control most devices in your car you’ll find it hard to install a different, working OS.
Crippleware
Remember when Intel made 486 CPUs with floating-point co-processors, then charged more for the ones that were enabled?
Good times.
Re:
The era of the dongle. Oh, the memories.
Re:
That was more a case of selling those where the floating point processor was out of spec for less.
Enshittification of restaurants and hotels
The analog version of this enshittification is the sock-on charges you’re seeing in sit-down restaurants and hotel bookings.
Restaurants (not the no-tipping ones) have begun the “we added a X% charge to cover employee healthcare/kitchen staff/Because Reasons” rather than just raise the price of the food and/or alcohol. Customers who want the charges removed can do so, but the penalty falls on the waitstaff or front of house. Workers can be fired, at worst, or have the charge taken from tips.
Hotels do the “resort fee” nonsense where the additional costs cover the common areas and amenities of the property like HOA dues for a condo. Hotels started this when guests migrated to online booking in the early days of the internet. Because the internet allows for comparison shopping to get lower rates, and there was downward pressure on prices, hotels just decided to unbundle amenities and sock on the resort fees because guests were enticed by the lower initial price.
Luxury automakers. If you’re dumb enough to spend the price of my flat on a car you deserve whatever fleecing you get.
Re:
Luxury filters down, however. Let Lexus, Infiniti, Acura and Genesis win with this performance-as-a-subscription gambit, the same principles will in a decade or so filter down to more quotidian Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Hyundai/Kia models, respectively.
Here we keep going
Looks like we need to start supporting Right to Use legislation as a companion to Right to Repair efforts. The medical equipment aspect of Right to Repair comes to mind. “I do like to stand up on occasion so I’d like to subscribe to the Vertical Enhancement Package for my artificial knees please.”
Mexico
I could see auto shops in Mexico provide services to circumvent that.
Fir the end user the DMCA anti circumvention statutes do not apply as it would not be for personal gain.
Just like the fact that phone manufacturers seal their phones so you cannot replace the battery. I found out I can go down to Mexico where any shop can break the seal, replace the battery and then seal it back up again.
The DMCA duez not apply in Mexico,so I will be able to take my phone down there and get that and get that done and not violate the DMCA because that would not be for financial gain as well as the DMCA having no jurisdiction in Mexico
Re: Re:Mexico
Your suggestion:
-better prevent over-the-air updates from your car’s manufacturer
-would most definitely void the car warranty (that you paid for), so there’s gotta be a fix for the “lack of warranty” issue
Re: Re:
It is possible that the captains of industry have over played the warranty card.
Better not do that, as it will void your warranty!!1111.
Your warranty is about to expire. Oh Noes!
Automobile manufacturers are becoming Karens. I wanna speak to the car warranty manager!
You wake up and are bombarded with bullshit from the tv
get in the car, bombarded with bullshit from the car
at work are bombarded by bullshit from management
go home, rinse, repeat.
Re: Re:
Over he air updates could be foiled by jamming what radio frequency is used. That kind of jammer would not vioate FCC rules, but might violate theft of service laws in some states.
And how are they going to know you went to Mexico to say, unlock AM radio functionality, which some automakers want to put bedhind a paywall, if they have AM radio at all, which is why there is a bill in Oongress now to prevent AM radio from being locked bhind a paywall.
Where I live is only 500 miles drive to Mexico, so if AM radio is locked behind a paywall in my car, I would not be breaking either the CFAa or DMCA by going down to Mexico and having hackers cirumnvent the paywall for AM radio.
First, for something to violate the CFAA you have to have used an illegally obtained password for the felony statutes to apply.
Second, the DMCA anti circumvewntion laws only apply if you do it for financial gain. Going to Mexico and and getting the radio hacked to unlock AM radio functionality would not be finacial gain, becuase I would not be doing it to make money.
Third, neither the DMCA or the CFAA have any jurisdiction in Mexico, even if you are a US citizen.
Depoending on what frequency is used for over the air updates, you can jam it without violating FCC rules.
The only frequency ranges illegal to jam inthe US are
530-1710 Khz
25-174 Mhz
401-512 Mhz
800-900 Mhz
1227 Mhx
1576 Mhz
1700-1900 MHz
2199-2200 Mhz
2300-2400 Mhz
As long is whatever frequency is used to receive over the air upadates is not in any of those frequency ranges, jamming it does freak FCC rules.
While you might possibly be breaking state theft of service laws by corumventing the paywall, you would be be breaking any federal laws.
It is the same thing when people delete their cookies so they can continue to read an unlimited number of articles from some newspapers. That does not break either the CF
We are reaching a point where cars are more of a burden than a convenience for many of us. Ever try to park in a big city? Renting a spot to safely keep your car on a daily basis can cost as much as an apartment does in a more rural location, and the plethora of alternative transportation options render vehicle ownership a frivolous luxury. There is ALWAYS another way to get from “A to B”, after all. The solutions to our problems are right in front of us, but we need to learn to ignore the shiny objects that the corporate World keeps dangling under our noses to keep us hooked on their death spiral. Their aim is to grind EVERYTHING down into a pile of radioactive DUST in the name of the Holy Profit. Time for We The People to JUST SAY NO.
The lesson to be learned from this “Fast and Furious” era is what happened to Paul Walker. Move too fast, and you end up no more than a puddle on the pavement…
(RIP)
https://www.buysonofit.us/
There are several problems here. One, most of the tech they want to charge a recurring fee to use is already embedded in the car you own