Follow us today…
In the world of electric vehicles, horsepower and range have been the headline metrics, the digital-age equivalent of roaring V8s and massive gas tanks. But what if the very power your car is capable of producing is held hostage behind a monthly paywall? That’s the question Volkswagen is forcing its customers to ask with a new, controversial “performance-on-demand” subscription for its ID.3 electric car in the UK. For a monthly fee, owners can unlock the full horsepower their vehicle’s hardware is already capable of delivering. This move has ignited a firestorm of debate, not just about the value proposition of a single car model, but about the very definition of ownership in the 21st century.
Redefining Ownership, One Feature at a Time
The “features-on-demand” model is the automotive industry’s latest attempt to create recurring revenue streams long after a car has been driven off the lot. The concept is simple: build vehicles with standardized, high-end hardware and then allow customers to activate or deactivate certain features via software for a fee. While automakers see a future of flexible, customizable vehicles and continuous income, many consumers see a Trojan horse. You’ve purchased the hardware—the motors, the batteries, the processors—but you don’t truly own its full capabilities.
This VW horsepower subscription is a particularly stark example. The car is physically capable of delivering more power from day one, but an artificial software lock prevents it. This approach fundamentally alters the traditional contract between a car buyer and the manufacturer. As pointed out by consumer advocates, it blurs the line between a product you own and a service you merely rent. The car in your driveway begins to feel less like a personal possession and more like a piece of hardware on a lease, perpetually tethered to the manufacturer for its full functionality.
A History of Backlash
Volkswagen is not the first automaker to test these murky waters, and the results have been far from encouraging. BMW famously faced a massive consumer backlash when it tried to charge a monthly fee for heated seats. The reaction was swift and overwhelmingly negative. Customers, many of whom pointed out they had already paid for the heating elements when they bought the car, viewed it as a blatant cash grab. The story went viral, becoming a case study in corporate overreach and generating significant negative press for the brand.
Similarly, Mercedes-Benz has offered a “performance subscription” for its EQ electric models that shaves about a second off the 0-60 mph time for an annual fee. While perhaps less egregious than charging for a basic comfort feature like heated seats, it was still met with skepticism from a public wary of being nickel-and-dimed for features their cars already possess. The lesson from these experiments seems clear: consumers have little appetite for paying repeatedly for hardware they’ve already bought.
Advertising
Damaging a Hard-Won Brand Image
For Volkswagen, this move is particularly risky. The company is still working to rebuild its reputation following the “Dieselgate” emissions scandal. It has since invested billions in repositioning itself as a leader in electric mobility, aiming for a friendly, accessible, and trustworthy brand image. Nicknaming its EVs the “ID” family was meant to signify an intelligent and iconic design for the people. However, locking away performance behind a paywall feels decidedly anti-consumer and undermines that “people’s car” ethos.
In an increasingly competitive EV market, brand loyalty and consumer trust are paramount. With formidable competition from Tesla, Hyundai, Kia, and a wave of Chinese automakers, creating friction points in the ownership experience is a dangerous strategy. This subscription model could easily be perceived as a betrayal of trust, leaving a sour taste in the mouths of potential buyers and damaging the brand’s long-term reputation for a short-term revenue boost.
One-Time Fee vs. Endless Payments
Could Volkswagen have approached this differently? A one-time, unlockable software upgrade might have been far more palatable. This model is common in the tech and gaming industries, where users can pay a single fee to permanently unlock additional features or content. This approach respects the concept of ownership; once paid for, the feature is yours. It allows the manufacturer to streamline production with standardized hardware while still offering customization and capturing additional revenue. A perpetual monthly subscription, however, feels punitive and exploitative, creating a sense of resentment rather than satisfaction.
Wrapping Up
Volkswagen’s decision to gate the full performance of its ID.3 behind a subscription is a significant misstep that misunderstands the modern consumer. While the allure of recurring revenue is strong, automakers must recognize that a car is one of the most significant purchases a person makes. The feeling of true ownership is a core part of that value proposition. By imposing artificial software limitations and charging customers to remove them, VW, like BMW before it, risks alienating its base and damaging its brand at a critical moment in the EV transition. The message from consumers is clear: sell us the car, the whole car, and stop trying to rent it back to us piece by piece.
Disclosure: Images rendered by Midjourney and Gemini
Rob Enderle is a technology analyst at Torque News who covers automotive technology and battery developments. You can learn more about Rob on Wikipedia and follow his articles on Forbes, X, and LinkedIn.
Follow us today…
Source: torquenews.com
