Comment on Hyundai car requires $2000, app & internet access to fix your brakes - what the actual f

• phutatorius@lemmy.zip ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  You don’t own the stadium, and you don’t own the satellite. So they’re really not the same as a car, which you do (nominally) own.

  source
• x00z@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Satellite TV is a service that requires constant upkeep by the companies which costs money.

  And your football stadium is a bad analogy.

  source
• shiftymccool@piefed.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I resent that the cost to the car company to install seat warmers is the actual installation of the seat warmers. Running them costs ME money in electricity generated by gasoline I bought. It costs them nothing to run them but i have to pay a subscription to use them on top of paying to power them?

  The football grandstand continues to cost the owners in maintenance and space that they own. You pay for the privilege of using something that is not yours. I bought my car, I shouldn’t have to continue to pay for the privilege of using something I already own since the equipment is already there and doesn’t require any interaction with a remote service that would make sense to charge for (navigation, satellite radio, etc…)

  source

  • sqgl@sh.itjust.works ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    OK I accept the analogies are not good equivalents.

    It is not necessarily true that everyone has already paid for the seat warmer hardware. The car may cost the same as if it didn’t have the hardware installed.

    The manufacturer may find it cheaper to just install it for everyone and wear the cost in the hope that enough people will pay for the warmer to be enabled.

    Of course it is possible that everyone pays for the hardware anyhow but it is not necessarily the case.

    source

    • architect@thelemmy.club ⁨40⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      I don’t see how you could possibly think it’s okay to sell something to someone while telling them oh but technically you didn’t buy everything inside it, that’s an extra fee.

      Come on you can’t be so broken you can’t see a clear scam right in front of you.

      It should be illegal and if any of our institutions had teeth it would be.

      source
    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      If you buy an object, you pay for all the components that come with that object. If they didn’t charge for all the components that’s on them. As others have said, heating elements don’t require any continued support from the manufacturer. It’s a button and some wires and a control module. Should they be charging for window defrosters too? There is literally 0 explanation for this that isn’t corporate greed.

      source
    • pogmommy@lemmy.ml ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This is such a weird hill to die on for someone who claims to be pro-consumer

      source

      • sqgl@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        You make it shine like football team loyalty.

        I am pro fairness, not pro-consumer. I don’t think the consumers are justified in their entitlement in this case.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • athairmor@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Of course it is possible that everyone pays for the hardware anyhow but it is not necessarily the case.

      It is necessarily the case. No company incurs the cost of making something, delivers it and then just hopes that someone pays for it. You literally can’t do business that way.

      source

      • sqgl@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Of course you can do business that way. If the heating costs $x, and half the customers pay for it but $5x is charged then that is a profit.

        The alternative would be to make two sets of cars (with and without heating). Or four sets of cars if another similar optional feature is shipped like this. Or 8 permutations if there are the features etc

        It can certainly be cheaper to install them by default even if not all customers pay to enable them.

        source

        • -> View More Comments