Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





High End Luxury Cars

1629630632634635771

Comments

  • hpowdershpowders Posts: 4,269
    For me as a value player, it goes against the grain to "invest" big dough in a depreciating asset-especially one that takes such a huge hit the second you drive it off the dealer's lot.
    So long as BMWFS continues to support their leases with artificially high residuals and competitive money factors, I will continue to rent and return. I see it as a no lose situation. I am currently leasing my 545i at 2.4% interest.
    One of Edmunds host's, Kyfdx, did even better. I believe he leased a 2005 3 Series convertible for only about 1% interest!
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    So long as BMWFS continues to support their leases with artificially high residuals, I will continue to rent and return. I see it as a no lose situation

    And it is a no-lose situation for BMW too. BMW can make big profits with generous lease deals as long as their cars remain number one in terms of actual high resale values.

    I sold my old BMW323i for a higher price than I had expected. Even buying a BMW and keeping it for many years can pay off big time.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Absolutely, anyone with half a brain and care about money at all would take the lease offer instead of buying when faced with these numbers. I'm considering leasing precisely one for that reason; it's so good that it may be a better deal than buying a different brand. However, it would be erroneous to say that I deem the 325Cic worthy of the $45k MSRP or the $35k sale price just because I'd be plunking down $269/mo to lease the car. There's no bloody way I'd be buying the car at lease end (at least not without serious re-negotiation of buy-out price, like I did with the Saab), so the MSRP and "sale price" never came into the decision making. I'd just be handing the funny money offered by BMWFS in the form of lease residual back to BMWFS.

    The case would be even more clear-cut if I had taken up on the sub-$400/mo S320 lease deal.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Say what? BMWFS is either eating the difference between residual and actual auction price, or that the car is not worth that much to begin with. That was my point.

    Cars are not investment, even for E36. Althought it did retain value remarkably well. The E90 is questionable, with all the heavy discounting this early in the model cycle. In any case, the $30k entry-level cars are not the purview of this forum.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    That was my point

    I dont know what your point is? I am talking actual resale values! The resale values actually realized when selling a BMW like I did with my 323i. I am talking about the actual resale values that make generous lease deals profitable for BMW. If acutal BMW resale values were as low as you imply then those generous lease deals would not make BMW one of the most profitable auto companies in the industry.

    Again what is your point :confuse:
  • hpowdershpowders Posts: 4,269
    Leasing a BMW is about as good as leasing can get.
    As if the inflated residuals aren't good enough, you can join BMWCCA and get from $500-$1000 back as a rebate on every new BMW that you lease!
    I would expect this kind of stuff from Kia.
    From BMW, it's a no-brainer!
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    The point is: BMWFS is either eating the discrepancy between residual and real life resale, or that the cars are not worth that much to begin with (hence BMW can afford to eat it by passing profit from one pocket to another). The resale value of an 8yr old car, even if it were a 7 series, would be quite irrelevent. Nobody, not even BMWFS is underwriting lease deals that long.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    The point is: BMWFS is either eating the discrepancy between residual and real life resale, or that the cars are not worth that much to begin with.

    You have not responded to my post.

    Based on your scenairo massive subsidized leasing with low real world resale values would translate into a very unprofitable BMW . That as you know is not the case and BMW is among the most profitable car companies . In other words your views of massive BMW lease subsidies does not hold . I repeat massive subsidies and very high profitabiliy can hardly coexist within the same company including BWW.

    Again what is your point?
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Some MB lease deals are quite incredible too. R class can be had for $3xx per month. To think that, originally MB thought R class was to be a close sibling to S class (hence the proximity in lettering) . . . hahaha. So perhaps, MB can do okay leasing out an S320 for sub-$400 after all, when only marginal production has to be off-set (instead of the overall cost, including R&D). Which does somewhat caste a shadow on how much these cars are worth, anyway? ;-)
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    I addressed that issue already, days ago. Routine massive lease subsides are like routine sales by jewlers. Hardly anyone buys diamond without 30%, 50% or 70% price discount off "professionally appraised value," yet the jewlwers are still profitable. The answer to the apparent riddle is quite simple: there is a whole industry doing the marking up and marking down; the "appraised value" is not real market price regardless how many professional liceses those appraisers have. ALG is doing the samething for BMW and MB.
  • hpowdershpowders Posts: 4,269
    Maybe so, but I'm hooked on BMW's. Spoiled me for life.
    Doctors tell me it's untreatable.
    I would rather drive a BMW 335i coupe than, the ultimate HELM, the MB S Class, any day.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Dont have time. It appears your arguments are becoming circular. Will address your posts later.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Please re-read my posts without injecting your own prejudice. My arguments are consistent.

    Lease subsidy and inflating residual is a form of vendor financing. It can make the books look good for quite a while, so long as sales volume is increasing. Many high tech companies became high fliers using that method in the late 90's . . . many home builders are doing that in the most recent past and still doing that now . . . Eventually a sales volume stall or decline did/do/will do all them in . . . but until then it's all honkey-doory, and fat bonuses are paid to the geniuses in charge for the quarter. The subsidy offered by BMW and MB should be obviouis: hardly anyone take lease deals from third-party banks on leasing their cars. If there were no subsidy, at least a significant number of leasers should be leasing through their banks or credit unions instead of taking vendor financing.
  • tagmantagman Malibu, CaliforniaPosts: 8,441
    it's not the entire car that the leaser is acquiring but only a small portion, the privillage of having it for 24-36 months.

    brightness - you are drifting all over the place with your quantitative manipulations of rhetoric. You have drifted from leasing to purchasing and back to leasing, to claim leasing and purchasing are just acquisitions, back to leasing, to phoney money, to incorrect definitions of benchmark, to then saying leasing no longer represents the acquisition of the car, but merely a portion of the car namely the privilege of having the car for 24-36 months, and have actually only partially represented cost-of-ownership but left out other c.o.s. details, and on and on and on and on . . .

    All to prove what? That the S-Class or BMW are somehow worth LESS than an LS? You seem to be trying to provide some constantly drifting quantitative spin. True quantitative analysis would not vary so much as yours does, and besides . . . you can't support your argument that incorrectly defines benchmark anyway, or uses selective incentives and subsidies. Heck, anyone can plug in variable arbitrary information and skew the picture.

    Sorry, but your argument holds no water. Too many holes.

    TagMan
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Look up the definition for the word "benchmark," please. The word "best" is not in there. Benchmark means the standard by which others are judged by; others can be better or can be worse. Usually the most dominant player in a market segment is the benchmark. e.g. Camry is the benchmark for midsize cars.

    There is no drift to my arguments. There are several issues. Please do not put your own spin to my words. I did not denigerate lease . . . in fact, I clearly stated that even "buying" only means acquiring the privilege of operating the car for a limited amount of time because nobody keeps a car forever. The relatively short duration, in other words, the relatively small portion of a car's useful service life value that a leaser is actually acquiring is what makes the lease residual manipulation such a huge impactor on lease payment. 10-15% of MSRP discrepancy may not sound much but it's huge if the entire lease only amortises 30% of MSPR thanks to discount up front and lease residual inflation at the back end. It may represent 50% or more of what the leaser actually shells out during the lease. BTW, hpowers got the point very quickly on his own: his suggestion of applying BMWCCA discount to leases is another way of saying the same relatively small sum of $500-1000 becomes a bigger deal if the transaction invloves only a portion of the car (as in lease) not the whole car.

    My point is that the market place may not have placed as big a price premium on S class and 7 over LS as you seem to be keen on bringing up at every opportunity. The very need for frequent lease subsidies makes the actual payments on S and 7 much less than their MSRP or even "sale price" suggest. The sub-$400 S320 earlier this year certainly was a lot cheaper than LS; heck, even cheaper than GS and IS350.
  • tagmantagman Malibu, CaliforniaPosts: 8,441
    Look up the definition for the word "benchmark," please.

    Don't insult me. I gave YOU the definition of the word yesterday.

    The standard by which others are judged has nothing to do with sales. As I mentioned, a super-fast computer could set the benchmark, but its sales could be dismal. It makes no difference, as it would still be the benchmark.

    The benchmark, as I used the word originally, was in that spirit. You were the one that put the sales spin on it, and I'm not in agreement.

    I am not saying that sales are not important, but I am saying that benchmark as it pertains to a vehicle's capabilities is a seperate concept here than a vehicle's sales data. I origianlly used the term to refer to the former and not the latter.

    TagMan
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Merriam-Webster Online gives the following definition for "benchmark" and "bench mark" (the latter being the etymological origin, I suppose):

    1. "bench mark": a mark on a permanent object indicating elevation and serving as a reference in topographic surveys and tidal observations;

    2. "benchmark": a. a point of reference from which measurements may be made; b. something that serves as a standard by which others may be measured or judged; c. a standardized problem or test that serves as a basis for evaluation or comparison (as of computer system performance).

    Obviously, definition 2b is the most appropriate one here. It does not say a thing about "being best". In a real life industry, that standard is the market share leader (or some static historical precedence, which would be meaningless in an industry as dynamic as modern carmaking), not some subjective valuation.

    If you want your own definition of the word "benchmark" to mean "MB and MB only" . . . well then, there's no point arguing that toutological point.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    I know you love hand-waving theoretical generalizations, but let's get down to the real numbers. Since we have what is, we have no need for what coud be. As both Edmudns and KBB numbers illustrate, a 3yr no-options (ie. the best for value retention) 745i retains 50% MSRP (if you don't like 03, the 04's 60% in two years is even worse) yet BMW gave 60% MSRP as residual . . . whereas a no-options 03 LS430 retains 63% MSRP in actual trade-in whereas Lexus lease only gave 57%. Thanks to your earlier hand-waving suggestion, we also ran the numbers for 03 540i, which came out to be 51% despite BMW's 61% residual.

    There you have it, we have the numbers on the specific cars themselves, and you are welcome to run the numbers on MB S430 or S500 or S320 on your own. We have these solid numbers in front of us about what these specific carmakers did with these specific models, models that are relevant to this forum, we do not need hand-waving speculations on what a theoretical luxury car manufacturer could do in theory.
  • hpowdershpowders Posts: 4,269
    "BTW, hpowers (SIC!!) got the point very quickly on his own."

    Thank you. For once, I didn't need an expert with me in the isolation booth! ;)
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Deja Vu?

    Amnesia?

    Have you seen the movie Groundhog Day?

    Did you not post those residuals yesterday. Did I not respond to them?
    Do you want me to respond again and go around and around this very same circle perpetually?
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Can you even understand what Tagman is saying?

    Did you know that there are various benchmarks?

    Benchmarks for US sales--LS
    Benchmarks for excellence--S Class

    Unfortunately the benchmark for sales becomes quite different beyond US borders where people cant fathom loving Buick-like rides.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    go around and around this very same circle perpetually?

    All those in favor of breaking that circle and moving on to something else right here, say aye!! I'll go first:

    AYE
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    I was hoping that this time around you'd have figured out that this is the HELM forum, not E36 3 series forum. Or that you have solid evidence that Edmunds' numbers are in error.

    Not all responses are valid rebuttals.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Aye, that's probably a good idea.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    That's what they said about SUV's too (American idiocy), but now sedan sales in Europe are tanking, thanks to people buying SUV's and MPV's.

    There's something about Lexus that differentiates it from Buick (understatement of the day), and I would not be surprised to see the rest of the world catching on at some point.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Amnesia, deja vu, have you seen the movie Groundhog day?
    Do you want me to respond again?
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Does that count as an AYE for you also? ;)
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    I certainly hope so.
Sign In or Register to comment.