Back in July, I shared with my readers that I would never buy a software-defined vehicle. I laid out my concerns in a rather lengthy piece of writing, but apparently I missed something crucial. When I mentioned the software itself, I said that car manufacturers might decide that my car was no longer worth updating, just as smartphone and computer manufacturers often do. However, I didn’t cover the topic as thoroughly as I should have: the truth is that car manufacturers might just as well stop updating software and declare bankruptcy.
I'm not talking about Fisker here, although it's a good example. Fortunately, the company didn't last long enough to influence more people than those who bought the first Ocean units. Off-roadOn the other hand, more than 160,000 customers in China are having trouble with cars made by manufacturers that have kicked the bucket in that market.
According to Rest of World, several customers of WM (WeltMeister) Motor complained that they were unable to open their cars or use the air conditioning. The Shanghai-based company filed for bankruptcy in October 2023 and its cloud-based services are now at risk. Owners of the company's BEVs complained that they were unable to use their car radios, which require an internet connection to work. These customers must miss regular radios. They also could not check the charge status or remaining range of their vehicles, meaning they could suddenly get stranded anywhere. Some companies do not provide customers with keys to open their cars or start them. All you need to do is a smartphone app. If you do not have access to Electric vehicle the producer's waiters, the customers are fried.
Photo: Public domain
Rest of World has said that automakers in China must ensure that all discontinued models have aftermarket services and replacement parts at least ten years after they hit the production dust. However, the 160,000 customers now affected by brands that no longer exist have no software law to rely on. Even if they have body parts and other components to keep their BEVs running, they will still be dependent on the software that defines them. If any regulators decided to address this issue anywhere in the world, it would only apply to companies that are still afloat for obvious reasons: there is no way to expect a company that no longer exists to provide anything. If that were possible, regulators would require them to continue paying salaries so that their potential constituents don’t lose their jobs.
The Rest of World article points out that this is one reason why customers are migrating to larger, more tried and tested manufacturers, but it has always been this way. Newcomers have lower sales volumes than traditional automakers. They have to seduce buyers with very compelling arguments to convince them to try new products instead of sticking with the established players. It may be that this is even more evident now, but that would require more data to confirm.
Unfortunately for more conservative customers who prefer to play it safe, this strategy will not help them when all automakers are willing to look like startups. Volvo has partnered with Google for the tech giant to help it with its operating system. However, early evaluations of the EX90 flagship show that the car struggles to recognize its electronic key generated by a smartphone app and will not offer several promised features because they are still in development. This is something that no mature automaker would dare to do not so long ago. But it gets worse. Remember that Volvo is a mainstream automaker aided by Google. If such a deal is not enough to prevent software problems, can you expect these software-defined cars to be better if they come from smaller or even larger companies without software expertise? BEV startups do not seem to have a chance, especially those without deep-pocketed investors, who are still struggling to survive…
Photo: Volvo
Suppose one of those companies on the wrong side of the grass or on its way there manages to keep its servers running. No one should expect it to fix bugs or solve other software difficulties. If it’s lucky, it will sell its assets to someone interested in keeping the brand alive. If not, neither will its customers. Independent shops with programming skills could keep these software-defined vehicles alive for a while, but for how long, given all the complex variables involved?
In a way, it makes perfect sense that most automakers are pursuing the software-defined vehicle business model. In addition to adding another revenue stream to their products, these companies may also be developing a new type of “too big to fail.” It will be much easier to rely on federal loans if millions of customers need your company to stay in business. How would they open or activate their cars without this, not to mention all the other functions that BEV makers could turn into cloud-based functions? This is another major red flag about these smartphones on wheels. Let’s hope we still have cars for sale despite all the efforts to put them out of business.