> Everyone ends up paying an approximately fair price for the one product that they were going to buy no matter what, and then gets a very good deal on everythi

> Everyone ends up paying an approximately fair price for the one product that they were going to buy no matter what, and then gets a very good deal on everything else. [...] If you’ve ever bought a new car, you’ve probably faced down the endless lists of extra add-on features in cars (bigger rims, heated seats, LED lights, whatever) are always, always sold in these “packs” where 5 or 6 totally unrelated things are offered together in a bundle. Now you know why. Those 'packs' always seemed like a rip-off even if you wanted all of the items. I can't imagine people think they're a fair price for just one of the items. Then again, the manufacturer of my car only seems to offer individual items today, not package upgrades. They did have a "cold weather package" when I bought my car, which is obviously a set of related features. > There’s a good reason why SUVs have become so popular: they’re the everything bundle. One of the two components of the bundle, mentioned above, is a Miata for driving, and an SUV is not at all good at driving like a Miata. > Unless you can replace all of the important jobs that a car does for you, all at once, then competing against the car means competing against free. He's right about this. This is why I keep hearing the bus advocates say it's cheaper than owning a car, which is true but irrelevant. They're not going to win over most drivers until they make it cheaper than driving a car you already own.