Carplay? Next?

[DJG]

This strike me as a straw man argument because my understanding is there are no fees to automotive OEMs to enter Apple's Made for iPhone (MFi) program.


I get it, you don’t want to use screen projection. What I don’t understand is why you want to make sure that nobody has the choice of optional screen projection for the subset of consumers who do want it.

I encounter a bunch of threads for feature requests where I think to myself, “I don’t want that but it doesn’t take away what I do want so I’m not even going to bother commenting.” I skim them and move on.

There might not be any fees under the current regime, but if an automaker started charging owners explicitly for the use of CP/AA, I'd fully expect Apple/Google to insert themselves. Perhaps not though, either way.

My post has literally nothing to do with restricting access to the feature. I'm actually offering advice on one way that those that do want it might be successful in obtaining it. To date they are just repeating a simple request and offering nothing in return, which yields basically no response from Rivian, basically a "thanks for the input". You can take it or leave it. Offering it as a premium subscription makes a ton of sense, because then only those that want it pay for it, and those that don't want it don't have to pay for it. If you just include it and increase the cost of the vehicle, then everyone pays for it.

Sponsored

 

[Obioban]

It might be helpful for the CP/AA proponents to gather data on how much they are willing to pay for CP/AA. $25/mo, $50/mo, $75/mo? If successful, Apple will step in and want their cut, so it has to be meaningful to share the wealth.

This might help Rivian get a sense of the benefit to them for offering it. If it doesn't benefit them, they can't be expected to care. And don't say the benefit is that they can sell more vehicles, because that's not true, they are constrained by the capacity of their factories and they don't need those programs to run them at full capacity for the foreseeable future (whereas legacy automakers do need them).

I'm skeptical people would be willing to pay a meaningful subscription for it, based on how that worked for BMW, but then again a BMW is more of a commodity vehicle and didn't offer OTA updates, so they don't have as much leverage.

$0 per month- exactly the same as what Apple charges car makers to support carplay. And, the same as what it costs in a Civic/Corolla/every other car.

A large part of why I want carplay is to avoid monthly services. I have 7 cars. Paying a monthly fee for each is a non starter.

I have one phone the provides all the services I care about, better than any car maker has yet been able to. It provides those services natively in all my cars, and will continue to do so (as I won't buy any cars where it can't).

The value to Rivian is the ability to make an additional car sale. Rivian will not be a supply constrained monopoly forever, after which the ability to sell cars will matter.

... how much are you willing to pay per month for air conditioning in your car?

 

[timesinks]

BMW tried charging a subscription fee for CarPlay before. That did not last long, and now CarPlay is free in all their vehicles.

 

[DJG]

$0 per month- exactly the same as what Apple charges car makers to support carplay. And, the same as what it costs in a Civic/Corolla/every other car.

A large part of why I want carplay is to avoid monthly services. I have 7 cars. Paying a monthly fee for each is a non starter.

I have one phone the provides all the services I care about, better than any car maker has yet been able to. It provides those services natively in all my cars, and will continue to do so (as I won't buy any cars where it can't).

The value to Rivian is the ability to make an additional car sale. Rivian will not be a supply constrained monopoly forever, after which the ability to sell cars will matter.

... how much are you willing to pay per month for air conditioning in your car?

Asking for something for free is generally not a good negotiating position.

And this is proving my earlier point - CP is a zero value add proposition for Rivian if people aren't willing to pay for it because it's readily available for "free" elsewhere.

They have several years before there is any prospect of lost revenue from idle factories, during which time they can keep their heads down developing their own system before any potential day of judgement comes.

If they were to add CP/AA now, it would create more even demand, and given restricted supply they would need to raise the price to find equilibrium. So, it's naive to expect them to offer it for free, especially if it's as important to so many people as is being argued. Given that, either everyone pays more for a Rivian, or they could split it off as a premium subscription. But either way, they will profit from it.

 

[Obioban]

Asking for something for free is generally not a good negotiating position.

And this is proving my earlier point - CP is a zero value add proposition for Rivian if people aren't willing to pay for it because it's readily available for "free" elsewhere.

They have several years before there is any prospect of lost revenue from idle factories, during which time they can keep their heads down developing their own system before any potential day of judgement comes.

If they were to add CP/AA now, it would create more even demand, and given restricted supply they would need to raise the price to find equilibrium. So, it's naive to expect them to offer it for free, especially if it's as important to so many people as is being argued. Given that, either everyone pays more for a Rivian, or they could split it off as a premium subscription. But either way, they will profit from it.

So why do they include air conditioning for free? Naive to expect them to offer it for free, especially if it's as important to so many people. Given that, either everyone pays more for a Rivian, or they could split it off as a premium subscription.

 

[astonius]

1. Ideally Rivian would buy-in to providing an amazing, fully-integrated CarPlay experience as a standard feature to make myself as a current owner and other potential owners happy and more likely to advocate for and purchase the brand going forward.
2. If not, and the primary concern is the revenue potential around their own system, I would rather pay for the monthly fee for their system if it included CarPlay than have no CarPlay option at all. I will not pay for their monthly service if it does not include CarPlay, plain and simple.
3. If putting CarPlay in, even behind a paywall, is totally out of the question, then for me it becomes a matter of when a viable alternative becomes available. I am already exploring a potential trade for an F150 Lightning primarily because of CarPlay. I wish RAM would get on it quicker.

 

[DJG]

So why do they include air conditioning for free? Naive to expect them to offer it for free, especially if it's as important to so many people. Given that, either everyone pays more for a Rivian, or they could split it off as a premium subscription.

They don't include AC for free, it's part of the price of the vehicle (the price is the sum of all the parts). If it didn't have AC, I would certainly expect to pay less for it.

 

[DJG]

1. Ideally Rivian would buy-in to providing an amazing, fully-integrated CarPlay experience as a standard feature to make myself as a current owner and other potential owners happy and more likely to advocate for and purchase the brand going forward.
2. If not, and the primary concern is the revenue potential around their own system, I would rather pay for the monthly fee for their system if it included CarPlay than have no CarPlay option at all. I will not pay for their monthly service if it does not include CarPlay, plain and simple.
3. If putting CarPlay in, even behind a paywall, is totally out of the question, then for me it becomes a matter of when a viable alternative becomes available. I am already exploring a potential trade for an F150 Lightning primarily because of CarPlay. I wish RAM would get on it quicker.

2. I don't think Rivian has any intention to create a competing product to what Car Play offers. Their focus on subscription services is for enhanced vehicle capabilities (drive modes is one thing mentioned) and then autonomous/advanced driver assistance. The rest of the planned Membership is data, access to exclusive events, and any other proprietary software features that would only be found in a Rivian.

 

[astonius]

2. I don't think Rivian has any intention to create a competing product to what Car Play offers. Their focus on subscription services is for enhanced vehicle capabilities (drive modes is one thing mentioned) and then autonomous/advanced driver assistance. The rest of the planned Membership is data, access to exclusive events, and any other proprietary software features that would only be found in a Rivian.

Yeah, I'm just saying regardless of what they intend to offer behind that paywall if it doesn't include CarPlay they will not get any money from me.

 

[DJG]

Yeah, I'm just saying regardless of what they intend to offer behind that paywall if it doesn't include CarPlay they will not get any money from me.

I think that's hard to say when you don't know what it includes exactly (other than the data plan) and for what price, but it's also ultimately your choice. There will be plenty that are the same (regardless of reason). My random guess is they hope for 25%-35% uptake on that program, I doubt it's a majority.

It's also quite possible still that they break it all up, and offer data separately, and Membership includes the charging, performance and social offerings. We'll find out eventually.

 

[Obioban]

They don't include AC for free, it's part of the price of the vehicle (the price is the sum of all the parts). If it didn't have AC, I would certainly expect to pay less for it.

Marginal cost of carplay is ~$0.00, so you're functionally paying for it already, too.

 

[Obioban]

I think that's hard to say when you don't know what it includes exactly (other than the data plan) and for what price, but it's also ultimately your choice. There will be plenty that are the same (regardless of reason). My random guess is they hope for 25%-35% uptake on that program, I doubt it's a majority.

It's also quite possible still that they break it all up, and offer data separately, and Membership includes the charging, performance and social offerings. We'll find out eventually.

It's really not hard to say-- I can't think of anything they could offer that would make me want to pay monthly. It only makes me not want their vehicle.

I especially don't want to pay monthly for data, as I'm already paying monthly for that (my phone). Charging me again for a worse version of something I'm already paying for is not compelling.

 

[SoCal Rob]

There might not be any fees under the current regime, but if an automaker started charging owners explicitly for the use of CP/AA, I'd fully expect Apple/Google to insert themselves. Perhaps not though, either way.

My post has literally nothing to do with restricting access to the feature. I'm actually offering advice on one way that those that do want it might be successful in obtaining it. To date they are just repeating a simple request and offering nothing in return, which yields basically no response from Rivian, basically a "thanks for the input". You can take it or leave it. Offering it as a premium subscription makes a ton of sense, because then only those that want it pay for it, and those that don't want it don't have to pay for it. If you just include it and increase the cost of the vehicle, then everyone pays for it.

I’m one of the people willing to pay for it, either as a one-time upgrade or as a recurring cost:
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/i-added-carplay-to-my-r1t.6250/post-173731

I’d even be fine paying for it only to later have it become an included feature as Rivian competes more in the mainstream space than in the early adopter space. I had to quote from a different thread on the same subject because there is enough interest in CP and work-arounds that more than a couple of us (and the overwhelming majority of reviewers) continue to note the absence in many threads here. I’m trying to introduce CP into the discussion in threads which name CP, AA, or screen projection, and in those about feature requests.

As annoying as we may be now, imagine in the not-too-distant future when normal (not Rivian-obsessed) consumers start buying Rivians without a lot of research because they like the look, the performance, or whatever. On delivery day they are shocked to discover that their expensive new mainstream-competitive EV doesn’t have CarPlay. It will never even occur to a lot of people to ask about the inclusion of CP because it is expected to be included or an extra-cost option on all brands sold in the U.S. except for Tesla. Oh, and now Rivian. To many consumers omitting CP would be like omitting Bluetooth: it’s considered a convenience and safety feature and going without it is perceived as a major step backwards.

If RJ and team want to pursue this path without huge increases in the native system capabilities quickly, then I think they’ll face increasing pressure from consumers and criticism from reviewers.

 

[DJG]

It's really not hard to say-- I can't think of anything they could offer that would make me want to pay monthly. It only makes me not want their vehicle.

I especially don't want to pay monthly for data, as I'm already paying monthly for that (my phone). Charging me again for something I'm already paying for is not compelling.

I don't think you're their target market, and that's fine (on both sides).

 

[Obioban]

I don't think you're their target market, and that's fine (on both sides).

I will be buying an EV pickup truck, so I should be in the arena

Sponsored