Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WhenenRome
I'm not sure if your post was merely going off on a tangent. But if you're suggesting that someone not renewing or subscribing to On-Star has a ''second hand smoke-like'' impact on other parties, I think that's way off base. Exactly how do you mean that?
And whether or not I'm reading that part correctly, I'm pretty sure you are suggesting (in the first part of your post) that people who don't renew On-Star also don't generally consider auto safety a priority... Not only is that just wrong, it's just plain condescending. Actually, I find most of the arguments against the people who rationally decide not to renew for the price (i.e., suggesting that one of us non-subscribers could have an accident and end up feeling ''pretty dumb'') arrogant as a whole.
Instead of assuming that we're just "stupid people who don't care about safety," why not take a more humble approach to your thoughts as to why we don't subscribe to it? I mean - not that a personal decision requires justification to anyone else - but I've explained quite explicitly why I chose not to renew. It's a rational sentiment, certainly not that of a stupid, reckelss, or careless person... and it's a sentiment that may reflect a number of people who don't renew On-Star.
Perhaps GM should consider renaming it On-Snob - to appeal to those who specifically want it to feel smarter and more relevant (and just plain better) than non-subscribers? Because I'm seeing some statements here that are just coming off more as egotistical than substantial.
|
Greetings WhenenRome,
No, I think you misread my comments. I was suggesting that yes, most new auto buyers do not consider auto safety high on their priority of features. And when it comes to safety, telematics (OnStar) is only one element in designing a comprehensive safety auto system. For accident avoidance, I mentioned the federal Highway Safety administration has release a statement to the effect that they have determined the anti-skid systems could save many lives and help drivers avoid accidents. I would not consider Onstar classified as part of the active safety avoidance category. I do consider Onstar or any telematics system that supports drivers and passengers in emergencies a key element in safety and should be part of the auto safety system design.
I am not hung up on arguments regarding subscriptions. I was really was making a much more pervasive statement, suggesting that government regulations might be required in order for auto makers to include auto safety technologies systems required for every passenger car, SUV and truck, such as full array air bags systems, anti-skid, telematics for air bag deployment and emergency situations, roll over, avoidance and protection systems. I consider telematics just part of the safety system topic, just like anti-lock brakes are just one component, but all of the technologies designed to work together is where the power and value to consumers truly is in my view. Quite honestly, the talk about who subscribes is of no interest to me personally, that is an individual choice as it should be.
JLM