OTA connected with low marginal cost features monetized is the disruption. Car companies don't want to go back to the absurdly low gross margins of past decades after Tesla demonstrated how lucrative this business model can be.

Welcome to the future, now contribute to those ARR stats.

> If someone wants to "disrupt" the automotive industry, forget about electric or self driving, build a decent car with no computer in it and no data connection, that is easily maintained on the owners terms. That's all I want.

I think that ship has sailed. Data is profitable and shiny tech features like remote start apps sell. I'm sure with the move to eSIM manufacturers will probably moved the connectivity to the main computer instead of a separate module like some of the models from last decade.

But bicycles are unconnected, unlicensed and for the most part easily repairable. Some ebikes have connectivity with companion appa but it's easily avoided.

Bikes are also exposed to the elements and easily stolen. Yes someone will chime in saying they are perfectly fine cycling in freezing winter or muggy summer weather, but that’s not going to do any favors in convincing most people to embrace cycling as their primary means of transportation.

> build a decent car with no computer in it and no data connection

No idea where you are but the problem is, connected features are slowly dictated by law - vide SOS call and self driving/lane assist/AEB are also required in all new cars. The fight isn’t with vehicle manufacturers, the fight is with legislators.

Cynically I'd say the manufacturers have bought that legislation to create bigger barriers to entry and cement their position. I definitely agree that disruption requires a battle on many fronts to remove incumbents. While not the same, uber, airbnb, and even tesla have managed to change or circumvent laws that protect incumbent interests, so it is possible.

This is known as regulatory capture, and yes that’s exactly what has happened in every major industry. Established players help write legislation that favors them and raises the barrier to entry for the entire market.

Disrupters like those you mention find loopholes in the laws and exploit them long enough to litigate their case. In parallel they lobby for laws to make their businesses fully legal. If they fail on either front, they usually have run their gray market operation long enough to have spent all of their investors’ money.

This is why it’s important to support candidates that truly support lowering regulations. A candidate that’s actually serious about this will be eviscerated though.

So many voters exhibit the desire to be hassled by their government under the pretense that their government is going to hassle someone else.

My dream car would be an electric sports car which other than the electric drivetrain, has a feature set circa the early 2000s. The only “modern” features I’d want is a dumb LCD screen to connect CarPlay to. Or better yet, a simple slot to prop up an iPad.

100% agree.

It's illegal to sell new cars people like you and I want to buy, unfortunately.

>build a decent car with no computer in it and no data connection, that is easily maintained on the owners terms. That's all I want.

well except for the last part that is what a good public transportation system looks like. Haven't had a car since my 2nd year in uni. No car no problems. Same goes for every other weird contemporary gadget that someone wants you to subscribe you too. Peloton is replaced by a good cycling track and a jog in the park.

Not even the best public transportation lets you travel fully on your terms. You are still dictated by it’s schedule and route, and the presence of other people who may or may not be nice traveling companions. You have to wait in the rain, snow, or heat (less bad if transit sticks to schedule, but US transit often does so poorly).

That said, I could happily embrace living without a car and using just transit in a city like Tokyo or Seoul. But I don’t feel the same doing so in any city (or metro region) in the US - not even NYC which supposedly has the “best” public transit in the country, but still leaves a lot to be desired.

Yeah, and don't hide some of the relays up under the dash where you can't even see them (thanks Chevy S-10, which is otherwise simple and decent; the relays seemed fine anyway)

Most people already focus on the weekly/monthly payment. That has been the focus of auto advertising for my entire life.

But after I pay off a loan on a traditional car, I own the car outright and can use all its features for the lifetime of the vehicle. I can also sell the car to someone with all its features intact.

That probably puts you in the minority these days. The typical buyer is willing to pay $500/month in perpetuity to lease a BMW rather than pay $500 to finance a Honda even if it means they'll own the Honda outright in X years.

I don't not-sympathize with them. It's not like when you bought a model year 2000 car. Ten years later it didn't end up being significantly worse than a 2010 car. Nowadays if you buy a 2022 car, you're probably going to end up having a Flintstonesmobile in 2032.

Due to the way they're calculated, the lease payments can often be determined in an opaque way that is not apparent to the customer in terms of a car's MSRP. Thus you can end up with a $50,000 BMW whose monthly lease payment comes out to be cheaper than the monthly payment leasing a $35,000 Honda.

It’s not a cost is it’s an agency issue. The device should work for the buyer not the seller.

> forget about electric

> easily maintained

electric should be easier to maintain