Warum muss man jetzt für Dinge auf dem Auto, die eigentlich im Preis inbegriffen sein sollten, extra bezahlen?

In recent years, the trend of "everything can be subscribed and upgraded" has not only reached the automotive industry but has also grown stronger.

Recently, Tesla launched a "steering signal lever modification" service on its Chinese official website, specifically designed for the refreshed Model 3, priced at 2,499 yuan.

This lever, which is almost a standard feature in all cars, was first removed under Tesla's "innovation" and then returned at a high price as an optional accessory.

Rather than being an "innovative upgrade," it seems more like taking away the basic human - vehicle interaction interface that should have existed in the first place and then selling it to you again.

It's tough for the owners who have already taken delivery of the new - version Model 3 without the steering lever. They either have to continue using the buttons or spend 2,499 yuan on the modification. According to multiple sources, Tesla will reinstall the standard steering lever on the Model 3s to be delivered in the future.

Once again, the old owners have been set up.

The steering lever "should have been there" not only because it conforms to the long - formed operating habits of drivers but also because the regulations and standards of various countries and regions have always emphasized the common - sense requirement that in - vehicle controls should be "identifiable and easily accessible."

After removing the steering lever, when dealing with complex road conditions such as roundabouts and continuous lane changes, it's difficult for drivers to intuitively, accurately, and quickly find the button while the steering wheel is turning. Imagine, when you turn the steering wheel half a circle, can you quickly and accurately confirm which is the left and which is the right?

This design, which sacrifices safety and convenience for the sake of minimalism and innovation, is questionable. Now, Tesla's official "thoughtful" launch of the lever modification service is tantamount to admitting that the previous design lacked overall consideration.

However, the cost of correcting this "mistake" has to be borne by the consumers who have already paid for the whole vehicle.

A part that should have been a basic safety component of the vehicle at the factory has now become a "value - added service" worth 2,499 yuan. Is this really a technological iteration or a shrewd "calculation"?

Tesla's approach inevitably reminds people of two other similar "sly moves": BMW's "seat heating subscription service" and the paid unlocking of additional horsepower offered by brands such as Volkswagen and Mercedes.

BMW's "seat heating subscription service" requires car owners to pay extra after purchasing the car to activate this function, even though the hardware for this function is already installed in the original vehicle. After a strong public backlash, BMW had to announce the cancellation of this service.

This clearly exposes the revenue - increasing idea of "installing hardware first and then selling the unlocking service."

Just as BMW was being severely criticized, Volkswagen, seemingly unaware of the situation, followed suit. UK owners of the ID.3 need to pay an additional 16.5 pounds per month or a one - time payment of 649 pounds to fully unlock the car's 228 - horsepower performance.

What's even more embarrassing is that the new - version ID.3 is registered at the factory with a full 228 - horsepower parameter, and insurance companies calculate premiums based on the original factory - registered horsepower...

In other words, whether the car owners pay extra to unlock the performance or not, they are at a disadvantage:

If they don't pay, they get less performance but still have to pay high insurance premiums;

If they pay, they are being exploited by Volkswagen...

It gives the impression that the entire automotive industry is a bit of a shoddy operation.

Buying a car should not be a complicated thing, but now it always seems that car manufacturers are trying to set up traps for car owners.

If Tesla first reduces the configuration and then raises the price, BMW and Volkswagen have taken "software - defined vehicles" to a new level.

Of course, we should recognize and accept that software - defined vehicles are an irreversible industry trend. Through OTA upgrades, vehicles can be as up - to - date as mobile phones, which is undoubtedly a significant progress.

It is understandable for car manufacturers to hope to create new profit growth points through software services from a business logic perspective.

However, the original intention of technological innovation should be to bring better experiences and higher value to users, rather than splitting and reselling the rights and interests that originally belong to consumers.

In these operations, the sense of "setting up traps" far outweighs the element of innovation.

They take advantage of information asymmetry and the exploration of new business models to try to squeeze every last bit of benefit from consumers.

This kind of behavior not only overdrafts the brand's credibility in the eyes of users but also may pose hidden dangers to the healthy development of the entire industry.

True innovation should provide new and valuable value - added services beyond the existing functions, such as more intelligent assisted - driving functions and a richer in - vehicle entertainment ecosystem.

It should not turn the basic functions that have long been industry norms and familiar to users from "ownership" into "subscription rights."

This article is from the WeChat official account "ifanr". Author: ifanr, exploring future trends. 36Kr is published with authorization.