You bought it. So why does it need a subscription?
Games that die when servers close. Fitness trackers whose readings sit behind a monthly paywall. "Products you purchase should not require a subscription to use" is a consumer-rights argument — and also a math problem. Model both below.
The break-even machine
Subscription (stacks monthly)
Break-even marker
Your product
How "buying" quietly became "renting"
The business logic: Wall Street values $1 of recurring revenue at roughly 2–4× a one-time dollar. That multiple — not your battery data — is why the tracker you bought for $150 asks for $9.99/month to show you your own sleep score.
The numbers: a $150 tracker + $10/month = $510 over three years, 3.4× the sticker price. Fitbit Premium, Whoop, and several smart-home brands moved features behind subscriptions AFTER purchase — the price you compared at checkout was never the price.
The legal edge: California's AB 2426 (2024) bans calling it a "purchase" when it's revocable a license, and the EU's Digital Content Directive gives remedies when paid features are withdrawn. The direction of law is clear; the direction of business models, so far, is not.
Four questions before checkout
What works offline?
List the features that survive with the servers dark and the wallet closed. For a tracker: does it still show heart rate? For a game: is there an offline mode? That list is what you're actually buying.
Can data leave?
Check for open export (GPX, CSV, standard APIs). If your five years of runs can't leave the app, the subscription isn't for features — it's a ransom on your history.
What's the 3-year price?
Sticker + 36 × monthly. Compare THAT to alternatives. A $300 device with zero subscription is cheaper than a $99 one at $12/month by month 18.
Any sunset record?
Search "[brand] discontinued servers." Companies that have bricked devices before will do it again — and reviews from sunset owners tell you exactly how it ends.