Tesla CEO Elon Musk announces FSD subscription coming in 2021

[dizmo]

You're so young that by the time it really impacts you, the landscape will be drastically different, and in your lifetime you'll probably see car ownership as a norm end entirely. I'm not entirely sure why you'd be preparing financially for things like that at age 15 anyway. Worry about it when you're ready to buy.

 

Something that's software based makes sense for a subscription based service. I see absolutely no problem with this. The ability to have it or not is a massive advantage over having to go purchase a vehicle that does or doesn't have it, should you decide later on that you do want it. It's like Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. Cars without it can be a pain to have it retrofitted into, if it's possible at all.

 

It really all comes down to price.

On 12/20/2020 at 10:47 AM, MadAnt250 said:

Agree.

The big problem is that they think the consumers are becoming more stupid and it is kinda true. I here more and more people say "That's the way it is, just accept it", I say, NO, that is BS, simple luxury features in a car should not be locked out by software and a subscription service

 

P.S. If more auto companies start locking out heated seats, then I will let people know how to get that function back, because they do not need to be controlled by one of the car's computers in order to operate. 

It makes more sense to have everything installed on the vehicle and then activate what's purchased, both from a manufacturing aspect, and an available unit aspect. If you have a lot of options, and not every vehicle has them, it's much, much harder to source the appropriate inventory for every buyer. If someone wants 8/15 options, and that particular vehicle isn't available, you can lose the sale. Having it so every vehicle is a potential match save for color, and you're a lot better off.

On 12/20/2020 at 6:16 PM, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Imagine if in the aerospace industry you had to pay a monthly or annual subscription for the autopilot. Mid-flight, your subscription has expired and now pilots are gonna have to fly manual for the rest of that 13 hour flight. 

Something they should probably be able to do anyway, no?

Some smaller aircraft are already getting something very similar to FSD where they will plan a route, communicate intentions with different ATCs, and land all on their own during an emergency. It's only a matter of time before pilots literally do nothing but sit there.

On 12/20/2020 at 7:40 PM, Mling said:

So I'll be able to drink and drive soon? I dont want heated seats. I want chilled cup holders.

I mean, technically you wouldn't be driving...

But most places have no open liquor in a motor vehicle laws.

On 12/20/2020 at 8:01 PM, Belgarathian said:

I don't see a problem with the subscription model as a way of reducing the barrier to entry for advanced features that are constantly under development. I do, however, have an issue with BMW's approach to making heated seats, Apple CarPlay, and AWD systems subscription based when they're not adding any value whatsoever overtime and the significant costs are already included in the vehicle (unless the vehicle is discounted to reflect the fact that they're not included in the original purchase).

I'd think the initial costs of the vehicle would be higher until people got used to the model, but having a lower entry price would be what they'd probably go for. I'm all for subscription services for software based things, like CarPlay, since you might not need both. Same with heated/cooled seats, as you rarely need both. It really comes down to costs. If it's $5/month for heated or cooled seats, I think it'd make more than enough sense to go with a subscription based model, since options like that are usually quite expensive.

On 12/20/2020 at 11:35 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

Just curious, have you tried the FSD in a Tesla?  (Not the autopilot, but the actual FSD)?  [I don't own a Tesla, but have been able to try...it's actually pretty neat and I can see why some people would dish out $10k for it].  Based on the YouTube videos as well, it looks like the new Beta FSD is performing a lot better as well...in a decent amount of cases being able to go from point A to point B without human intervention.  (Also...I know a fair amount of timid/not great drivers that would love having the car being able to do a lot of the heavy lifting for them)...especially parking.

 

If it's like $200 for a month, I could totally get why people might subscribe to it for road trips/month long holidays

 

Yea, if they continue having the purchase option, I really don't care as much.  Although, if they remove purchase options, and move towards subscription then I'll be the first one to be lighting the torches and picking up the pitch-forks.

 

Way to make me feel old   "simple features" (remembers when paying for A/C was a luxury...my first car didn't have A/C).  For myself, I am still on the fence about the heated seat debate.  On one hand, I get that it's already in the vehicle and just software locked...on the other hand, my current vehicle doesn't have heated seats and it costs too much to retrofit it into the vehicle.  If the cost of adding in "heated seats" in terms of bomb cost would be the same as having a separate SKU (in the sense that you have to have different manufacturing lines, so the cost of supporting a different SKU would cost money), then I am okay with it.  Even if it does add a bit to the cost, I think personally I am okay with it (again, going back to my argument...I bought my current car and didn't realize how much I missed having heated seats until it was too late).  We'll see though.  If they start taking away features though (or rather start selling vehicles at the same price but less features that you will then have to purchase, then I think it will flip my vote)

I haven't seen the FSD even in videos, but I hope it's miles better than the auto pilot; from what I've seen and read, GM's autopilot is actually considerably better than Tesla's. You wouldn't (shouldn't) need FSD to park though, that's a feature on many, many other vehicles already.

 

Even at $200, depending on it's level of autonomy, isn't a bad price. Consider how much it'd cost for a chauffeur.

 

Retrofitting heated seats actually isn't that expensive. It's just a pad, switch, and some wiring. Eventually, having 2 models (one luxury, one base) and having all features on both would likely make a lot more sense, and I think would come with savings you were hinting at. Not necessarily with BOM (bill of manufacturing) costs, but also with not having vehicles sit on lots and not sell because they didn't have the exact feature set the buyer wanted.

On 12/21/2020 at 12:50 AM, Spindel said:

Thank you everyone that thinks music streaming is a good idea, you guys started this...

Streaming, if you listened to music at an even moderate rate, is significantly cheaper than buying albums.

On 12/21/2020 at 5:31 AM, Ein0r said:

With a little luck the subscription payment will count towards the purchase price, but I doubt it. 

That wouldn't really make any sense.

On 12/21/2020 at 5:46 AM, kewtz said:

From a US economic perspective, this service is the difference between something being accessible or not.
Let's not forget that many (read: most) Americans live paycheck to paycheck. A subscription based model appears more attainable or reachable compared to buying it outright.

As the price of the car itself comes down and becomes more attractive for the "common" buyer, a subscription may make sense to that buyer.

 

Also remember this is a good method for Tesla to standardize the manufacturing process.

If you consider that car brands can have up to 8 different trim levels for 1 model, Tesla has a single trim level that fits everyone.

Imagine buying a base model that you can "pay to upgrade" over time as your financial situation allows it.

 

I think it's crazy that you can get the car you want (maybe not need)...and upgrade its features over time versus having to buy a new car - which is a financial mess.

Agreed, this is something that a lot of people overlook. Having only one model greatly reduces complexity.

One has to wonder how long it'll be until you can actually have a base platform you can upgrade over time without requiring new hardware; sensor tech etc is still advancing pretty rapidly.

On 12/21/2020 at 7:02 AM, jagdtigger said:

Its painful but it is the reality so you just have to deal with it. I have to face this every year when there are xmas sales and the inflated prices before it so the discounted price is the same as it was before they pumped it up. Guess how many ppl noticed this? Well the huge line before the checkout tells me none.....

Not everything is inflated, and that might be something more related to your region of the world. It's not something that's common in NA, at least.

On 12/21/2020 at 7:39 AM, HarryNyquist said:

Don't give them an inch. Buying a tesla is easily 50,000+ USD. If that's not enough to cover their R&D for this feature, then the cars are priced too low.

 

It's very John Deere-y. The mile they take will be disabling your car if you put an non-OEM oil filter and non-OEM oil in your car at a non-OEM shop or on your own.

It's not, though. The Model 3 is significantly cheaper. It'd be quite something for them to charge you for an oil filter....considering it doesn't use one

On 12/21/2020 at 8:04 AM, AvMaverick said:

Not cars. I feel this will extend to everything else too, from housing to other goods that you purchase today.

How would that work for housing?

On 12/21/2020 at 8:21 AM, Dedayog said:

Right, stop pre-worrying.

 

It won't, since those industries are pretty well set in how they work.  People have been touting pay-for-play for emergency services (fire, police, etc) and access to other things for decades, not going to happen.

 

Tesla is a company innovating on a small scale.  The rest of the world is doing just fine without him.

Really? Where have they been touting paying for emergency services like that? The costs would be astronomical and it really wouldn't work at all.

On 12/21/2020 at 12:16 PM, jagdtigger said:

And this is where you are wrong:

Even if there is no actual gear shifting it still needs oil, and oil needs to be replaced periodically because it will get worn out and loose most of its lubrication properties. Everyone saying otherwise is an incompetent fool. Same goes for the differential.

You're kind of moving the goal posts of your argument though, aren't you? Having to replace the oil in an electric motor is drastically different than having to do regular oil changes. It's not a regular maintenance item.

[Ein0r]

2 hours ago, dizmo said:

 

That wouldn't really make any sense. (Detracting the subscription fees from a possible future purchase price for that customer)

 

Why not? It's just another incentive to buy the full license. If a sub costs 100€ - 200€ and you used it 10 times then you already spent 1k+ € on it.  And maybe you are more likely to fork over 9k €, or less at some point if  you keep buying the sub, than paying 10k + subscription fees in total.

[dalekphalm]

3 hours ago, Ein0r said:

Why not? It's just another incentive to buy the full license. If a sub costs 100€ - 200€ and you used it 10 times then you already spent 1k+ € on it.  And maybe you are more likely to fork over 9k €, or less at some point if  you keep buying the sub, than paying 10k + subscription fees in total.

I mean... if you're subscribing to the service instead of buying it outright, and that goes towards the outright cost... why not just buy the feature and add that onto the financing?

 

It would ultimately depend on how long it would take for the subscription service to equal the purchase price.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 hours ago, Ein0r said:

Why not? It's just another incentive to buy the full license. If a sub costs 100€ - 200€ and you used it 10 times then you already spent 1k+ € on it.  And maybe you are more likely to fork over 9k €, or less at some point if  you keep buying the sub, than paying 10k + subscription fees in total.

For the same reason you can't deduct rent payments from the price of a house.

If you have a lease contract with a residual purchase value, sure, but the monthly fee will reflect that. But what you are proposing is basically buying something in installments while reserving the right to give it back at any point, and immediately be discharged of any remaining payment. Every renter would be an owner in a finite number of months. That is not the why they'll introduce a subscription model. The goal is for you to pay forever.

[dizmo]

3 hours ago, Ein0r said:

Why not? It's just another incentive to buy the full license. If a sub costs 100€ - 200€ and you used it 10 times then you already spent 1k+ € on it.  And maybe you are more likely to fork over 9k €, or less at some point if  you keep buying the sub, than paying 10k + subscription fees in total.

9k is an incredibly long stretch from 1k. If you went into it going monthly and you're a year in chances are you don't plan on keeping the car long enough for purchasing it to make a difference. The average person only owns their car for 6 years.

[wanderingfool2]

5 hours ago, dizmo said:

Retrofitting heated seats actually isn't that expensive. It's just a pad, switch, and some wiring. Eventually, having 2 models (one luxury, one base) and having all features on both would likely make a lot more sense, and I think would come with savings you were hinting at. Not necessarily with BOM (bill of manufacturing) costs, but also with not having vehicles sit on lots and not sell because they didn't have the exact feature set the buyer wanted.

hmm, I think we are on the same page about this.  Yea, I wasn't necessarily referring to the BOM cost, but the fact of maintaining different SKU's (and the fact that they would have to dedicate a line to making lower cost ones etc.).  My dealership quoted me like $1200, which is far less than the $300 from Tesla.

 

5 hours ago, dizmo said:

haven't seen the FSD even in videos, but I hope it's miles better than the auto pilot; from what I've seen and read, GM's autopilot is actually considerably better than Tesla's. You wouldn't (shouldn't) need FSD to park though, that's a feature on many, many other vehicles already.

I wouldn't really take what you read about autopilot/FSD from media outlets at face value...even the car publishers have grossly misrepresented Tesla's FSD (literally there is one critic who gave it a horrible rating, and when they released a video of the test drive the guy literally was disengaging it, and then claiming it wasn't slowing down/making turns)

 

e.g. Consumer reports put Tesla's autopilot a "distant second" to GM's Super Cruise, and media outlets ran with it...the problem was they contrived scenario so Tesla would almost always fail (even if it drove perfectly).  i.e. Only one category was how the vehicle actually drove, which Tesla scored 9/10 being top in the category...the remaining categories of how CR tested autopilot features of different brands were as follows ("Keeping the Driver Engaged", "Ease of Use", "Clear When Safe to Use" <--More on this, "Unresponsive Driver").

 

They literally scored GM's Super Cruise the best on "Clear When Safe to Use" (8/10 vs Tesla 2/10)...because Super Cruise only works on a limited set of pre-programmed roads (which isn't that many at 2019 it was 200k miles of road it would work on) and Tesla could turn on autopilot pretty much whenever.  To me, that's a limitation, but CR put it as a perk.  Two of the categories essentially had to do with whether the vehicle could detect whether the vehicle was paying attention (which given Tesla only uses feedback from the steering wheel they lost).  For myself, if I were to buy FSD/autopilot on other vehicles I care more about how it performs.

 

Actually, if you're interested, here is a video of the FSD beta (it's not what the public currently has, but shows what might be a thing within the next year) [It has it's faults but it's leaps and bounds ahead of anything that companies are currently showing..that and it's improving every single beta update]

Tesla Self Driving Beta Goes Underground, Parallel Parking, Left Turns Update 2020.48.10.1 FSDBeta 7 - YouTube

[Ein0r]

4 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

For the same reason you can't deduct rent payments from the price of a house.

 

But this is not for an apartment that you don't own. That is about a  subscription for a service for a good that you already own. You don't rent the car. And if you just rent the car then it is a different topic anyway. You can do the same in League of Legends for example. If you buy a champion bundle with several skins, and you own the champion and maybe one of the included skins, then the price for the bundle is reduced by the amount of rp your already owned items would cost.

2 minutes ago, dizmo said:

9k is an incredibly long stretch from 1k. If you went into it going monthly and you're a year in chances are you don't plan on keeping the car long enough for purchasing it to make a difference. The average person only owns their car for 6 years.

The thing is that there is no harm in actually offering that, regardless of how long you own the car. It has the chance to make somebody purchase the full software unlock, because the costs isn't as terrifying anymore and you have comitted to the subscription for a while. Opinions can change and so can llife circumstances. If you go for a subscription you made a conscious choice, knowing that you are unlikely to use it often and extensive enough to warrant a full purchase. But why not keep that option?

 

Besides, my post regarding that deduction was only trying to make this subscription in any way enticing. To me, a subscription based fsd is just a "tourist/vacation feature" in the first place.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, Ein0r said:

But this is not for an apartment that you don't own. That is about a  subscription for a service for a good that you already own. You don't rent the car.

So? You're not renting nor buying the car in this discussion, only a particular feature, an add-on. That add-on is the equivalent of the house, not the car.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Ein0r said:

The thing is that there is no harm in actually offering that, regardless of how long you own the car.

Well, I can see a very real harm to Tesla's bottom line.

 

[Ein0r]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

So? You're not renting nor buying the car in this discussion, only a particular feature, an add-on. That add-on is the equivalent of the house, not the car.

 

 

Well, I can see a very real harm to Tesla's bottom line.

 

If the house is the equivalent to the add-on then you have to assume that you own the property the house is on. And that doesn't make much sense.

 

And what would the harm be? The harm is no greater than actually offering a subscription model to begin with. The average customers that opts for the subscription instead of the purchase is already aware that they will never have 10k for that feature. They will by the sub for a month to test it, and maybe a few more times to impress somebody or drive to a different country without any hassles.

 

Tesla won't get any money or any data from those pleb customers if they don't offer a subscription model. With the subscription they will get data and some money. So why not keep the option for a purchase open? This way Tesla would get data, some money, +x. X being the leftover amount for the full purchase. You probably lose access to fsd when you sell your car. And this "what if" scenario also hinges heavily on the subscription fee. Set it too high and people won't be interested anyway, except for a single test or two. Set it too low and people will just take it as a "freebie"

[MadAnt250]

14 hours ago, dizmo said:

It makes more sense to have everything installed on the vehicle and then activate what's purchased, both from a manufacturing aspect, and an available unit aspect. If you have a lot of options, and not every vehicle has them, it's much, much harder to source the appropriate inventory for every buyer. If someone wants 8/15 options, and that particular vehicle isn't available, you can lose the sale.

Paying for a service makes sense, but having to pay the manufacture to activate simple hardware in a car, does not. Having everything that is deactivated installed in the car does not help the buyer as much as you think, because installing everything from the factory would increase the sale prices on the lower end or base vehicles in order to make up for the extra cost of the non working items installed.

14 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd think the initial costs of the vehicle would be higher until people got used to the model, but having a lower entry price would be what they'd probably go for. I'm all for subscription services for software based things, like CarPlay, since you might not need both. Same with heated/cooled seats, as you rarely need both. It really comes down to costs. If it's $5/month for heated or cooled seats, I think it'd make more than enough sense to go with a subscription based model, since options like that are usually quite expensive.

Thinking like this and the popular figures of the modern times convincing other people to think like this is frightening. This entices big brands to practice scummy things even more, and creates a higher percentage of people that cannot afford new cars. As a former ASE certified technician, I can tell you that having all the same optional components in a base model car that the fully loaded car has can/will increase the prices by a substantial amount.

 

Also, heated seats activated with a paid subscription is morally wrong, because heated seats is not a service.  

[wamred]

Welp, Linus was right. Tesla is moving towards a subscription bases. I will still be BUYING my crap that I will own. 

[Brooksie359]

On 12/20/2020 at 9:01 PM, Belgarathian said:

I don't see a problem with the subscription model as a way of reducing the barrier to entry for advanced features that are constantly under development. I do, however, have an issue with BMW's approach to making heated seats, Apple CarPlay, and AWD systems subscription based when they're not adding any value whatsoever overtime and the significant costs are already included in the vehicle (unless the vehicle is discounted to reflect the fact that they're not included in the original purchase).

Totally agree. Subscription based services for something that is constantly being updated and developed and you receive those updates as part of the service makes sense. That is completely different than a system where you have to pay a subscription to a static feature that never changes. 

[atxcyclist]

Just another reason I'm sticking with my old internal combustion vehicles, for as long as possible.

[wanderingfool2]

5 hours ago, wamred said:

Welp, Linus was right. Tesla is moving towards a subscription bases. I will still be BUYING my crap that I will own. 

Well for now it appears as though purchasing is still an option...so there's that.

 

4 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

Just another reason I'm sticking with my old internal combustion vehicles, for as long as possible.

ICE vehicles doesn't really have much to do with this?  This is the same industry that literally has devices that reset sensors and they charge over $300 for.  (e.g. like some of the check engine oil lights...where you needed the specific device to reset the count, or the many other examples where they have restrictive software already)

[atxcyclist]

3 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Well for now it appears as though purchasing is still an option...so there's that.

 

ICE vehicles doesn't really have much to do with this?  This is the same industry that literally has devices that reset sensors and they charge over $300 for.  (e.g. like some of the check engine oil lights...where you needed the specific device to reset the count, or the many other examples where they have restrictive software already)

I drive old enough vehicles that my $29 scan tool and my service manuals are the only things I need to diagnose and repair them. Outside of an alignment or tires, I haven't taken a car in for repair in almost 20 years. I used to mount and balance my own tires at a friends shop too, just don't have the equipment available anymore. I wouldn't own a car that required a specialty tool to reset a service indicator light. Yes there are bad practices in the industry, and some manufacturers are worse than others, but as a consumer you have an obligation to yourself to buy products that are not exorbitantly expensive to repair if you have an issue with spending that money. I learned lessons long ago like not buying another European car, I hate working on them and the parts get expensive and hard to find. 

 

Of course, fewer and fewer people work on their own vehicles these days, so I'm part of a shrinking demographic.

[Brooksie359]

On 12/21/2020 at 1:15 AM, SpaceGhostC2C said:

So basically it's like a videogame: you are supposed to pay a subscription or upfront for something that doesn't exist yet, so the devs get the money to -hopefully- finish it one day.

Only you are beta-testing with your life on the line  

I guess that might be how you would see it but the way I see it is sorta like Adobe creative subscriptions or the various other software subscription services out their. I mean this is much more comparable to software subscriptions than video games as FSD is simply a continuously updated software meant for automated driving. I have no doubt that FSD will likely never have an end goal like a game would but essentially be updated continuously or until tesla ceases to exist similar to most other software subscription services. Sure the updates might be less impactful as time goes on and but I doubt there ever be no room for improvement.