“Our research indicates that with the right mix of compelling offerings, customers are willing to spend $135 per month on average for products and services,” said Wexler.
Assuming this is not a maintenance contract, who in their right mind will spend 135$ per month on "products and services" for their car?
I think the CEO's gambit here is that she can keep the reality distortion field up long enough to land $100-150M in compensation by waving hands and saying the word AI.
Does OnStar have that many paying subscribers? I know the cars come with X years of free service but are they really getting that many takers for years X+1 and beyond?
Comments
It is even worse than that - the CEO has this pipe dream that they are going to build a Netflix sized subscription business:
https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/06/gm-aims-to-build-netflix-s...
Assuming this is not a maintenance contract, who in their right mind will spend 135$ per month on "products and services" for their car?
Nobody
I think the CEO's gambit here is that she can keep the reality distortion field up long enough to land $100-150M in compensation by waving hands and saying the word AI.
This is the cross industry playbook, and I'm really tired of it.
Tesla FSD is $100/month, OnStar is $30-$50.
The phrase "people with more money than sense" comes to mind.
The same people willing to spend $130k on a SUV?
OnStar's been around so long, and people value it enough, that it's unreasonable to sneer about pipedreams.
Once you throw in Tesla-like subs for automation, etc., it's reasonable to make that a goal for 2030.
Does OnStar have that many paying subscribers? I know the cars come with X years of free service but are they really getting that many takers for years X+1 and beyond?