Because companies know that subscription fatigue is real. Thus they think they can survive

• Fewer drivers than ever wants to pay for a subscription in the car.
• Donation of cars believes this and tries to find out what the consumers actually pay for.
• Here is why car manufacturers double, although consumers are tired of monthly payments.

Do you know what people love? Paying for things they use them over time.

I’m just kidding. Literally no one – not the only soul – Isking for the next monthly fee on their credit card. As if the streaming services, fitness applications and that in your kitchen in your kitchen was not enough, the machines now also want.

Because the brands are obsessed with the conversion of their vehicles into app stores. Do you need a heated steering wheel? No problem, $ 9.99 per month. Do you oversee your own drive? It will be $ 99 and the list will be.

It’s not just a trend. Powerful performance on GM, Ford, Kia, Toyota and almost every sun under the sun has seen how the subscription model works. They saw what Adobe did with Photoshop, and probably have their personal regulations for Netflix and Spotify. They want it. And it is all because it proves the value of the company to share fastening with other rear streams – importantly the one that does it with a single flashy term: monthly recurring returned.

There’s just one little problem: I don’t want it.

The S&P Global Mobility 2025 study says only 68% of drivers would even consider paying for connected cars. I know that it might seem like a lot, but since the number in 2024 fell from 86%, the number of consumer reports will be suitable for a proverbial fire with the backrest to store a rapid rate.

Here is an excerpt from a survey that outlines what is in the minds of these people gooir:

Hardware and software costs for connected cars can be considerable, making it difficult to integrate these functions into vehicles for the mass market and budget. Subscription-based services (navigation, Wi-Fi, etc.) are increasingly encountering consumers’ resistance sensitive to price, who may not see the value of paying repeating fees for functions that they often do not use.

Users are frustrated when hardware (eg cameras, sensors) is present, but the functions are transported. Consumers also push back against “fragmentation of elements”, where the basic functions are divided into multiple paid third.

It’s not just about how Many People want to pay. Consumers really grip the pennies and want to spend less on a subscription in the car than they watch Hulu.

In fact, many of the survivors of Repondnte, which stated that they were using connected automotive services, said with that costs are the primary factor that does not use these attached services behind them. And those who did not care about the cost said they said with that smartphones that already do, what cars want to charge for.

Could this be why automakers fill the mirroring device like Apple CarPlay and Android Auto?

Grant, there are some things that a mobile phone simply can’t provide. Think: Tesla is $ 1,200 per year with full -power or Ford’s $ 495 Bluecruise subscription. But let’s be a real-if your phone can vomit traffic maps in real time, integrate into your car for navigation around the fast DC chargers and Spotify without any problems, you would probably not know over $ 12 per month just for your mother ship.

Speaking of data privacy is also one of the greatest concerns of the survey:

Personal data protection is the largest industry concerned because car manufacturers strive for recurrent revenues and monetization options. Consumers are careful about how their driving DNA (rental, habits, etc.) are collected, stored and used, especially with regard to the potential for abuse or unauthorized approach. Lack of transparency in data policy has been shown to reduce consumer confidence, especially among privacy users.

In addition, it was interconnected because it was difficult to overcome security concerns. The connected vehicles are susceptible to hacking, data disruption and harmful attacks, which increases more concerns about the safety and security of personal information and vehicle control systems. The existing laws and personal data protection regulations such as laws in Europe and North America require automobile workers to prefer data transparency and robust security measures for vehicle data.

Gone is an old adage “if it’s free, you are a product” because not only you paymenttarget You are still a product. If you have forgotten, GM was recently dragged over coal when he was accused of doing it exactly, and then by selling driving habits to insurance brokers.

Currently, the US has the highest number of reconnaissance responses (35%) to subscribe to the attached service and pay off their own pocket. India follows 33%, followed by China to 32%, South Korea to 30%and in the UK to 29%. China and India have the most drivers who use free tests.

France has the most consumers who have rejected linked services with more than half of all respondents. Followed by the United Kingdom and Brazil, then narrowly Germany. American placement directly around the center to 38%.

Car cars think they can express their subscription fatigue. The biggest problem identified in the survey is that car substitute models are still in childhood phase, so it is not clear what consumers want to pay money – and this is one of those data points that feed their homes in the parent ship through Connect, remember when Tesla removed the lumbar support?

“We are trying to figure out what consumers are willing to pay for, how much they are willing (A), as they want,” said Stephanie Brinley, director of Auto Intelligence S&P.

This means that car manufacturers will continue to introduce new features and techniques to find out what consumers consider interesting and useful to pay. Keep in mind that if the hardware is installed in the car and worked on costs (I think: heated seats or extra performance), software support span.

Margins and returned, that’s what it is all about. If automakers can find a new way to push out several other dollars of their product – especially on a scale – it is a way to drastically improve their product while reducing income paid to third episodes such as business representation. More, income from the sale of customer data open up another flow of income that is not possible 10 years ago.

But on the consumer side, it’s not a good experience. Nobody wants to pay for something already in the car. This line also reaches the center when comparing a cheap, versatile function compared to how to ensure that the ride is safer or more comfortable. For example, swallowing $ 9.99 per month for connected services is much easier than pony for automated driving help $ 99.

Meanwhile, the automaker remains quite flexible. It’s all about collecting data and water testing. If consumers are rebelled or are not willing to pay, it may not be worth investing in a specific function or even inserting hardware in the car. But if there is something hit, it could be a treasure with a very small directorial capital needed to maintain it. And this is where car manufacturers try to hit gold.