Gee, thanks, GM! - Onstar analog to go silent

waterdr · December 2007

First of all, my intention was to not upset you or anyone. I can't speak to details about GM labor contracts and it is not the point of this thread.

I never attacked GM workers. That is a bit harsh to say that. If GM is working people 68 hrs a week, they need to find more workers. We do not ask our folks to work in those conditions except in rare circumstances....it is not good for anyone. Fact is, when you do that, you loose a lot of productivity and it becomes dangerous too. I, for one, have always personally supported labor in this country and there is lot we need to do to prevent jobs from moving overseas.

I apologize for bringing this conversation in a direction not intended.

As far as the local Saab dealer laughing at me, I have already talked to them about the issue and they have no answers, but I don't recall them laughing.

Here is my gripe.....GM owes me NOTHING for any service I paid for and did not get. But, I did pay to have On Star equipped on my car. When they did so, they did not tell me that the equipment would be obsolete in a few years. Now I just have useless buttons that do nothing. That is why I am irked.

Will I ever get anything from them? Nope....not one penny. But, I can choose to spend my money where I want.

waterdr · December 2007

I do know that the FCC is the culprit, but who is watching out for the consumer? What do we do in 3 years when the current OnStar "goes away"? The whole process has caused me to loose trust. If GM had "hooked-me-up" and got my vehicles going, they would probably have a customer for life.

I loved the OnStar service...one of the reasons why we bought what we bought. Now I am just left hanging. Not very good for OnStar brand imaging.

gagrice · December 2007

Cellular service to which Onstar is just an add-on is constantly changing. As a person that retired from a company that provides Cellular service I can tell you we were hit with changes that were not even thought of 3-4 years in advance. While it is true that Analog has been on the list to be phased out for a long time. It was still the best choice for Onstar. No digital service has the range that analog has. In the Arctic where we provide service to rigs that are 50-70 miles from our cell site, digital just does not work. Our company opted to keep some analog cells to provide the hundreds of truck and rig phones working. GM did not have that option as they depended on a cellular company to provide the service. To me the current Onstar with digital would be a waste of money. If you are out in the desert and your car quits. It is more than likely that your digital Onstar will not work. Digital cells are too small to be effective in rural areas. On a recent trip to Phoenix my wife tried using her cell phone about 10 miles out of Yuma. NO SERVICE. Just the direction cellular is moving. Good in the city not so good in the country.

jgorde · December 2007

I am a 40 year Chevy/GM guy, however, I cannot and will not stand in support or empathy with GM on this one. And, this is not about the workers or the Federal Government or the changing landscape of technology...it is simply a matter of who knew what and when. The ugly truth is that GM/ONSTAR knew about this change/decision well before they installed non-convertable units in various vehicles in 2002 and 2003, specifically - by then it was totally transparent - the decisions and motives for not installing convertible units in all vehicles was strictly economic - maintaining inventory flows to just in time production facilities and not wanting to heroically take it upon themselves to abandon already diagramed and harnessed and produced electronic systems for automobiles not yet actually in production. They could have assured every 2002-2003 vehicle could be converted to digital - the vast majority of the autos in question that cannot - and GM CHOSE NOT TO. That is why there will be a significant Class Action, to which I am likely going to be the Virginia plantiff. I have discussed my concerns with On STAR and the law firm leading the Class Action and I feel that my only recourse is the class-action. And, it is beyond just the loss of what I considered to be a valuable safety service in both my vehicles - it is also the decision not to reimburse existing and unused telephone minutes that remain on 12/31/07. GM/ONSTAR has actually decided NOT to reimburse these prepaid expenses even though almost 400,000 customers will INVOLUNTARILY lose their ability to use them. Why would they take such a position...likely because they have done the math and determined that the cost of reimbursement will not be offset by the number of customers that will remain loyal purchasers of future GM vehicles. There is a rather simple rule of decency here and keeping prepaid minutes as a non-reimburseable expense only adds insult to my sense of injury. So, I say again...GM knew about the change in time to make sure every vehicle in 2002 and forward was equiped with convertable units to handle the analog to digital change and chose not to do what they would have to do in order to make that happen...therein lies the only real issue...who knew and when? ONSTAR/GM...that's who - ONSTAR/GM knew before they ever produced a 2002 model year automobile and chose not to do the right thing...and that is why they are going to be in litigation for years to come and that is why I have agreed to participate. Who told me in March of 2002 and again in November of 2002 that one of the primary features that impacted my buying decisions would evaporate in 2007 and that the technology to avoid this event was denied to me eeven though it was already available...the answer is nobody told me. If they had, I would have waited for the new units and that would have cost GM a sale or postponed sale...and GM was not about to let that happen so nobody told me - even though everybody from the production plant to dealer knew. So, I will cease to be a GM customer for the next 40 years. My showroom perfect 1987 shortbed pick up will be my last reminder of a three generation committment to GM. And, I am fully supportive of labor...however more commited to integrity and truth. With regrets...jerry gorde.

gagrice · December 2007

They could have assured every 2002-2003 vehicle could be converted to digital

What about 1998 to 2001 GM vehicles? I was offered the $2000 Onstar option in June of 1998 on my Suburban. We knew at Cellular ONE in 1995 when we installed the first analog cell site in the Arctic, that analog was going away soon. Now it is 12 years later and it has not gone yet.

If you have service that is prepaid that will no longer be available. I say you have a right to a refund.

I thought I read someone's post that GM does have a digital upgrade for the analog only systems.

jgmilberg · December 2007

Not all vehicles equipped with On Star are digital capable. The ones that are not are usually ones that had a new model coming out in the next year or were slated for discontinuation. When either of these things happen GM, and any other car maker for that matter stops developing technology for those models. They would have had to go back and redesign a box for cars that were being changed, and that's just not how it works in the auto industry. That's where some people got caught up in this whole mess. My '01 Yukon XL was analog only, but when they redesigned the interior in '03 they integrated the digital capable box in the new model. The whole wiring harness and antenna assembly is different it's not just the control box, it's a whole system and the way it is integrated into the car itself, now people expect GM to put on the brakes and design an On Star box for a car that they don't even make anymore, or the current owner bought used from someone else.

On Star does owe the money for unused minutes, and for any prepaid service beyond 12/31/07 that can't be used because of the analog service being dropped. If the people that bought the minutes elected to discontinue On Star service it's one thing but they are being shut off against their wishes. I know some people that have paid 2 or 3 years in advance to get a better rate that no are being shut off, those people didn't know that this was going to happen or they wouldn't have purchased the service so far in advance. They deserve their money back the $500 new car voucher is a slap in the face to those that are being cut off and prepaid.

jgmilberg · December 2007

None of the auto companies domestic or foreign go back to work out an obsolete electronic part on a car that's 5 years old, unless it's going to cause some kind of damage to the car that would result in an injury of some kind.

If you have prepaid minutes or service beyond 12/31/07 they owe you the prorated amount of your remaining service and minutes and nothing more.

The SAAB dealer comment I made was in response to your rolling into the dealer on 1/2/08 with a warranty claim for the On Star not working. They might not laugh at you while your standing there but a chuckle or to will be heard after you're gone.

Have you looked to see if a newer car of the same model as yours has digital ready box? It would have to be the same exact car only newer, not a redesigned model bearing the same name. I doubt that GM or the dealer would sanction trying this because you would be putting equipment that was not approved for your car. if you have an '02 and they changed the car in '05 I bet the '04 model has a digital ready unit that would work in your car. This might be the only way to keep your On Star, but neither the dealer, On Star or GM would pay for the box or the installation. Before going out and buying an On Star box I would try a local salvage yard to see if they have a Hollander book that would show the interchange of the parts from one car to another. If the '04 is known to be digital ready and the book says it fits it should work. I would buy a used unit from the salvage yard so that you are not out a bunch of money. If you install the unit yourself the dealer will still have to contact On Star and set up the new box, like if they had to replace a defective unit and perform the digital upgrade if needed also.

I still take your previous comments as an attack on the UAW workers, it was stated like we are the reason that GM won't fix the Os Star issue, and that's not the truth. Just like the statements on how much the boiler operators make, and that GM pays UAW workers to cut the grass for $100K/yr each. If you don't know, and you admitted that you don't, keep your comments to yourself and state what you need to and let the chips fall. Don't come out here and try to slander and or ruin the lively hood of the the workers because you have a couple dead buttons on the dash. Your issues are with GM and On Star not the workers so keep them out of it!

waterdr · December 2007

To the issue of my comments about the UAW/Labor issues, I verified my source, and the info came second hand either from a UAW worker or a contracted employee who may have had a bone to pick. In other words, the worker was apparently joking to one of our folks about the situation I mentioned above. Workers say this kind of stuff. I have been around hourly labor workforces my whole adult live and they talk....not only accurately, but also untruthfully too. It is the nature of the beast. The individual put it in an humerous manner....the public is very sensitive to this stuff. So, if I falsely repeated information as my source was not accurate, I 100% apologize.

GM does indeed have labor issues they may certainly not be the reason that my OnStar quit working, but when $2500 or so from each sale is used to pay benefits for retirees, that can't last forever (as reported in numerous places in the press). The Big Three are all hurting...GM is not alone. The market itself is a paradox. Each company struggles to be innovative in a landscape where differentiation is difficult and brand image is EVERYTHING. The consumer is loosing loyalties they once had and are being pulled by "deals" and "offers" that are ultimately bad for the company in the first place.

Then along comes OnStar. The commercials are great....they tell the story with real-life situations. GM actually found a service that real people will pay money for.....not a give a way....a marketers dream.

I have a close friend. His daughter at 18 years old was killed in a car accident on an icey road in a rural area. It was a single car accident. She hit her head and because no one found her for 5 hours hours, she died......but only after being at the hospital. His cars all have OnStar now, but he finds himself in the same situation as many of us.

While GM and the FCC are fighting (even if they still are), the consumer that was roped-in to a great service, has now been left in the lurch. "OnStar....always there" just is not true for some of us.

Brand image is everything and On Star has lost a lot of ground with many people.

I paid for OnStar just as someone would a sunroof. My car is under warranty and neither my sunroof or the On Star work. While you can't blame the radio for not working if the radio station no longer broadcasts, in the case of OnStar, GM ownes the station as well.

GM....you could have had a customer for life with me and my kids.

But, to me "On Star...always there....maybe" is now more the truth.

jgorde · December 2007

I do not know if prior to 2002 GM had developed and had ready for installation at time of production the analog/digital convertable system. I know for certain that no 2002 or later model year had any reason whatsoever to be denied the convertable unit except perhaps for GM's internal decision not to take the necessary steps and perhaps some losses in order to step all 2002 and beyond model years up to the convertible units. This decision would have required some retooling and some losses due to scrapping existing analog inventory that would have been an additional write-off. This poor decision continued into 2003 in many GM models as well as Subaru's Outback VDC that was equiped with ON-STAR (yes, I have a 2003 Subaru with the same issue - analog only).

And, as for the phone charges, just call ON-STAR and they will rather rudely inform you that prepaid telephone minutes are non-refundable regardless of the cut-off. And, when asked how they are able to make such a decision in good conscience, they have the nerve to indicate that they informed every customer buying minutes they would have to be used by 12/31/07 or they would be lost. It took me two steps up the ladder before a "supervisor" agreed to credit back my unused minutes as an "exception/favor to me" because the policy is clear and will be enforced - no refunds of unused minutes...well, just think of the 400,000 (+/-) customers out of the 2,000,000 (+/-) who fully maintained their ON-STAR services and telephone service and the number of combined minutes they likely have and the combined refunds that this would require...? I think I see a pattern here - if it will cost the company additional money and effort to do the right thing, then the answer is to not do the right thing and then deal with the few disgruntled customers that are willing to escalate the issue.

Thus, not disclosing to us what they knew at the time we purchased our vehicles -that we would involuntarily lose our service on 12.31.07 due to having non-convertible analog only systems denied us the option of choosing to purchase anyhow, postpone our purchase or not purchase at all...which was not an acceptable option to GM. It was therefore determined by management it would be better to deal with discontent years after having made the sale than being truthful on the front end and perhaps losing the sale or having it postponed until the convertible units were available.

Thus, when people call for refunds of minutes, tell them they are non-refundable and then deal with the few who take it up the ladder.

And, when the class action is initiated, the cost of settlement will be less than the cost of having lost the sales on the front end in 2002 and 2003 if they told the truth back then and it is always better to pay a little later than it is to pay more on the front end.

Who knew? GM/ON-STAR knew that's who. And they did the math and they realized that a screwed customer in 2007 is better than a lost customer in 2002/2003. Who knew? GM Knew, that's who.

It is not about GM's organized labor - I would more easily trust them to do the right thing than I would management. And, it is not about having no option - GM had already created the fix and then denied it to most of us in 2002 and 2003. And, it is not about the rapid pace of changes in technology - the analog to digital transformation was a long time in coming and GM had ample opportunity to create the convertible system for the vast majority if not all of its OnStar customers.

So, let us not get distracted by heated rhetoric and side issues. Who knew? ON-STAR/GM knew....that's who.

gagrice · December 2007

Who knew? ON-STAR/GM knew....that's who.

Which digital system do you suppose they should have installed? GSM, G3, TDMA, CDMA, CDMA2000 Layer 3, or whatever the latest and greatest might be?

Onstar is just a user of the cellular network. GM was just as much at a loss as to who would end up on top as we as a rural cellular company. We made the wrong choice and ended up having to buy a whole new $million system to be compatible with the phones that were being sold. No matter which digital system they chose it was a gamble 5 years ago.

sls002 · December 2007

My 2002 Seville (which I no longer own) can be upgraded for $15. As far as upgrading a ten year old vehicle is concerned, I am not sure that makes much sense. Onstar is nice, but an aging vehicle should probably be replaced anyway.

For those who are making a big deal out of this: do you know that your old TV will stop working in about 1 more year? who are you going to sue over that?

waterdr · December 2007

Not true about the TV.....if you have cable or sat your TV will still work fine. Does anyone on the planet still use bunny ears?

But, still a reasonable analogy and don't think there won't be legal action about this as well. Keep in mind that people generally sue for 4 factors:

1 - How much pain/grief was caused

2 - How much they think can win

3 - What are the chances of winning

4 - Or, do folks just want to "stick" it to someone

I don't think many people care that much about the TV issue, but you never know.

There is a way to handle this mess....all GM needs to do is refund all owners of vehicles that were equipped with OnStar but that now can not be upgraded at a cost of $850 less a fair depreciation rate. I have a 2003. I would be willing to bet (though have not checked) that the KBB probably adds $150 to $250 to the fair market value of my vehicle. That is all I am looking for. Additionally, anyone that has unused minutes or paid for services in advance should be refunded.

GM offerred me two years free services on a new car. A reasonable financial offer, but I don't think anyone should be forced into buying a new car.

GM is handling this issue the way the Big 3 has done work since the exploding Pinto.....Risk Analysis. The problem with Risk Analysis is that it is hard to capture the impact of things like consumer loyalty.

I currently own a Chysler, a Ford, and a GM product. I never owned anything but these brands. But when my Honda-Loving boss takes a ride in my car like he did a few weeks ago and said "hey, what do these buttons do?"...all I can say is "nothing".

rockylee · December 2007

GM does indeed have labor issues they may certainly not be the reason that my OnStar quit working, but when $2500 or so from each sale is used to pay benefits for retirees, that can't last forever (as reported in numerous places in the press).

Well you need to watch what the press says as well. I've seen $1500 per car all the way up to $3000 a car for health care so obvious the large difference between the numbers I've seen in the press wouldn't be credibile. The bottom line is GM, did not fully fund the employees pension plans and future healthcare costs. They got behind on their obligation and tacked it on to cost of labor to slander and fire up the anti-union folks in the public to win support. I've seen reports from the media saying UAW workers are making $65, $70, $75, $85, $88, $90, $95 dollars an hour in different news articles over the last couple of years.

The bottom line is the VEBA takes care of the healthcare obligations at GM, and the the new two-tired wage system has replaced a lot of high-paid autoworker jobs. They are making half the money and do not have a define benefit plan.

As some have said in the past and that is our future especially my generation and younger will not even come close to having it as good as our parents generation.

Well I do hope you can get your Onstar, issue resolved !!!!

-Rocky

sls002 · December 2007

People who live in the country and don't have sat are using an antenna. My guess is that till the broadcasting stops people are blissfully unaware.

My understanding is that if your onstar can be upgraded, the cost is $15. Some 2002's are upgradeable, more 2003-2004's are. I assume that anyone who wants to upgrade already subscribes to onstar. Anyone buying a used car that wants onstar should be aware (but of course they are probably blissfully unaware).

jgmilberg · December 2007

GM doesn't own the "station" as you put it. They buy service from Verizon Wireless. On Star is bacically a glorified cell phone, nothing more. It's not GM's network, they just recently switched to Verizon after a long run with Cingular, now AT&T. Verizon and all the other cell companies lobbied the FCC to allow them to break the charter and discontinue upkeep on the analog network. They claim they the burden of repairing 2 systems to provide the same service was redundant, cost too much, and the number of customers still on analog was not going to be an issue because all modern hand held cell phones are digital or at least dual mode. The FCC is not forcing them to discontinue analog, but said if things go out they don't have to fix them.

I'm sorry to hear about your friends daughter, but how mad would he have been if her car did have On Star, but it was the analog system and she was in a digital only zone? He paid for the service and when it was really needed it didn't work. I'm pretty sure there would be a lawsuit, I would sue if that happened to me. Now that the FCC said that the cell companies don't have to repair the analog network unless they see fit to do so On Star can't tell you when or where outages will be because they can be random, and some areas might not ever be fixed. That's the reason On Star can't continue service to analog only equipped vehicles. It's too big of a liability and they can't risk the company on unreliable service form the cell companies. They are taking a huge hit with the decision not to keep analog only cars, but with everyone so sue happy nowadays keeping analog was going to be a huge risk that had the potential to cripple or bankrupt the company. As a person with a business degree you have to understand how this works.

jgmilberg · December 2007

Do you honestly think that all of the 400,000 vehicles out there still use On Star?! I'm willing to say 25% - 30% of them are in the scrap pile after a wreck, then you factor in that the majority of people don't renew the service after the "free" year. If it's a used car, I can't quote any hard numbers, but I doubt that the car was bought because it had On Star. After they find out it's $100 to activate and $200/year they tend not to care so much anymore. On a new car the activation is in the option cost, and the buyer never sees it, and the first year is free so if they didn't need it within that year it gets dropped. Now that insurance companies are offering a discount if you keep the On Star service active they might think about it a bit more, but only if the discount covers the $200/year service fee.

I have never needed or used any of the features enough to want to renew, the hands free calling is cool, but the voice recognition was a pain sometimes and the minutes are expensive compared to normal cell phone charges. I carry an extra key with me so the most used On Star feature is not my concern.

gagrice · December 2007

Factor in that the majority of people don't renew the service after the "free" year.

That would be me. On my 2005 GMC PU I was never able to activate it. I tried two times in that year to get through for activation. Got no answer and gave up. I think it is a waste of money.

The main reason Analog service was phased out is bandwidth. Depending on the type of cellular service, you can get 12 or more conversations in the same bandwidth used for one analog call. You cannot offer any of the fancy text, GPS and picture services with analog. It is strictly for voice.

This talk of suing is crazy. When Verizon and at&t Wireless discontinue analog will these people sue Nokia or Motorola because their cell phone quits working?

jgorde · December 2007

Regarding the 400,000 users who have analog and will lose their service...that is out of approximately 2.2 million total analog installed vehicles - yes, only about 15-20% actually maintained the service.

As for the comments regarding which digital system...that is why I limited my remarks to the 2002 vehicle years forward...because from 2002 forward, GM knew the system and in fact was installing it in certain makes and models...just not in either of mine. And, yes...therein lies the risk analysis - the "math". And yes, as with many large entrenched institutional businesses, the "math" often fails to take into account the less quantifiable issues of customer loyalty.

Yes, I know that the OnStar system is in some ways just a glorified hands free cell phone system. And if that is all that it was for, I probably would not have maintained my subscription at 216.00/year per vehicle or even cared if I had the OnStar system. However, my upgrading of vehicles is more a matter of keeping up with safety technologies. And, OnStar provided me with another layer of safety. My family is priceless to me. I bought the Subaru VDC to replace a Volvo wagon in order to gain the variable dynamic control and all-wheel drive and OnStar...a great package of safety features. I bought my suburban to replace my older suburban to gain better safety including OnStar. I am in a position to be able to afford to do this. I understand that I can lose my family to accidents and I am willing to do the most I can to avoid this from happening to the extent it is possible, within reason and without slipping into paranoia. Lots can happen and safer autos is one way to reduce the odds/potential of this happening on the road. So, again, by way of review....

- 400,000 is a small fraction of total OnStar analog installed vehicles that were produced.

- by the 2002 model year, GM could have installed convertable systems into every vehicle they were producing.

- by failing to inform their prospective customers of their inability to continue to have peaceful and full enjoyment of the OnStar system beyond 2007 (which they knew a at the time of sale), they basically defrauded and damaged every customer, who given the information would have made a different choice.

And, their reason for not equipping every vehicle with convertible systems from 2002 forward and for not disclosing/telling every prospective customer of the limitations of the analog only systems was the preservation of sales and profits and the elimination of any additional expenses.

I could have easily afforded to wait. I would have waited. I was buying the safety features and OnStar was a big part of my buying decision in the purchase of both my 2002 Suburban and my 2003 Subaru Outback VDC. Thus, I honestly believe that I was a victim of fraud by deliberate omission and I have been damaged by this decision...their money over the safety of my family...GM can do the math on how that makes me feel...

So, who knew? GM knew...that's who!

gagrice · December 2007

I was buying the safety features and OnStar was a big part of my buying decision in the purchase of both my 2002 Suburban and my 2003 Subaru Outback VDC.

If you feel that strongly about Onstar, will you buy a new model with the latest Onstar technology?

waterdr · December 2007

You bringing up MY business degree....are you aware that GM posted the second biggest corporate loss in US History last quarter....all run by people with business degrees. My degree and training is in Chemical Engineering....I have an MBA. GM has become fodder in business schools by instructors. It used to be ENRON, and still is to some degree, but now GM gets much of the time.

As far as the figures discussed earlier, these are reported figures and easy to calculate just by looking at an annual report. It is a mere fact of dividing the amount spent on retiees and dividing by the number of units sold. I think the descrepency in figures is due to what is being calculated. Is it medical bennefits? Is it total retiree bennefits?

Want to blame someone? How about the investors. GM is a public company which forces GM to make decisions in support of a stock price. US investors are short-sided and always looking for a quick buck.

Now, here is a little Business 101....it is not always about the dollars...it is about doing the right thing, protecting the brand, and ensuring a timely, quality product that meets the desires of the consumers. Sometimes doing the right thing costs more now, but pays-off later.

I fond this online....not sure if it is accurate, but reports to be GM's mission statement:

"G.M. is a multinational corporation engaged in socially responsible operations, worldwide. It is dedicated to provide products and services of such quality that our customers will receive superior value while our employees and business partners will share in our success and our stock-holders will receive a sustained superior return on their investment."

It is crisp and to the point. Is the last statment more of a bennefit or a hinderance to the organization?

GM is a mere reflection of the problems of many business today...they certainly do not stand alone. I will stop here because this is a topic for another forum.

jgorde · December 2007

This is a good question and the jury is still out. I am looking at other technologies that I could potentially add to the vehicles, however to date, I cannot find the emergency system built into OnStar - the gps locator, the immediate response if air-bags are deployed...the very fact that the equivalent of 911 personnel would be available to my family if they were stuck some where - perhaps injured. That is what $216.00/year is worth to me...to cover that unlikely but not impossible situation from being without adequate response...so I suppose I will enter the Class Action, fight what I consider to be the fraud by omission and likely pursue options first and a return to OnStar second. Emotionally, I never want to do business with GM/OnStar again...however, my family comes first. So, there is a chance I will change my rhetorical "never again" for the sake of my family. Will I ever feel the same about GM after three generations of loyalty...not a chance. Am I a goner the moment I have an option...you bet. Does GM care...not a chance...didn't even want to refund unused telephone minutes without a fight. As a consumer I feel abused. As a loyal customer I feel like road kill. As a citizen, I am not without recourse. Let the fight drive on to the courts...our only venue for resolution of these various issues.

quietpro · December 2007

Regarding the safety of OnStar, here are some things to consider. I have used OnStar twice. Both times, they were unable to get a GPS location for me. The first time was with an '02 model Monte Carlo that was later determined to have a faulty GPS unit. Unfortunately, since I discovered the problem after the warranty had expired, it wasn't covered. However, I learned in my troubleshooting that OnStar keeps logs of the times you call them and each time, they "normally" get a GPS location. I had contacted them several times prior to my "emergency" (a defective battery) but had no GPS data in any of those calls. Was I informed of the fact that the GPS was not functioning? Absolutely not. Would you ASSUME, as I did, that the operator on the other end would advise of this problem? They will not! I had to ask each time afterwards for a verification of my location.

The second incident occurred while I was in a drive-thru (defective battery again on my '06 Impala). So...as for depending on the nifty feature of emergency crews showing up at your crash site without your input, you might want to be sure you crash in a totally unsecluded area without trees or other obstructions. I know I don't have a secure feeling regarding the OnStar GPS system.

Also, of note, is that the GPS system only works if there is cell coverage in your current location. If not, not only will you not get emergency services, but you won't get the friendly voice asking if you're OK. Don't get me wrong, I still subscribe and suggest my sisters do the same, but I don't have a lot of trust in the system. For all who read this and are current subscribers, I would suggest verifying your GPS is working by making a call to the OnStar operators and have them tell you where you're located. You might be surprised! :P :sick:

As for the changing technology, I believe it is a raw deal although I understand that times change. Concerning the refusal to refund prorated fees, that's absolutely unascceptable. I had my own concerns about the changing technology long ago but could not get an answer from anyone at OnStar about it. I made the assumption that my old '02 car was analog based on the reception and call quality. BTW, that call quality had already begun to degrade in '05.

Regarding the analogy about TV signals, I'm willing to bet more people have heard about it than have heard about the OnStar switch. I knew about the TV switchover through TV news reports (which you can receive for free) and any electronics store employee would likely have the information. I PAY a lot of money for OnStar and my car (OnStar nor my salesman had a clue) but couldn't get an answer when I asked a DIRECT question. How is THAT a fair analogy? :mad:

gagrice · December 2007

Also, of note, is that the GPS system only works if there is cell coverage in your current location.

I have wondered about that. I cannot imagine needing such a service in the city. Yet you do not have to get far out of many towns to lose Verizon Cell service. I think the digital Onstar will be sub standard to the old analog system. It is probably in GM's best interest to just phase it completely out.

When you find yourself broke down in the desert and it is 120 degrees and your trusty Onstar has no service you will probably wonder why you wasted the money.

jgorde · December 2007

Agreed - worrisome and bothersome...again, nothing that I was informed of by my dealers or by OnStar. I have not assumed the best or worst - just that, as you and me and others - trying to figure out how best to hedge our risks and our willingness to pay to increase the potential for safety of our families. I hate the idea of being abused in the process of trying to protect my family. However, GM takes none of this personally - it was just another scheme to both address a real issue of concern and make a few bucks along the way. And, hey, if it doesn't really work out - the profits were all built into the initial price, carrying fees for the ongoing subscriptions and the extra profits from the prepaid telephone minutes (at several times the cost of regular cell phone minutes)...I certainly get it...and I accept GM's desire for profits and the need to satisfy a number of stakeholders from investors to employees to Federal regulators...However, it seems to me that more and more the customer is thought of as the dupe rather than the life-blood of corporate prosperity. Price is not everything...the value equation - price compared to benefits is the consumer's mission...and when it comes to safety, we should not be trifled with...and that is how I am feeling...who knew...GM, that's who.

jgmilberg · December 2007

So are you saying that On Star should pay to maintain or flat out buy up the analog system off the cell companies to continue service to analog only cars? What level of "the right thing" are you talking about?

In my mind the right thing to do would be to come up with some kind of digital to analog converter, but how that would integrate into the system is beyond me. I don't even know if that is possible with today's technology, but in the next year the cable and TV companies are going to have to figure it out, in '09 TV is going all digital and they have to come up with something to keep all the old TVs working. Maybe there can be some type of borrowed technology from that to make an adapter to retro fit into the analog cars. It would have to be something between the antenna and the module it's the only way it can be affordable for On Star to develop. You only have so many cars effected and that limits a production run of the adapter boxes to make, so the cost for development and manufacture will have to be extremely low budget or the cost will be to high and the people won't buy it.

It has to be a universal adapter because each module is integrated into the car a different way and installed in a different location. It's not feasible for them to redesign a box for each of the 35 or so models effected. A model by model fix would be a much more expensive for the end user, and that's who would pay for it. Are you willing to shell out $400 for a digital box? You know On Star will want one year up front to wave the $100 activation fee so it would cost around $600 per unit to do! I don't think the majority of the customers would pat that kind of money to keep On Star. When these cars were purchased On Star was an option so everyone already paid once. I didn't pick $400 out of the air either, that's how much it was just for the box w/o labor when the dealer had to replace the box in my '04 Yukon XL.

That is GM's mission statement, but it wasn't GM cutting the analog cord it's the cell providers. Since the cell providers won't be able to guarantee consistent analog service it's more responsible to shut down the analog On Star services than let people think it's all working, then when it's needed it's not there. Look up On Star's mission statement, because they are the ones making the call.

gagrice · December 2007

but in the next year the cable and TV companies are going to have to figure it out, in '09 TV is going all digital and they have to come up with something to keep all the old TVs working.

HDTV is a much simpler fix than the analog to digital cellular conversion. One is simplex (one direction) the other duplex (two way conversation). It looks like the consumer will have to buy a new TV or a digital to analog converter box.

On February 17, 2009, federal law requires that all full-power television broadcast stations stop broadcasting in analog format and broadcast only in digital format. Heres what these requirements will mean for you and your television viewing.

If you have an analog television, you will have to purchase a digital-to-analog set-top converter box to attach to your TV set to be able to view over-the-air digital programming

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html

gagrice · December 2007

There are some serious downsides to having your car equipped with Onstar. For those being dropped off it may be a blessing in disguise.

OnStar is also one of the best tools available that the government and big business could use to invade your privacy. In some cases, OnStar data has been used against the owner of the vehicle. Below are some examples of how data collected by the OnStar service and/or other devices similar to it in operation have been used:

OnStar data to be used in California courts and possibly elsewhere. Information is circulating on the Internet that tells you how to get at your OnStar unit and download its databank. This information can also be used by anyone else.

OnStar can be used to listen to all conversations within a vehicle, despite assertions by OnStar representatives to the contrary. A recent court decision has by the 9th Circuit Federal Appeals Court has declared this practice improper, but not for privacy reasons. The reasoning the Court relied upon was this: if the device is being used to spy on the occupants, it can't be used to make a call to emergency services. The Court sidestepped the entire privacy issue, and it is very likely that we will soon revisit this issue in Court.

http://www.onstarprivacy.com/

waterdr · December 2007

This is a very interesting argument. Did you know that people said similar things about cell phones? How about flouridated water? Trust always seems to come down to intentions and most law abiding citizens do not worry about such things.

I suppose if I was a law abiding and my car was hit by a speeding drunk driver and technology could be used to prove the other driver was going fast, I would like this idea. Or, how about if my car was car-jacked with my kids in it.....I might be glad to know that the authorities to listen to what was going on in the car.

I am not really dissagreeing with you, but looking at the other side. It is always a trade-off. Personally, I am concerned about loosing personal liberaties, I just wish there was a way to better differentiate the good guys from the bad guys - lol

waterdr · December 2007

I really don't care how they do it. I just want it to work. That is for GM to figure out,

I already offereed what I thought was an ethical solution. My solution was a lot cheaper for GM and would demonstrate solid intent by GM.

gagrice · December 2007

I suppose if you never break a law while driving it would be no big deal. I am thinking if you get from point A to Point B in too short of a time for the posted speed limits and a week later you receive a ticket in the mail, it may be a point of contention. I think it was Newt Gingrich that was brought down by a cell phone call that was monitored. If you have no reason to care who listens to you on the phone it is a non-issue.

jgorde · December 2007

They did come up with that very thing - a convertible system for analog to digital. And, at least from 2002 forward, every vehicle that was to have OnStar could have been equiped with the converter. GM CHOSE NOT TO DO IT. That is the long and the short of it. How far back could this be taken. I am not sure. I do know that the change to digital was known for years...however, the decision as to which specific digital system would win out was later in coming. I am sure of only one thing - all those variables were totally worked out and known in time to install convertible systems into every vehicle equiped with OnStar from 2002 forward and the decision not to had nothing to do with the cell phone companies, the federal government, the digital format, or the lack of appropriate technologies. The convertible units started appearing as the analog only inventories were fully absorbed and the production lines prepared for the changeover, period. Yes, it would have taken GM some real heroic effort to bring all models up to speed at least starting with 2002. They simply chose not to in order to maximize profits. All the rest of the blather on this forum about types of digital systems, cell phone companies, the government et al being the problem and prohibition are simple not true. There are 2002 and 2003 vehicles that have the convertible boxes - thus proving that everything had been worked out. There is an old saying in business - "just follow the money" And that is all one has to do in this case...why didn't everyone from 2002 forward get the analog to digital convertible systems? From GM's perspective, there wasn't any money in it and the math indicated that the lost and disappointed customers would be far less a financial hit than the cost of fitting every vehicle from 2002 forward with the digital converters. Why is it so hard for so many people to believe that a decision could be so callous and such a betrayal? The only remaining proof one needs is to ask yourself whether at the time of purchase you were informed and given the option to continue with the purchase or be put on a list for the next available digital-able model that you wanted. I do not know of a single person that received an honest disclosure regarding what would happen to us on 12/31/07. It was a deliberate omission. WHO KNEW? GM THATS WHO.

jgmilberg · December 2007

It's not the On Star system that records the data it's the PCM and BCM, they both save 10 minutes of driving data. Speed, throttle position, brake switch, seatbelt sensor, seat position, pass airbag switch, and a few others are all recorded. The PCM data is what they are downloading the info from, NOT On Star. GM has been installing these data recorders in select models since 1999, and now they all have "black boxes" On Star or no On Star, and if you have factory navigation the data recorder gets the location from there, again no On Star needed. All of the big 3 are doing this now, some if the data from the Explorer rollover lawsuit were from these type of recorders.

If On Star is active the radio will not play, so the only way they would be able to listen and you not know about it is if you drive with the radio off.

jgmilberg · December 2007

I know how the TV stuff works, the set top box replaces the TV tuner and you leave the TV on channel 3. What I'm talking about is not that much different. All they have to do is come up with a box that receives digital signal and outputs it in analog format that the module can understand. You would hook to the adapter box output to the input of the On Star module and bang you're back in business. Someone needs to develop it that's all. No need to redesign a module for every model, just one box that plugs in between the antenna and the module.

If the digital is coming in at 5.7MHz and the analog is 900 MHz the box takes the digital in, converts it and kicks it out at 900 MHz analog. I don't know the actual frequency cell phones use, I just picked these as an example.

jgmilberg · December 2007

They came up with a second generation box in '02 to work on either digital or analog and installed it in all redesigned models or models with a new wiring system for '02. In the convertible 2nd gen boxes the dealer removes the analog receiver and installs a digital one in the original box making it a digital only unit. They used those until gen 3 On Star was released, and that works on both digital AND analog w/o modification. Gen 4 is digital only and gen 5 is coming in '09 with the ability to put a max speed on a stolen car to 25MPH so the cops can avoid a high speed chase but the car still has all the power steering and brakes to maintain control.

What I'm talking about is an adapter unit that would retrofit the older gen 1 units to convert a digital signal into analog. A one box fits all adapter for the gen 1 cars, this way they don't have to come up with a module that only works on one car because they all integrate into the electronics of each model different. A box from a Suburban will not plug into a Grand Am and work because it's integrated into the electronics differently.

sls002 · December 2007

the cell phone part can be replaced with a cell phone.

The primary safety part of OnStar, which is the capability to call for help in the event of an accident is what is really lost. A cell phone can replace this function if someone in the car is still able to use the cell phone after an accident occures.

It seems to me that GM would design an upgrade if this was easy and cost effective. But there are limits to what OnStar is worth. If upgrading an old unit would cost $5000, how many of you would pay that much?

quietpro · January 2008

The primary safety feature of OnStar is the automatic call for help if you're involved in a serious accident and unable to call for yourself. A simple cell phone won't replace that feature. However, it does seem like it would be possible to bridge that feature to a modern cell phone that could be permanently mounted inside the car. If the phone also had GPS, that would also solve the location problem. Sure, it wouldn't be as elagant as the current OnStar setup, but it would be a workable solution for those who want to continue the service on their older cars.

But, my primary beef is not with the phase out of analog but with the refusal to refund prepaid subscription fees and prepaid phone minutes that were purchased after the phase out was planned. I would be interested in knowing if anyone was advised when purchasing renewals for an analog system that the service would terminate prior to their subscription expiring. I'm betting they weren't. As I stated in an earlier post, not a lot of information is shared by the OnStar reps, even when asked a direct question. To that degree, this IS a scam. :mad:

sls002 · January 2008

So how many unused minutes do you have left?

park4you · January 2008

I totally agree with you. I purchased a 2005 park avenue just a few months ago..Called GM and was told all vehicles in 2005 were equiped with both antalog and digital system. I purchased the vehicle for comfort and safety, being on the road. I was told today that Opps my vehicle fell into production BEFORE the 2005 production, sorry. There has got to be something someone can come up with to change this system over to digital...I feel GM owes its consumers more than a swift kick in the rear and to say sorry. OnStar however was gracious and refunded me my phone services that I purchased.
Those people out there who think to bad you loose, have no idea what peace of mind can do where you are out on the road, with no(latest technology) phone service. My so called digital phone service is not reliable although it is the best nation wide coverage I can get. OnStar was there all the time...

waterdr · January 2008

GM should buy that car back from you if you called them before you purchased it....that is "doing the right thing".

jgorde · January 2008

OMG, a 2005 with the same issue? I just assumed that my 2003 was the last of the analogs...GM kept this going into 2005? Shame on them. And they wonder why they have fallen from grace with the consumer? Three model years after starting the conversion and they still didn't completed it! So, with a straight face, they were selling 2005's knowing full well that the system would be unusable within two years...they deserve the class-action lawsuits coming their way and they deserve to lose us as customers...WHO KNEW? GM...THAT'S WHO!

jgmilberg · January 2008

Like I said before models that were slated for discontinuation were not upgraded to the new box, and unless there were design issues they dropped all funding for further development of these models. '05 was the last model year for the Park Ave and was on the chopping block since '02.

Pretty much if you have a pig tail antenna on the back window or side glass of your vehicle it's analog only, it doesn't matter what year it is.

PARK4YOU - If On Star said it was digital capable then I would say that you should be able to get a refund of some type on the car from them. If the used car dealer told you it can be upgraded I would take it back and make them give you ALL your money towards a different car. You sound like you were looking for an On Star car for a reason and they wanted to dump this car on you to make a quick sale. If you called Buick I'm not sure what to say because they don't have a list of what can and can't be upgraded and should have given you the number for On Star or directed you to the website to enter the VIN and see if it was an option. There might be some kind of action you can take there but w/o a name operator ID and date of contact it would be hard to prove.

66hiway · April 2008

Now we all know just how much GM cares for all of us. I am not that impressed with onstar myself. This is one of many reasons: We were just behind a fatality accident on I-40 in New Mexico three years ago. I pushed the emergency button and received a message that I was not authorized to use the Plateau Cellular System. Thankfully I had my cell phone and ham radio.

GM will not upgrade anything over a few years old because they know that the older vehicles will either be sold, traded or salvaged in short time. They are going to invest only in what will give them the most return. Yes! they could upgrade the older analog units, but that will not provide the same return that cranking out new vehicles and signing up new customers will provide.

THE BEST THING TO DO, if you need safety and security in your older car is: either install a full powered digital cell phone with an external antenna or purchase a bi-directional power amplifier for your hand held digital phone and connect it to an external antenna. This will enable you to connect in those areas that your handheld alone can't. If you are an AT&T subscriber, you can add roadside service that follows your phone nationwide for $2 a month

sls002 · April 2008

And I assume that your OnStar subscription had not expired?

imidazol97 · April 2008

> if you need safety and security in your older car is: either install a full powered digital cell phone with an external antenna or purchase a bi-directional power amplifier for your hand held digital phone and connect it to an external antenna.

Examples? Pricing? Source?

Does it use the analoge antenna on the car already for OnStar?

gagrice · April 2008

Examples? Pricing? Source?

I have installed a quite a few bi-directional dual band amplifiers. They generally cost about $400 for the amp and you would need an antenna for your band whether it is cellular or PCS. They generally stretch the range to about 50 miles from the cellsite depending on the terrain. You get better range with the Cellular 824-894 Mhz than the 1850-1990 Mhz networks. I don't know what range you can get with Onstar. I had it free for a year and never turned it on.

We bought our equipment from this company:

http://www.alternativewireless.com/cellular-antennas/wilson-antennas/wilson_cell- ular_amplifiers/

chicamam1 · May 2008

Speaking from personal experience, My husband and I are in the market for a suburban model year between 00-02. One thing that we really wanted as a feature was the onstar service, especially the navigator turn by turn service. After looking at all the dealerships who in the description of the car say it has onstar included, what a fraud. Finding out recently, the buttons are useless. I do think the issue will be fixed in the somewhat future, but what about all these car dealerships selling these cars saying onstar is included knowing full and well the service cannot be utilized? I can guarantee we were not once told it would not work until i attempted to activate service from the suburban and found out the service isnt available. I returned the suburban just on the principal that the dealers knew the service wasnt available but yet advertised it was. This is happing all over the good ol usa now. Of course going forward, I do understand its my job as a consumer to be educated and to question these practices. Anyhow, Just wanted to share my two cents. Still going with a burb because nothing beats the room and luxury for the price.

waterdr · May 2008

Yeah GM really laid an egg with this dissaster. I traded in my 2002 Suburban with it's useless buttons for a new vehicle (not a GM) and saw it on the lot advertised with On Star. I think this is a huge problem. In part, because some places are not honest, and in part because some place just do not know.

jgmilberg · August 2008

Subject: 08089A -- SPECIAL COVERAGE ADJUSTMENT - ANALOG ONSTAR® DEACTIVATION

Models: 1999-2004 BUICK REGAL
1999-2005 BUICK CENTURY, PARK AVENUE
2000-2005 BUICK LESABRE
2002-2004 BUICK RENDEZVOUS
2004-2005 BUICK RAINIER
2005-2006 BUICK LACROSSE
2006 BUICK LUCERNE
1997-2004 CADILLAC SEVILLE
1997-2005 CADILLAC DEVILLE
1998-2001 CADILLAC CATERA
1998-2002 CADILLAC ELDORADO
1998-2006 CADILLAC STS
1999-2000 CADILLAC ESCALADE
2002-2004 CADILLAC ESCALADE, ESCALADE EXT
2003-2005 CADILLAC ESCALADE ESV
2003-2006 CADILLAC CTS
2004-2005 CADILLAC CTS-V, SRX, XLR
1998-2004 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO
1998-2005 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN
1999-2000 CHEVROLET LUMINA
1999-2001 CHEVROLET BLAZER
1999-2005 CHEVROLET VENTURE
1999-2006 CHEVROLET TAHOE
2000-2005 CHEVROLET SILVERADO
2000-2006 CHEVROLET IMPALA
2002-2004 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE, TRAILBLAZER EXT
2002-2005 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER
2003-2004 CHEVROLET EXPRESS
2003-2005 CHEVROLET CAVALIER
2004 CHEVROLET COLORADO
2004-2005 CHEVROLET MALIBU, MALIBU MAXX
2005 CHEVROLET EQUINOX
2005-2006 CHEVROLET COBALT, CORVETTE
2006 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO
1999 GMC SIERRA, SUBURBAN
1999-2001 GMC JIMMY
1999-2005 GMC YUKON
2000 GMC YUKON DENALI
2000-2005 GMC YUKON XL
2001-2006 GMC SIERRA
2002-2004 GMC ENVOY XL
2002-2005 GMC ENVOY
2003-2004 GMC SAVANA
2004 GMC CANYON, ENVOY XUV
2003-2005 HUMMER H2
1998 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE
1999-2004 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA
2000-2002 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE
2000-2004 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE
2001-2003 OLDSMOBILE AURORA
2002 OLDSMOBILE ALERO
1998-1999 PONTIAC TRANS SPORT
2000-2004 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX
2000-2005 PONTIAC BONNEVILLE, MONTANA
2001-2004 PONTIAC AZTEK
2002 PONTIAC GRAND AM
2003-2005 PONTIAC SUNFIRE
2005 PONTIAC G6, PURSUIT
2006 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX
2000-2004 SAAB 9-5
2000-2005 SAAB 9-3
2002-2004 SATURN LS, LW, VUE
2003-2004 SATURN ION
2006 SATURN VUE

This bulletin is being revised to correct the Case Type in the Saturn Claim Information table to SP. Please discard all copies of bulletin 08089, issued June 2008.

This Special Coverage bulletin is being administered in two phases. The first phase will consist of all U.S. and Canadian vehicles, except the Saab 9-3 and 9-5 vehicles. The second phase will consist of all Saab 9-3 and 9-5 vehicles. Dealers/retailers will be notified of the release of the second phase and a new bulletin will be published to include the service procedure for the Saab 9-3 and 9-5 vehicles.
Condition

In November 2002, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled that wireless carriers would no longer be required to support the analog wireless network beginning in 2008. As a result, On Star® is unable to continue analog service.

OnStar® has deactivated most of the systems operating in the analog mode; however, there are some vehicles that OnStar® could not deactivate. Although the analog OnStar® hardware in these vehicles can no longer communicate with OnStar®, the hardware in the vehicle is still active. If the OnStar® emergency button is pressed, or in the case of an airbag deployment, or near deployment, the customer may hear a recording that OnStar® is being contacted. However, since analog service is no longer available, the call will not connect to OnStar®. To end the call, the customer must press the white phone or white dot button. If the call is not ended, the system will continue to try to connect to OnStar® until the vehicle battery is drained.
Special Policy Adjustment

At the customers request, dealers/retailers are to deactivate the OnStar® system. The service will be made at no charge to the customer.

This special coverage covers the condition described above until December 31, 2008.

goldensrule1 · October 2009

We had a 03 Cadillac Seville with onstar and were able to upgrade it to work! The ruling from the fcc is what screwed this up not Gm. they ruled in 2002 that analog systems would NOT have to be kept running by cell carriers. I have been involved in 2 wrecks with vehicles with onstyar. To me it is priceless. My cell phone was broken and when that voice came thru I was so thankful. Like all systems like this it took time for it to be upgraded and to be better. Ive had mercedes and lexus with their own systems and NONE compare to Onstar. Ive driven cross country many times and Onstar helped me with everything from hotels to directions to weather and road closings! I found a 02 escalade with 50000 miles on it that cannot be upgraded. I asked what year vehicle I should look for and they said some 02s can be it just depends on the car. for some reason cars are able to upgrade better than suvs. I will not own a vehicle without it! It also actually saved our Golden Retriever when she got sick while driving from california to tennessee. They found a emergency vet for me. I LOVE onstar!

forsythe · April 2011

We have owned several GM vehicles and LOVE onstar. the first car we had with it was a 04 yukon. We had never had it before. I loved the fact it was like a safety blanket that even now cell phones dont offer. Some have gotten mad about older cars with onstar and them having a analog system. ALL technology has gone from analog to digital. There are no systems to support. They did make a upgrade for onstar on some 04 vehicles with onstar but now that they are coming out with the new nirror all you have to do is buy that. Its alot safer than a cell phone. We dont use it for navigation but for the safety. when my mother was older she had a pontiac with it and knowing if something happened the car would call out for her was priceless. and at 19 bucks a month thats nothing. Many insurance companies give discounts for having it active. We will always drive a car with onstar and keep it active. Nothing is fool proof but Ive never had problems with onstar. I can tell you it works better than my cell phone. especially when I was in a wreck and my cell was broken!

Gee, thanks, GM! - Onstar analog to go silent

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles