Imagine this scenario: You spend 300,000 yuan to buy a new car. When you take delivery, you notice the steering wheel is heated. But when you press the heating button, a message pops up on the screen - "This feature requires a subscription: 99 yuan per month." You think this is unreasonable, but the salesperson explains that the heated steering wheel hardware is already installed in the car, only locked by software. If you're unwilling to pay, that hardware will remain in the steering wheel forever - you can't use it, and you can't remove it. This isn't science fiction; it's already happening. BMW's heated steering wheel subscription service in some markets is a concrete example of this model.
Automotive software subscriptions are becoming one of the most controversial topics in the industry. Supporters argue this is an inevitable path for the auto industry's transition from one-time hardware sales to ongoing software services, opening new revenue streams for automakers - the so-called "second growth curve." Opponents argue this is a veiled form of consumer trapping: users have already paid for the hardware, so why should they pay again to use it? This model essentially extracts consumer surplus rather than creating genuine value.
Behind automakers' push for software subscriptions lies clear business logic. The traditional auto industry is a typical low-frequency, high-ticket business. Users buy a car every few years, and after the transaction is complete, there is almost no further connection between automaker and user. The software subscription model can transform one-time transactions into ongoing revenue streams, like SaaS software companies, generating stable monthly or annual cash flow. For automakers suffering from price wars and declining profits, while software subscription revenue may be small in the short term, its profit margins are extremely high - nearly pure profit. Take Tesla as an example: its Full Self-Driving Capability package sells for $12,000 in the US, yet the software copy delivered to users has almost no marginal cost. For each unit sold, most of the revenue is profit.
Another layer of logic is price discrimination and differentiated pricing. Different users perceive the value of the same feature differently. Some are willing to pay for better sound quality, while others don't care at all. In the past, automakers could only differentiate users by offering different configuration packages, but this approach was costly and inflexible. Software subscriptions allow automakers to create multiple product tiers through software switches on vehicles with identical hardware. Budget-conscious users can buy the base version and subscribe to features as needed; users with ample budgets can buy out all features upfront. This strategy of "standardized hardware, differentiated software" can maximize value extraction from users with different willingness to pay.
However, from the user's perspective, the experience of software subscriptions is not entirely positive. The most common criticism is "double charging" - users have already paid a price that includes hardware costs, so why should they pay extra to use that hardware? Take BMW's heated steering wheel subscription as an example. The heated steering wheel hardware is installed at the factory, and users have already paid for it. Requiring users to pay a monthly fee to activate this feature is seen by many as unreasonable. BMW ultimately adjusted its strategy under public pressure, but similar practices continue with other brands and features.
Another issue is the cumulative effect of subscription fees. Dozens of yuan per month for one feature may not seem like much, but if multiple features adopt subscription models, they add up to a significant expense. Seat heating, steering wheel heating, premium sound, dashcam, autonomous driving, remote start - if each feature requires a separate subscription, users' monthly expenses could reach hundreds of yuan. Accumulated year after year, this could even exceed the cost of a one-time purchase. Some users joke: "After buying the car, we still have to pay a 'monthly payment' to the automaker."
A deeper issue is the separation of ownership and control. In the past, when you bought a car, all its features belonged to you. Now, automakers can add, remove, or restrict features at any time through over-the-air updates, reducing users' control over their own vehicles. While no automaker has yet abused this capability, the theoretical possibility exists. When certain core functions become "services" rather than "assets," the boundaries of consumer rights as car owners become blurred.
So what is the future of software subscription models? A reasonable prediction is that the industry will move toward stratification and differentiation. Basic features, safety-related features, and features with significant user experience differences are better suited for one-time purchase. For example, seat heating is almost a necessity in cold regions - making users pay a monthly fee for it would only cause resentment. Features that iterate frequently, have high value differentiation, and are not safety-critical are better suited for subscription models. For example, autonomous driving technology is still evolving rapidly. Users can subscribe monthly and always upgrade to the latest version, rather than purchasing a feature pack that may become outdated in a few years. Additionally, automakers need to offer more flexible options - for the same feature, users could choose a one-time purchase, monthly subscription, or pay-per-use. Putting the choice in users' hands, rather than mandating subscriptions, is the sustainable approach.
Automotive software subscriptions will not disappear, but they must find forms that match user value. If subscriptions are used merely as tools to "harvest" users, user backlash will make this model unsustainable. Only those subscription services that genuinely create user value, offer flexible choices, and respect user ownership will go further on this path.