GM Is Quietly Becoming a Subscriptions Company (businessinsider.com)
- Reference: 0184588294
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/07/22/2010225/gm-is-quietly-becoming-a-subscriptions-company
- Source link: https://www.businessinsider.com/general-motors-gm-earnings-subscriptions-revenue-business-2026-1
> GM says its software business keeps roughly 70 cents of every dollar it brings in. That's a rare level of profitability in the auto industry, as many car sales generate just four to 10 cents per sales dollar. [...] GM expects to add about 1 million OnStar subscribers this year, bringing the total close to 13 million. Super Cruise, GM's hands-free, eyes-on driving system, is growing even faster. GM added about 70,000 subscribers during the quarter and expects to end the year with more than 850,000. Revenue from the service increased about 70% from a year earlier.
>
> And a lot of drivers are sticking around after the free period ends. GM said between 30% and 40% of eligible owners continue paying after their included three-year Super Cruise subscription expires. [..] "We do think we have tremendous levers, multiple levers of growth," Barra said on the call. "We definitely think there's a lot of opportunity at GM to grow, improve margins, and become less cyclical."
>
> "Software and services are becoming increasingly important to how customers experience GM vehicles and how we deliver value beyond the initial purchase," a spokesperson previously told Business Insider. "As vehicles become more software-defined, we can introduce new digital experiences through updates and optional services rather than hardware changes."
[1] https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/26/07/22/1958256/apple-partners-with-klarna-to-offer-iphones-macs-on-a-subscription-basis
[2] https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GM/earnings/GM-Q2-2026-earnings_call-544947.html
[3] https://www.businessinsider.com/general-motors-gm-earnings-subscriptions-revenue-business-2026-1
brakes only $4.99/mo or $50/year! (Score:5, Funny)
brakes only $4.99/mo or $50/year!
Re: (Score:2)
(99 * 12) / (5 * 52) = $4.57/day
It's really easy to burn up more than this on tolls, especially here in Florida. Yeah, you'd have to leave a bit earlier to use FSD as a substitute for toll roads, but most of the stress of dealing with traffic is actually having to do the annoying stop-and-go pedal dance.
I'm not simping for Musk here, heck, I don't even own a Tesla, but I'm just pointing out that people absolutely do already spend this kind of money just to get to their destination without the hassle of bei
Another reason not to buy from Government Motors (Score:2)
And to buy an older car.
Perfect! Never buying a GM vehicle ever! (Score:2)
So that's it for GM. BMW already went that way, VW, and Toyota is starting to sniff out the subscription markets too.
I really wonder if there's going to be a car company out there that refuses to do this or everybody's going to be on the subscription bandwagon and we're all going to be looking for old non-smart vehicles.
Here comes the return of the carbureted cars. This is going to be great for the environment. But maybe the EVs from China will have enough people hacking them to make them at least free fro
Re: (Score:2)
There's eventually going to be the Slate Truck, if you really want that early 90s throwback vibe. Personally, I'd rather have something a bit less spartan, even if it means that every once in awhile it nags me for not subscribing to OnStar. Different strokes for different folks.
I'm keeping my current wheels (Score:1)
I'm keeping my current wheels until death do us part.
if the wheels fall off I put em back on again.
Light, stickshift, simple, joyful. No watchful eye. No connection to any network. It does have a black box that can be played back tho.
But today's cars? An affront to privacy, an affront to the person who enjoys driving, an affront to basic decency.
Maintain your old cars, folks - they don't make 'em like they used to now, and this time is far worse than prior shockwaves.
Stuff like this makes the federally
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck in the rust belt. Cars here last about 20 years tops.
They don't even write good software! (Score:3)
How many cars have you driven, that had elegant, well-crafted user interfaces in their software? Maybe Tesla? The rest of them write crappy UIs with menu trees that could only make a call center manager happy. (But don't worry, your call is very important to us.)
If they used the money to do it right, I'd be slightly less unhappy with the concept.
Re: (Score:2)
I think part of the problem is that a lot of the people who design and manage user facing interfaces don't know how bad their stuff is.
Re:They don't even write good software! (Score:5, Informative)
Tesla is awful due to the lack of physical controls where they would really make sense. It is an actively driver-hostile car. Other than the powertrain, which is amazing, the car is completely obnoxious. The door handles in particular are a huge problem and have been banned in China. Why would you intentionally make door handles that are super awkward to open rather than just pull? Why would you make someone dig through a menu to adjust the mirrors, or adjust the A/C vents and other controls? Trying to shift with the right stalk? Awkward and horrible. I think they thought it was sexy to just have a screen and nothing else, but in reality it just absolutely sucks. Before you say, "but have you owned one?" Yes, yes I have. It's my wife's current daily driver. And I avoid driving it like the plague.
Re:They don't even write good software! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I hate cars that have the often-used controls as touch-screen. I don't even like touch-screen radio controls. Give me a button to push or a knob to turn.
But then, I drive a stick shift, so my opinion doesn't count. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
The absolutely most boneheaded Tesla UI decision was putting the speedometer on the infotainment. Anecdotally, driving around central Florida I almost never see a Tesla driver doing the usual "speed limit +5" - they're always either flying like a bat out of hell, or driving like Mr. Magoo. The worst ones are the drivers who alternate between both: they go slow as shit until someone tries to pass them, then they take off like a maniac, then begin slowing down again - pretty much the sort of behavior you mi
Re: (Score:2)
> Tesla is awful due to the lack of physical controls where they would really make sense. It is an actively driver-hostile car.
It is also dangerous as it makes you take your eyes off the road .... yes, it should only take a second -- but you know how it is, you often cannot find what you are looking for as quickly as you thought and before you know it you have driven 1/4 mile NOT looking at the car in front -- what happens if it were to brake suddenly ?
Re: (Score:2)
> Maybe Tesla?
A few years back when my partner and I test drove a Model 3, I think we spent more time Googling things than actually driving the damn car. I'm sure once you get past the learning curve it's not so bad, but ultimately neither of us wanted to deal with that. For all the crap Chevy gets over "bad software", they did a damn good job just making the Bolt be a normal car that happens to be powered by electrons rather than dinosaur juice. That was what ultimately sealed the deal.
Also, back then the Bolt had Ca
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, CarPlay is good because it was built by...not a car company.
"how we deliver value beyond the initial purchase" (Score:3)
Value to who, exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
They said the quiet part out loud.
Re: (Score:2)
The CEO and shareholders.
Suckers (Score:4, Interesting)
So they're taking all your data, selling it, and making you pay for the privilege? Must be a nice business if you have zero scruples.
Why do you need OnStar? Who would want to steal a GM car? All the GM brands are at the very bottom of Consumer Reports reliability index for 2026.
OnStar uses cellular service to connect, so if you have an emergency, either both OnStar and your cell phone work, or neither work. So there's no advantage to using OnStar rather than just dialing 911. 911 services are allowed access to your phone's GPS location regardless of settings.
It just seems like a pork package to sell along with the clear coat. Not to mention the theft of your data without compensation, whether you subscribe or not. You have to physically disable the modem to avoid that.
Re: (Score:2)
> You have to physically disable the modem to avoid that.
And nobody knows how to do that, and if they did there's no guarantee the car would keep working. I bring this up to prevent the quoted statement from making someone think that "disabling your car modem is a thing" people do... it isn't, despite many -- like myself -- very much wanting to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Cottage business opportunity.
Re: (Score:2)
What's worse is stock GM, Ford, and Stellantis vehicles lack proper coatings on their steel frames and they rust out in 5 years with mid-West or coastal ownership. A new vehicle must be undercoated yourself with a proper coating like spray-on bedliner.
Re: (Score:2)
And then there's unwanted Karr vulnerable Bluetooth remote unlock and immobilizers installed by the dealer even if you don't want it, they leave them.
Wait until your door hinges go here (Score:2)
What is to prevent them, but US?
Fuck OnStar and surveillance capitalism (Score:2)
GM can keep their low quality vehicles and rent-seeking bullshit.
The enshitification of your car (Score:2)
Wait until you start paying more per month on your car subscription than your car mortgage.
Subscriptions (Score:2)
Subscriptions in today's world are bullshit. Keep your crap GM.
Yeah, no (Score:2, Interesting)
They can spin this all they want, but only a small percentage of people are actually willing to pay for a subscription to their vehicle. Certainly not enough to sustain a business model around it for the long term.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be surprised. I'll bet the normies who buy their vehicles would pay, no questions asked.
Re:Yeah, no (Score:4, Informative)
"OnStar brought in about $800 million in the second quarter"
Re: (Score:2)
Most probably don't notice the charges or are too lazy to call up and cancel. I guarantee it won't ever be as easy as click here to cancel .
Re:Yeah, no (Score:5, Insightful)
You assume rationality. GM hopes to repeat the behavior of APPLE corpse .... and sell expensive transportation jewelry all gussied-up like a car. Body-by-Fisher now means fishing customers wallet for 70% profit.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's like Jeep, the salesmen are punished if customers don't sign up for the monthly services. Of course the first few months are always free and you can always cancel at any time they say.
Re: Yeah, no (Score:2)
Or the shitty car salesmen surreptitiously sign uo buyers without telling them
Re: Yeah, no (Score:1)
Every dealer everywhere pushes thousand dollar tire warranties for $800 worth of tires. It's just background noise when you're buying a car.
Pay up (Score:2)
... or we'll make you [1]shift it yourself [slashdot.org].
[1] https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/07/18/0239231/the-death-of-the-stick-shift-is-almost-here-for-americans
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and No.
If it's something physical like heated seats...that's a hard no.
If it's something subject to ongoing development and improvement like FSD then probably yes.
I still GREATLY prefer one and done purchase but things like FSD are...immature. You can't just buy it like adaptive cruise control and it's limited but works as advertised.
I still hate *aaS nonsense but there are a few times where paying for the thing results in improvements that make it well worth it.
Fast forward a ... while. I can see FSD d
Re: (Score:2)
70 cents on the dollar says they dont have to have a lot, but 800 mil/year on what... $15/mo or whatever it is? They have enough people grabbed on this crap.
And dont be naive, other car companies are looking at this profit and salivating.