Ford patents in car advertisements

[T-dubz]

https://www.motor1.com/news/732376/ford-patents-in-vehicle-advertisements/

Edited September 3 by T-dubz

[mackinaw]

Topic title, believe you mean patents, not parents.  

[akirby]

Before people get carried away, this doesn’t necessarily mean they want to do it, they just want the patent in case somebody else decides to do it.

[T-dubz]

 

I think the only thing that I would be remotely ok with would be if they replaced the vehicles start up animation with a short 5-10 sec commercial, but even with that, I’d want a good amount off of the purchase price.

[DeluxeStang]

The only way this is a good idea is if it drastically reduces my ownership costs. Like if you can option into having ads play as startup animations, and everytime one plays, it pays you a few bucks to an account of your choosing that can be used towards your monthly payment or something. Or if ads can ever be displayed externally, you get paid x amount per mile to drive around with a digital ad on the outside of your car. 

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, akirby said:

Before people get carried away, this doesn’t necessarily mean they want to do it, they just want the patent in case somebody else decides to do it.

But they need to stop this. So many people actually believe Ford's gonna do all these wacky ideas and it's hurting their reputation and driving people away from the brand. A lot of people, for instance, think Ford is genuinely gonna introduce that feature where the car repossesses itself essentially, and so they're not buying Fords.

 

 

People will make vids on this, and people won't buy Ford's because they think Ford's actually gonna do these in car ads. The casual consumer doesn't follow the industry like you or I do, and they don't really know what tech will or won't be added. They see some clickbait article or vid, and think it's actually happening. 

[fordmantpw]

6 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

But they need to stop this. So many people actually believe Ford's gonna do all these wacky ideas and it's hurting their reputation and driving people away from the brand. A lot of people, for instance, think Ford is genuinely gonna introduce that feature where the car repossesses itself essentially, and so they're not buying Fords.

 

 

People will make vids on this, and people won't buy Ford's because they think Ford's actually gonna do these in car ads. The casual consumer doesn't follow the industry like you or I do, and they don't really know what tech will or won't be added. They see some clickbait article or vid, and think it's actually happening. 

 

And 99% of those people will never see the fact that Ford patented this.

[Andrew L]

13 hours ago, T-dubz said:

 

I think the only thing that I would be remotely ok with would be if they replaced the vehicles start up animation with a short 5-10 sec commercial, but even with that, I’d want a good amount off of the purchase price.

 

I wouldn't be ok with that either.

[Rick73]

13 hours ago, T-dubz said:

I think the only thing that I would be remotely ok with would be if they replaced the vehicles start up animation with a short 5-10 sec commercial, but even with that, I’d want a good amount off of the purchase price.

Couldn’t a 5~10 second delay lead to security or safety issues under some circumstances?  Also, where does this logic end?  If initially 5~10 seconds, what prevents future revision to 30 seconds?  Not that numbers matter, it’s the principle of it all.  I do not like actually buying any item and then having others maintain control of what should be my property.  Sometimes it’s a necessary evil like with phone upgrades or Internet funding, but a car needs Ads to function about as much as a lawn mower or a pipe wrench.

 

The real issue for me is privacy, and not having much control over it.  I do not even like the idea of a car with microphones and cameras that could be eavesdropping on occupants for any reason.  I’m not sure statement below is even legal, but highlights potential abuse.

 

“The system could listen for dialogue between passengers and reduce the number of ads during conversations or play an audio ad when the cabin is quiet. It could also listen for keywords or phrases that indicate the driver's destination, using that information with historical data to begin serving relevant ads, which sounds like a privacy nightmare.”

[blazerdude20]

“Cruise control will resume after this 15 second ad from our sponsor State Farm”

[92merc]

Ford has done some interesting patents lately.  Another one from a month ago had them patenting speed detection in vehicles and reporting it to the police.  But Ford clarified that only Police Interceptor vehicles would be doing this.

 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

And 99% of those people will never see the fact that Ford patented this.

But that 1% who does, that's still millions of dollars in revenue that Ford lost. That sort of thing adds up. I'm just saying to Ford, optics. They have people who know media outlets will write about this, they know ideas like cars repossessing themselves, reporting other cars to the cops, and playing ads, that sort of thing is gonna turn people off, and they know the chances of them actually incorporating these features is quite low. So maybe just don't parent an idea if it's gonna piss a lot of people off and you aren't gonna use it in your cars anyways. 

[T-dubz]

There’s also a thing called the radio that already plays ads too. How many ads can one person handle in a car?

[joseodiaga4]

11 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

But they need to stop this. So many people actually believe Ford's gonna do all these wacky ideas and it's hurting their reputation and driving people away from the brand. A lot of people, for instance, think Ford is genuinely gonna introduce that feature where the car repossesses itself essentially, and so they're not buying Fords.

 

 

People will make vids on this, and people won't buy Ford's because they think Ford's actually gonna do these in car ads. The casual consumer doesn't follow the industry like you or I do, and they don't really know what tech will or won't be added. They see some clickbait article or vid, and think it's actually happening. 

Totally agree.

Also, it is a total waste of money to invest in this considering you don't invest so much in your ICE vehicles redesign, I mean, for this kind of stuff Ford seems to have money but for others, they don't.

[ice-capades]

14 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

There’s also a thing called the radio that already plays ads too. How many ads can one person handle in a car?

 

And a lot of those advertisements aren't heard because so many drivers are too busy and consumed with talking on their cell phones!

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, 92merc said:

Ford has done some interesting patents lately.  Another one from a month ago had them patenting speed detection in vehicles and reporting it to the police.  But Ford clarified that only Police Interceptor vehicles would be doing this.

 

Steve Lehto may be making a mistake assuming only police cars presently have the “equipment” to detect other vehicles’ speed.  Most cars with self driving capabilities must already have the equipment installed that allows the car to compute or estimate how fast other vehicles around them are traveling, otherwise a car in the right lane behind a truck, for example, would change lanes to pass right in the way of a car in the left lane going 100 MPH.  Cars also know how fast you’re coming up on a car in front, so knowing how fast you are going, allows knowing the speed of car in front.  Even if not accurate enough today for law enforcement, it can serve as a warning to LEOs to look for you.
 

It’s a slippery slope regardless.  Where I live citizens revolted against use of stoplight cameras and made city stop their use for traffic enforcement, though technology worked.  My wife got a ticket for not coming to a complete stop before turning right on red.  Pretty much everyone does it, but was not enforced until cameras monitored drivers, or after monitoring stopped.

[fordmantpw]

45 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

Totally agree.

Also, it is a total waste of money to invest in this considering you don't invest so much in your ICE vehicles redesign, I mean, for this kind of stuff Ford seems to have money but for others, they don't.

 

Do you realize the cost of this is practically zero in the grand scheme of things?  The potential revenue (if it were to ever happen) outweighs the cost by thousands of times.  

 

20 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Steve Lehto may be making a mistake assuming only police cars presently have the “equipment” to detect other vehicles’ speed.  Most cars with self driving capabilities must already have the equipment installed that allows the car to compute or estimate how fast other vehicles around them are traveling, otherwise a car in the right lane behind a truck, for example, would change lanes to pass right in the way of a car in the left lane going 100 MPH.  Cars also know how fast you’re coming up on a car in front, so knowing how fast you are going, allows knowing the speed of car in front.  Even if not accurate enough today for law enforcement, it can serve as a warning to LEOs to look for you.
 

It’s a slippery slope regardless.  Where I live citizens revolted against use of stoplight cameras and made city stop their use for traffic enforcement, though technology worked.  My wife got a ticket for not coming to a complete stop before turning right on red.  Pretty much everyone does it, but was not enforced until cameras monitored drivers, or after monitoring stopped.

 

Are people really that pissed off that a car can determine the speed of a car in front of it?  I mean, you don't need technology other than the speedometer in your car to guess pretty close.

[joseodiaga4]

3 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Do you realize the cost of this is practically zero in the grand scheme of things?  The potential revenue (if it were to ever happen) outweighs the cost by thousands of times.  

 

 

Are people really that pissed off that a car can determine the speed of a car in front of it?  I mean, you don't need technology other than the speedometer in your car to guess pretty close.

We don’t have any information about the cost of this so we cannot talk about it, maybe you are right, maybe not.

I was just saying that considering the limited resources, it is better to focus on what you really sell (vehicles) instead of this that seems to pursue a scheme like Youtube, Spotify and that really doesn’t seem to be a good idea, I mean it only could make sense if you are parked waiting for someone/something but in any other case I just don’t see it viable

[fordmantpw]

37 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

We don’t have any information about the cost of this so we cannot talk about it, maybe you are right, maybe not.

I was just saying that considering the limited resources, it is better to focus on what you really sell (vehicles) instead of this that seems to pursue a scheme like Youtube, Spotify and that really doesn’t seem to be a good idea, I mean it only could make sense if you are parked waiting for someone/something but in any other case I just don’t see it viable

 

No, we don't have hard numbers, but we can make an educated guess.  I'm in software development, and have a pretty good idea what it would take to build something like this.  It's relatively simple, so I'm pretty sure this was low-cost to develop.  Again, it's not a polished, ready to put in production piece.  It's the basics, mostly ideas, in order to patent the concept.  It's not like this thing is going to show up in a 2025 model year Ford this fall.

 

And, don't forget, Ford is also a software company.  Blue Cruise is software.  Connected Navigation is software.  Ford Pro (or whatever they call their commercial software) is software.  Those are features that Ford sells.  They don't just sell vehicles anymore.  Software is likely going to be one of Ford's most profitable pieces of business with much higher margins than the actual vehicles the software is used in.

 

That doesn't mean I want ads in my cars...they can keep 'em!

[joseodiaga4]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

 

No, we don't have hard numbers, but we can make an educated guess.  I'm in software development, and have a pretty good idea what it would take to build something like this.  It's relatively simple, so I'm pretty sure this was low-cost to develop.  Again, it's not a polished, ready to put in production piece.  It's the basics, mostly ideas, in order to patent the concept.  It's not like this thing is going to show up in a 2025 model year Ford this fall.

yeah I am sure it isn't that difficult or expensive, but then again what I am referring to is that Ford doesn't want to expend money on actual 2025 products but they can redirect the investment in something like this.

Do you really think that if this was a good business idea, other brands like Tesla would have already done it.

 

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

And, don't forget, Ford is also a software company.  Blue Cruise is software.  Connected Navigation is software.  Ford Pro (or whatever they call their commercial software) is software.  Those are features that Ford sells.  They don't just sell vehicles anymore.  Software is likely going to be one of Ford's most profitable pieces of business with much higher margins than the actual vehicles the software is used in.

 

That doesn't mean I want ads in my cars...they can keep 'em!

Agree with your statement, maybe I don't express myself correctly, but most of the software that you mention is related to driving the vehicle or the experience within it like Blue Cruise, but of course there are some others that are complementary but IMO they are focus on the branding of each brand like the Lincoln Rejuvenate: it is not driving experience but relates to the mantra of the brand.

I am trying to imagine the customer journey to this new feature and I don't really see it, in which scenarios? 

[Chrisgb]

[Me driving past a Ford dealership billboard ...] "Hey, Friend, take a right at the next light and let us take care of those pesky recalls at Werenot Ford! Have a pumkin spice latte at our in-store Starbucks while you wait! turn right, NOW!"

 

I think the concept could be left handed like other phone apps. You would have an in-app purchase option on FordPass for a FordPass Premium app, which would be the only way to block the ads. Ford could charge $4.99/mo for a Premium app, and collect revenue from the advertisers for authorization to display their ads in car for those that don't opt for the Premium app.

Edited September 4 by Chrisgb

[silvrsvt]

3 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

yeah I am sure it isn't that difficult or expensive, but then again what I am referring to is that Ford doesn't want to expend money on actual 2025 products but they can redirect the investment in something like this.

Do you really think that if this was a good business idea, other brands like Tesla would have already done it.

 

So here is the thing-what you want or think isn't what Ford should be doing...

 

Anyways, Possible future feature development (i.e. engineering/developing of concepts like this) and refreshes done on products are two completely different lines of accounting

 

This isn't going to pay for your air suspension that you so desperately want Lincoln to have in its products 🙄

[joseodiaga4]

15 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

So here is the thing-what you want or think isn't what Ford should be doing...

something that actually creates value and make their cars more appealing? 

Who on earth likes ads?

 

15 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Anyways, Possible future feature development (i.e. engineering/developing of concepts like this) and refreshes done on products are two completely different lines of accounting

 

This isn't going to pay for your air suspension that you so desperately want Lincoln to have in its products 🙄

 

do you think I am a fool? Of course I don't think that this is going to pay something like that, I am just saying that they should focus and pay attention to their business cases. 

What's is with you guys always trying to defend everything Ford does? 

 

Edited September 4 by joseodiaga4

[fordmantpw]

15 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

yeah I am sure it isn't that difficult or expensive, but then again what I am referring to is that Ford doesn't want to expend money on actual 2025 products but they can redirect the investment in something like this.

Do you really think that if this was a good business idea, other brands like Tesla would have already done it.

 

But if another brand has done it, it's too late to patent it and you lose out.  That's the problem with waiting.  Personally, I don't see this as being a reasonable feature in the near future, but if it happens, guess who will be sitting pretty with the patent! 

 

Also, as @silvrsvt pointed out, not doing this isn't going to pay for big features.  There is likely a group of software engineers at Ford whose sole purpose is to come up with ideas like this to patent.  Their budget is miniscule compared to a vehicle development team's budget.

[silvrsvt]

2 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

something that actually creates value and make their cars more appealing? 

Who on earth likes ads?

 

do you think I am a fool? Of course I don't think that this is going to pay something like that, I am just saying that they should focus and pay attention to their business cases. 

What's is with you guys always trying to defend everything Ford does? 

 

Because the vast majority of people have no idea how a business is actual run and operated. 

Plus if Ford has the patent for this and other companies want to do it, they can get passive income for it. Do you really think that they spent months trying to figure out how to do this?