In all cases the margins were razor thin. Poorly equipped cars were stolen marginally more and likewise cost a trivial amount more to insure.
But personal new car buying is 500% driven by consumers using emotion driven logic to magnify tiny differences so sales dropped, somewhat, maybe. It's hard to separate this from the variable of older products and cheaper products generally selling less well than the new hotness. Column locks went on to become standard as OEMs refreshed product lines and did mid-life facelifts.
And just waving it all away with "No, people just buy shiny" is counter to volvo even existing as it did. Many people do not buy just shiny.
I wonder, would this also be a physical retrofit? There could be hardware limitations to change here.
The system can auto correct.
For example, one person claims that such a vulnerability means that the insurance company won't pay, for it leaves no smashed windows if you are robbed.
However, all it takes is one person going to court, publicizing it enough, and winning against the insurance company.
What happens? The insurance company, naturally, starts to increase rates for owners of that brand of car.
It has to pay out more often, for that car has a weakness, and this is the result.
This has happened before, with cars that didn't have physical steering wheel ignition locks, back in the 80s.
The result? Sales dropped for those cars, no one wants to pay 50% more for insurance, and manufacturers quickly worked to fix the issue.
It's a sad thing though, to see a relentless stare at the daily, short term bottom line, without thought to other factors, and long term profit.
Way to drive away customers, and crash a reputation! Brands to steer clear of, to be sure!