Software-Defined Vehicle PricingSoftware-Defined Vehicle Pricing

Key takeaways

• Owners resist paying again for features they see as part of the car, such as performance and core safety.
• Recurring pricing is accepted for connectivity, content and assistance that genuinely improves over time.
• Bundled memberships and explicit, reversible data opt-ins protect trust better than per-feature charges.

What problem was the client trying to solve?

A luxury marque came to us with a software roadmap and a memory. The roadmap planned a growing list of over-the-air upgrades and features on demand. The memory was of the backlash the wider industry had seen when owners were asked to pay monthly for things they believed came with the car.

The commercial case for recurring software revenue was clear. What was not clear was which features an owner who had already paid a premium would accept paying for again, which they would treat as an insult, and how much in-car data they would trade for convenience. Not a feature list. A pricing line the marque could hold.

Why is software-defined vehicle pricing difficult to research?

Software turns the car into a relationship that is priced more than once - which is an opportunity only if the second price feels earned.

The paid-twice problem

An owner who paid a premium for the vehicle judges any subscription against that purchase, not against the feature’s value in isolation.

Feature lists flatter

Asked to rate features, affluent buyers value almost all of them. Only forced choices reveal which ones carry real weight.

Own, lease and subscribe mean different things by feature

Performance unlocks, safety, connectivity and evolving assistance sit in different mental categories, and a single model would misprice most of them.

Privacy differs by generation and market

Comfort with in-car intelligence and data sharing varies sharply by age, ownership type and country.

What did the research set out to answer?

The objective: Identify which software features affluent owners value, what they will pay for them and in what form, and the point at which data and privacy concerns outweigh convenience - by market, generation and ownership type.

• Rank the feature set. Use MaxDiff across 28 features from driver assistance and in-car intelligence to connectivity, performance and autonomy.
• Price the formats. Use choice-based conjoint to measure willingness to pay for each feature as included, one-off purchase, lease or subscription.
• Separate owning from renting. Establish which features owners insist on owning outright and which they will rent.
• Find the privacy line. Trade data sharing against convenience to locate where comfort with in-car intelligence breaks.
• Hear the language of backlash. Use owner interviews to capture what makes a charge feel fair or feel like a penalty.

How did Amber & Bull research software-defined vehicle pricing?

This study was delivered as our Software-Defined Vehicle Value & Privacy Study, an automotive industry solution within Custom Research. Pricing & Value supported the willingness-to-pay modelling and Product & Innovation the feature prioritisation; the privacy module drew on The AI Trust Ladder. It covers the Aspiration, Selection and Verdict stages of the Decision Arc.

Screened on investable assets, vehicle ownership and decision role, with quotas by generation.

Phase 1: Feature & Format Definition

Built the feature list and purchase formats with the marque’s product and software teams.

Phase 2: Owner Interviews

24 interviews exploring past subscription experiences, perceived fairness and data comfort.

Phase 3: Quantitative Field

700 completes across four markets, covering MaxDiff, conjoint and the data trade-off module.

Phase 4: Pricing Architecture Synthesis

Translated utilities into a feature-by-format map and a recommended pricing architecture by market.

What did the study recommend?

Four recommendations came out of the study, each a rule for the software pricing architecture.

• Never subscribe what feels like the car - Features owners see as part of the vehicle, performance and core safety, should be included or bought once, not rented.
• Subscribe what renews - Connectivity, content and assistance that genuinely improves over time is where recurring pricing is accepted.
• Price as a membership, not a meter - Bundled tiers read as a relationship; feature-by-feature charges read as nickel-and-diming.
• Make the data exchange explicit and reversible - Opt-in by feature, with the value of sharing shown, keeps trust intact across generations and markets.

Why does this approach work?

Software revenue in luxury automotive will be won or lost on fairness, and fairness cannot be read from a rating scale. It has to be modelled through trade-offs, feature by feature and format by format.

By combining MaxDiff, conjoint and a privacy trade-off with verified owners, the marque now knows which features can carry a second price and which would cost it the relationship - before the roadmap reaches the customer.

Frequently asked questions

How do you research willingness to pay for over-the-air upgrades?

Rating scales overstate value because owners rate most features highly. MaxDiff forces a ranking of the features, and a choice-based conjoint measures willingness to pay for each feature in different purchase formats and at different price points.

What is Software-Defined Vehicle Value & Privacy Study?

The Software-Defined Vehicle Value & Privacy Study is an Amber & Bull custom study that identifies which software features affluent car owners value, what they will pay and in what form (owned, leased or subscribed), and where in-car data privacy concerns outweigh convenience.

Who took part in this study?

The study covered 700 quantitative completes · 24 owner depth interviews across United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan. Respondents verified on investable assets rather than income: HNW (USD 1M–30M) and UHNW (USD 30M+), with affluent where stated