360 camera subscription on 2023 Select

OON7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Evan
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Threads
11
Messages
383
Reaction score
491
Location
Ohio
Vehicles
Current: 22 GTPE DMG // Previous: 21 Select CG
Country flag
I think the people who dislike this idea (like myself) fear the proverbial slippery slope where this takes us.

Generally speaking, I dislike the notion of software disabling hardware that is already on the vehicle. I understand that:

a) technically it may be cheaper to make all cars the same because the physical hardware costs next to nothing to purchase whereas having allowing it to be configured creates a more expensive production line, and

b) tempting people with previewing a feature may cause them to spend more money than they otherwise would.

Add those together, and it means more money for the manufacturer.

To me this is even more blatantly "wrong" if the hardware in question serves no other purpose. e.g. If the subscription is not purchased then the hardware does nothing. It create e-waste and is just a bad precedence. I'd rather they just split the difference and included it everywhere and spread the cost around.

Ultimately: If the cost of the hardware is so inconsequential then just include it turned-on for everybody. Don't present this as a choice between "not there at all" and "only there for a subscription." A third choice exists: everybody gets to use it. Let's always advocate for the best choice for the consumer.

The only place subscriptions make sense to me on a car is if it is to provide ongoing services that perpetually cost the manufacturer money (e.g. providing internet connectivity or keeping maps up to date).

I will never spend money on a subscription for something like heated seats, a camera, etc. It's ludicrous and I hope enough people agree that it provides no value to the companies that try it.

I mostly agree with what you are saying, and I do agree this is a slippery slope. It is hard to trust Ford or any other manufacturer to do the right thing and not abuse this setup.

However, in the context of getting an option to use something that was never provided a chance to do before, or be given an upgrade path that would have never been an option, then I am intrigued by the opportunities it provides. One of the very few things I disliked about my Select was not truly understanding some of the extra features I missed out on by getting the 21 which had the option for comfort/appearance or comfort/technology. Mine came with the comfort/appearance and no extra cameras or bluecruise. I don't know if I'd pay for it or not, but it would have been nice to have a choice.
Sponsored

 

OON7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Evan
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Threads
11
Messages
383
Reaction score
491
Location
Ohio
Vehicles
Current: 22 GTPE DMG // Previous: 21 Select CG
Country flag
From what I heard (and what I see on the Ford website) is that this package is no more available, which means no heated seats on the Select
Yeah, this is why I feel bad for people getting converted to 23s that ordered 22 Selects with the package. It is what it is if starting a fresh 23 order, but worse for 22 orders since its pulling the rug out from underneath them on features they already ordered.
 

Parasmoney

Well-Known Member
First Name
Paras
Joined
Sep 27, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
103
Reaction score
92
Location
Philadelphia
Vehicles
Mazda 3
Occupation
IT
Country flag
You pay $0 for the 90 day trial and get to try before you buy and even change your mind later. It should also add resale value to your car because the next person could opt in.

So why are so many people acting like this is a bad thing?
I agree that if you purchase a entry level trim and like to get some of the features as subscription based features, it makes sense to offer it. Now, if Ford is going to provide the features as part of a higher trim, then I would be upset if they make me subscribe on top of paying for the premium trim.
 

bcaceres

Well-Known Member
First Name
Barry
Joined
Apr 18, 2022
Threads
5
Messages
85
Reaction score
110
Location
Las Vegas
Vehicles
N/A
Country flag
As stated, prior years allowed you to get neither. What's the difference if you say no?
For 2022, I had an order for a Select AWD with the Comfort & Technology Package which included both the 360-degree camera AND BlueCruise. So your statement is not true. I had to change my order to a Premium with the Standard Range Battery to keep the cost down. Went from $52K to $60K for the 2023 -- now I just have to hope Ford's "private offer" makes up a lot of that MSRP hike -- they have not provided details yet.

I would have much rather ford kept the Comfort & Technology Package available for the Select rather than invalidate my order. I did not really need to pay for the glass roof, better stereo and upgraded wheels of the premium. I like the roof, stereo and wheels in the base model just fine even if the Premium were a bit better.

I am nervous for the glass roof living in Las Vegas -- 4 months of the year that may be a bit hot.
 
Last edited:

Logal727

Well-Known Member
First Name
C
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Threads
101
Messages
7,326
Reaction score
11,270
Location
Florida
Vehicles
ā€˜21 Carbonized Gray Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD Ext
Country flag
You had to buy the comfort/technology package to get them on the Select. I think this is a better option for the base model car, though I feel bad for anyone getting pushed into a 23 from a 22 since a lot of the other options from that package were cut completely.
Seems like an easy way to streamline production which I feel is a good thing.
 


RickMachE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2021
Threads
200
Messages
13,135
Reaction score
17,856
Location
SE MI
Vehicles
2022 Mach-E Premium 4X, 2022 Lightning Lariat
Country flag
For 2022, I had an order for a Select AWD with the Comfort & Technology Package which included both the 360-degree camera AND BlueCruise. So your statement is not true. I had to change my order to a Premium with the Standard Range Battery to keep the cost done. Went from $52K to $60K for the 2023 -- now I just have to hope Ford's "private offer" makes up a lot of that MSRP hike -- they have not provided details yet.

I would have much rather ford kept the Comfort & Technology Package available for the Select rather than invalidate my order. I did not really need to pay for the glass roof, better stereo and upgraded wheels of the premium. I like the roof, stereo and wheels in the base model just fine even if the Premium were a bit better.

I am nervous for the glass roof living in Las Vegas -- 4 months of the year that may be a bit hot.
My statement is 100% correct. Had you not ordered the Comfort and Tech package in 2022, you would be in the same position as using the trial in 2023 and then not paying for it. But you're not the OP, and your situation has nothing to do with the issue he raised.

Also your roof concern is a non-issue as people who live in Arizona, Texas, and Florida have attested to.
 
OP
OP
Wildthing

Wildthing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Threads
17
Messages
273
Reaction score
435
Location
Canada
Vehicles
Mach-E Premium SR AWD
Country flag
I think the people who dislike this idea (like myself) fear the proverbial slippery slope where this takes us.

Generally speaking, I dislike the notion of software disabling hardware that is already on the vehicle. I understand that:

a) technically it may be cheaper to make all cars the same because the physical hardware costs next to nothing to purchase whereas having allowing it to be configured creates a more expensive production line, and

b) tempting people with previewing a feature may cause them to spend more money than they otherwise would.

Add those together, and it means more money for the manufacturer.

To me this is even more blatantly "wrong" if the hardware in question serves no other purpose. e.g. If the subscription is not purchased then the hardware does nothing. It create e-waste and is just a bad precedence. I'd rather they just split the difference and included it everywhere and spread the cost around.

Ultimately: If the cost of the hardware is so inconsequential then just include it turned-on for everybody. Don't present this as a choice between "not there at all" and "only there for a subscription." A third choice exists: everybody gets to use it. Let's always advocate for the best choice for the consumer.

The only place subscriptions make sense to me on a car is if it is to provide ongoing services that perpetually cost the manufacturer money (e.g. providing internet connectivity or keeping maps up to date).

I will never spend money on a subscription for something like heated seats, a camera, etc. It's ludicrous and I hope enough people agree that it provides no value to the companies that try it.
Best way to resume the situation šŸ‘
 

MachEMaster

Well-Known Member
First Name
Will
Joined
Jan 25, 2022
Threads
25
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
1,101
Location
Canada
Vehicles
1997 GMC Yukon GT
Occupation
Aircraft Maintenance Engineer
Country flag
Look at what I've found by building a Mach-E on the US ford webiste! They will include the 360 cameras in the Blue Cruise subscription for new owners! Probably because people didn't show a lot of interest to pay for that, they remove options from that car and add them in the subscription like BMW want to do with heated seats. Cheap shot Ford!
Ford.PNG
I donā€™t see how they can remove so many features, and justify a price increase. Definitely makes me appreciate my ā€˜22 Select AWD. I wonā€™t be renewing my BlueCruise when the subscription is up.
 

bcaceres

Well-Known Member
First Name
Barry
Joined
Apr 18, 2022
Threads
5
Messages
85
Reaction score
110
Location
Las Vegas
Vehicles
N/A
Country flag
My statement is 100% correct. Had you not ordered the Comfort and Tech package in 2022, you would be in the same position as using the trial in 2023 and then not paying for it. But you're not the OP, and your situation has nothing to do with the issue he raised.

Also your roof concern is a non-issue as people who live in Arizona, Texas, and Florida have attested to.
We can agree to disagree on the 100% correct -- maybe from a certain point of view (Obi-Wan Kenobi style). But you said "prior years allowed you to get neither" -- prior years allowed you to get those features in an option package. Once purchased without the option package, then you no longer had any allowance (no try and buy and change your mind).

As a bit of a kick in the teeth, 2022 models with the option package were cheaper than the 2023 base models without it.

I do agree that "try and buy" is better when all else is equal.... For example, if Ford offered a 2023 C/T package that activated those two features and gave the other features from 2022 C/T package -- then offering a trial on those features for free is an upgrade -- pure goodness. Anybody who did not have a 2022 order can't really complain though, because you lost nothing.

As far as non-issue on the roof, I hope you are right. Alex on Autos (YouTube) did a long-term review on the Mach-E (owning it for over a year) and he felt he needed to get a custom interior roof cover to block the sun and I think he lived in Northern California (a place where I would have no concern). My brother-in-law (also in Las Vegas) has a Tesla Model 3 and he says he cannot touch the glass above his head in the summer without burning his hand. Anyway, I hope you are 100% correct about the roof -- I'd rather not get one of those custom fit roof covers to use in the summer time.
 
Last edited:

Mach1E

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2021
Threads
76
Messages
7,719
Reaction score
9,602
Location
Florida
Vehicles
Mach 1, Chevy SS-sold, GTPE delivered oct 2021
Country flag
I think the people who dislike this idea (like myself) fear the proverbial slippery slope where this takes us.

Generally speaking, I dislike the notion of software disabling hardware that is already on the vehicle. I understand that:

a) technically it may be cheaper to make all cars the same because the physical hardware costs next to nothing to purchase whereas having allowing it to be configured creates a more expensive production line, and

b) tempting people with previewing a feature may cause them to spend more money than they otherwise would.

Add those together, and it means more money for the manufacturer.

To me this is even more blatantly "wrong" if the hardware in question serves no other purpose. e.g. If the subscription is not purchased then the hardware does nothing. It create e-waste and is just a bad precedence. I'd rather they just split the difference and included it everywhere and spread the cost around.

Ultimately: If the cost of the hardware is so inconsequential then just include it turned-on for everybody. Don't present this as a choice between "not there at all" and "only there for a subscription." A third choice exists: everybody gets to use it. Let's always advocate for the best choice for the consumer.

The only place subscriptions make sense to me on a car is if it is to provide ongoing services that perpetually cost the manufacturer money (e.g. providing internet connectivity or keeping maps up to date).

I will never spend money on a subscription for something like heated seats, a camera, etc. It's ludicrous and I hope enough people agree that it provides no value to the companies that try it.
Best case you get something for nothing.

Worst case you get nothing for nothing.

But philosophically you donā€™t like the ā€œideaā€ of it.

I donā€™t get it.
 
OP
OP
Wildthing

Wildthing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Threads
17
Messages
273
Reaction score
435
Location
Canada
Vehicles
Mach-E Premium SR AWD
Country flag
Best case you get something for nothing.

Worst case you get nothing for nothing.

But philosophically you donā€™t like the ā€œideaā€ of it.

I donā€™t get it.
No because when you purchased the tech package you had the 360 cameras.

Do you really think that they put all those camera for free? They are included in their cost and they include it in the selling price. So some will pay for it but they'll be unable to use it. Very far from Blue Cruise that I agree it's a service, like Ford Pass charging (you have to maintain agreement with charging networks, make some updates, etc.)

360 camera is totally different. They will probably go like BMW et charge for heated seats in the future. And no the cars won't be cheaper because the building cost is the same.
 

devmach-e

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Sep 8, 2021
Threads
1
Messages
1,164
Reaction score
1,416
Location
SF Bay Area
Vehicles
2022 Premium RWD ER, 2016 Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Occupation
Unix Sysadmin
Country flag
As far as non-issue on the roof, I hope you are right. Alex on Autos (YouTube) did a long-term review on the Mach-E (owning it for over a year) and he felt he needed to get a custom interior roof cover to block the sun and I think he lived in Northern California (a place where I would have no concern). My brother-in-law (also in Las Vegas) has a Tesla Model 3 and he says he cannot touch the glass above his head in the summer without burning his hand. Anyway, I hope you are 100% correct about the roof -- I'd rather not get one of those custom fit roof covers to use in the summer time.
Yes, the roof is hot to touch when you first get in the car, but if you move your hand an inch or so away, you can't feel the heat. After about 5 minutes of driving the car, the roof is merely warm to the touch, about the same temperature as the windshield or side windows. I.e cool enough to touch. My Highlander Hybrid gets warmer inside than my Mach-E, and the Highlander has a retractable roof shade for its panoramic sunroof. In other words, it's a total non-issue.
 

mateo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2022
Threads
6
Messages
228
Reaction score
339
Location
Chicago
Vehicles
2022 MME GT
Country flag
I don't know about the terms of this subscription, but yes, I don't like the idea of it...

With a subscription, you own nothing. And there's nothing legally requiring the other party to keep offering the subscription.

So I pay $20/month to get heated seats. Then they decide it's worth $50. Then they decide to discontinue the subscription because they shut down their authentication service. Now I cannot use my heated seats.

Maybe this never happens with car subscriptions, but it's not something I want to deal with. So yes, I will avoid supporting this type of revenue model because I don't trust it.

With things like music, it makes sense... I can pay a monthly fee to have access to all sorts of changing content, far more than if I individually purchased physical copies. And there's added convenience of being able to access it anywhere, anytime, etc. And there's competition in the marketplace and switching services has little to no friction for me.

Back to the car, what if i find a way to install my own firmware and enable the cameras? What if I provide information to others on how to modify their own cars. Is this illegal? It's a dumb scenario made possible by this type of model. I own a piece of hardware but not the right to utilize everything in it without perpetually paying a tax that I have no control over the future price.

I already have a subscription... It's my loan payment. šŸ˜…

I won't rehash any of my statements in my original post as they still stand.

I understand the other perspective, but overall I think it provides the potential for abusive relationships that consumers may end up not being able to control without regulations... which I hate when that becomes the solution
 

Mach1E

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2021
Threads
76
Messages
7,719
Reaction score
9,602
Location
Florida
Vehicles
Mach 1, Chevy SS-sold, GTPE delivered oct 2021
Country flag
No because when you purchased the tech package you had the 360 cameras.

Do you really think that they put all those camera for free? They are included in their cost and they include it in the selling price. So some will pay for it but they'll be unable to use it. Very far from Blue Cruise that I agree it's a service, like Ford Pass charging (you have to maintain agreement with charging networks, make some updates, etc.)

360 camera is totally different. They will probably go like BMW et charge for heated seats in the future. And no the cars won't be cheaper because the building cost is the same.
Yes, they did put those in for free.

Why? Because they think the install cost will be offset by some people who opt in to the subscription.

Is it weird? SURE! But I actually think itā€™s a good thing. Gives you the option, but you choose if you want to pay for it, and can change your mind later.

Itā€™s actually BETTER than those of us who paid for the option, but canā€™t decide later we donā€™t use it or donā€™t need it.

Subscription model is a bit odd, but it gives you more flexibility. And again, worst caseā€¦ā€¦ zero $$ out of your pocket.

I still donā€™t see why people are complaining.
 

Mach1E

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2021
Threads
76
Messages
7,719
Reaction score
9,602
Location
Florida
Vehicles
Mach 1, Chevy SS-sold, GTPE delivered oct 2021
Country flag
I don't know about the terms of this subscription, but yes, I don't like the idea of it...

With a subscription, you own nothing. And there's nothing legally requiring the other party to keep offering the subscription.

So I pay $20/month to get heated seats. Then they decide it's worth $50. Then they decide to discontinue the subscription because they shut down their authentication service. Now I cannot use my heated seats.

Maybe this never happens with car subscriptions, but it's not something I want to deal with. So yes, I will avoid supporting this type of revenue model because I don't trust it.

With things like music, it makes sense... I can pay a monthly fee to have access to all sorts of changing content, far more than if I individually purchased physical copies. And there's added convenience of being able to access it anywhere, anytime, etc. And there's competition in the marketplace and switching services has little to no friction for me.

Back to the car, what if i find a way to install my own firmware and enable the cameras? What if I provide information to others on how to modify their own cars. Is this illegal? It's a dumb scenario made possible by this type of model. I own a piece of hardware but not the right to utilize everything in it without perpetually paying a tax that I have no control over the future price.

I already have a subscription... It's my loan payment. šŸ˜…

I won't rehash any of my statements in my original post as they still stand.

I understand the other perspective, but overall I think it provides the potential for abusive relationships that consumers may end up not being able to control without regulations... which I hate when that becomes the solution
Thatā€™s an awful lot of ā€œmaybesand unknowns.

And yes, it could turn out that way.

However, remember this only applies to select buyers who didnā€™t pay for the option!

Dont like the subscription model? You still have options:
1. Donā€™t pay for it. Result? Itā€™s like it never existed
2. Subscribe- your choice
3. Get a premium and pay the full option price.

None of those sound bad to me.
Sponsored

 
 




Top