\"Writing.Com
*Magnify*
    November     ►
SMTWTFS
     
28
29
30
Archive RSS
SPONSORED LINKS
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/books/entry_id/1035539-Heated-Discussion
Image Protector
Rated: 18+ · Book · Personal · #1196512
Not for the faint of art.
#1035539 added July 22, 2022 at 12:03am
Restrictions: None
Heated Discussion
I'm linking this article, from Cracked, because it illustrates a disturbing trend that needs to die.



No, the "disturbing trend" isn't people continuing to buy BMWs. On my extensive list of "things people do that I don't understand," it gets lost somewhere in the middle. You want an overpriced car? I'm not going to stop you.

No, it's this "subscription" shit that has to stop. It makes sense for things like streaming services and news outlets, because you're getting new content on the regular—and if you're not, you can cancel the subscription. But this? This sort of thing enrages me.

It’s the perfect situation for the companies that offer one. They get to present a highly reasonable visual price to the people considering it, providing that, as is true for most people, they’d rather have a fingernail removed than do any form of math.

Sadly, this is true. I'd even add "without anesthesia."

Subscriptions sneak under the radar, slowly building on your bank account as you quietly repeat to yourself ad nauseum “what’s $5 a month?” until suddenly you are a gaunt, bloodless husk.

Hey, Cracked. Pay me and I'll be an editor. "Nauseum," forsooth. (Pay me more, and I'll be a writer.)

A 2021 poll found that the average consumer spends 273 dollars a month on subscription services, or a whopping $3,276 a year, which is roughly enough to buy 9 Arizona Green Teas a day for a whole year.

I keep close track of mine, and it's less than that—and my income is above average. This includes my Writing.Com premium membership, which is sometimes paid for by Gift Points.

None of it is too surprising, and in honesty, it’s impressive in the blood-soaked way that would make bankers laugh at a white-tablecloth lunch. Income inequality and, lately, inflation, have left whatever we’re calling “middle-class” consumers with less liquid spending money than ever. However, to increase wages and salaries on these consumers would, of course, negatively impact the profits and overhead of these same companies. Therefore, the solution is to proffer in hand, outstretched with a grin, a virtual piggy bank that paycheck-to-paycheck masses can drop one of their hard-earned quarters in each week in order to own the same items their bosses can buy for their mistresses without a second thought.

It's more than that, in my opinion. People figured out a while back that if you can offer something for a monthly price, you can jack up the actual cost. Nowhere is this more obvious than with college tuition. Once student loans became widely available, tuition started increasing much more than the price of everything else, largely because people see "$300 a month" as a much easier pill to swallow than "$30,000 and done." Even if, over the length of the loan, you end up spending closer to $40,000. (There are nuances involving the time value of money here, and it has to be compared to inflation, but I'm trying to keep it simple. Sometimes a loan makes sense.) So if you, say, were offering your software for $3000, you might look at your balance sheet and decide you can make more money over the life of the application if you charged $250 a month. Most people, like this author says, won't do the math. A certain computer-aided design software company pulled this shit over ten years ago, and as an engineer, I kind of do math, so it was a major factor in my deciding to retire.

Of course, there’s a limit to these asks. Push your subscription fees even a dollar too high, as Netflix recently learned, and you risk shattering the entire facade, causing all your supplicants to suddenly awake from their stupor like a very broke Neo covered in goo.

Netflix is kind of a special case here. As I said, subscriptions to streaming services make sense if you use them, because you're getting new material. Some people aren't into the new material, in which case the subscription no longer makes sense. (For me, it'll be worth it just for The Sandman, coming out next month.)

Articles cover a recent new… I’m not sure what to call it. Program? Purchase option? Gleeful middle finger? Whatever the correct nomenclature is, BMW has attempted to board the Money Train by offering BMW owners a subscription–to the heated seats that are already installed in the car they have purchased. If you own a BMW, and should you like to sit in the gentle warming lap of luxury, you can now do so in multiple countries, including the United Kingdom, for the low, low price of $18 a month.

No. Just... no.

Okay, so here's my heated seat experience. They came with the Subaru I bought back in 2010. Average high temperatures in January in my part of Virginia are around mid-40s F. Average lows, mid-20s. Being the average, sometimes it's quite a bit lower. Point is, heated seats are something I might use a few times a year at home. More if I take a road trip to Minnesota in anything but July. Over the 11 years I owned the car, I think I turned on the seat heater less than 50 times, total.

If I had to pay for it on a monthly basis, I would forego the luxury entirely.

My plan is to buy another Subaru if the chip issue is ever sorted. If they pull this subscription shit on me, though, I'm walking.

But yes, I am here to tell you, all of the cars are fully outfitted with everything they need to heat those comfy seats. And yes, as part of a removed, self-reliant system, heating those seats transfers absolutely zero cost to anyone beyond the person who owns the car and the battery under the hood. BMW has just, while looking directly into our souls, installed a software block in the cars that says “ATTENTION CAR: do not activate heat this poor serf’s seat until they pay their monthly tithe to the Car Lord.”

To be pedantic, if the car is running (and not sitting idling), the battery is barely even involved. It draws power from the engine, like your lights do. Unless you have an EV, and I can't be arsed to find out if BMW makes EVs.

A BMW spokesperson did give a statement, as follows: “ is part of a global aftersales strategy that BMW has introduced in various markets around the world, including on a small-scale basis in the U.S.” Which is like asking someone, “Why are you pissing on my head?” and them answering “Me urinating on your head is part of a personal piss strategy I have introduced to your head.”

This is called trickle-down economics.

It’s a bit strange that of all car companies to introduce something like this, a luxury producer like BMW would employ it. The type of people who own new BMWs would be, you’d assume, flush with plenty of cash to pay a measly fee every month.

I never did follow this logic. What if you've used up all your cash and credit to buy the BMW? There's a never-ending cycle. "If you can afford the car, you can afford the insurance." "If you can afford the insurance, you can afford the stupid subscription." "If you can afford the stupid subscription, you can afford to give money to the homeless." "If you can afford to give money to the homeless, you can afford to get a new paint job every year." Stop that.

Also, rich people are notoriously cheapskates. That's how a lot of them get and stay rich.

It's also clear to me that BMW must charge a per-use fee for their turn signals. Else more BMW owners would actually use one. When I was in the L.A. area earlier this year, I witnessed a BMW driver using their turn signal. Almost gave me another heart attack. I didn't get video of this miracle, but NaNoNette Author Icon was driving and she can back me up on this.

The “strategy” has inspired a huge consumer backlash and a flurry of incredulous articles, which is what businesses refer to as a “negative response.” Weird, you’re telling me people are upset that you paywalled their car? But if people spend the money, BMW will happily take a momentary PR hit.

And that's the real problem: people allow this shit to happen. Companies wouldn't do it if people didn't pay for it. But people pay for it. I know I've harped in here before about other issues, like climate change, that shouldn't be on us to change. But this is different: it's one manufacturer out of a dozen or so, in a semi-free market. One can choose a different car. If you gotta be a prick, there are plenty of other dick-substitute cars/SUVs (BMW also makes motorcycles, but their seats are automatically heated because the engine is right under them) on the market in the same price range.

If this effort succeeds, though, it's only going to usher in more subscriptions. Unless, of course, we boil ourselves to death first. At which time, who would need seat heaters?

© Copyright 2022 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted Writing.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/books/entry_id/1035539-Heated-Discussion