Luxury Lounge

11213151718428

Comments

  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    High residuals are fictional for all auto companies including BMW. WHat is not fictional is the fact that most other automakers are not able to achieve the high realized resale values that BMW achieves. As I have oft mentioned here "High Resale Values" is what makes it possible for BMW to offer such tempting lease deals and still earn a profit as confirmed by their financials

    As for the mag article Brightness pointed out all the guy was doing was poking fun at folks who buy stature. Replace BMW's name and the pun on engines with MB, Lexus , Audi or if we were talking cameras put Nikon, Leica or Canon in there instead

    That does not change the fact that what he said is unimportant.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    We're not talking operating cash flows here. We are talking free cash flows ---the excess of cash inflows over cash outflows (including capital expenditures). It is the free cash flow that flows into the pockets of shareholders.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    So then answer the majic question. Why pump a high residual and put yourself at risk 3 years later when you don't have to. What business with a highly desirable product that people are tripping over others to buy does that? That is is where your whole argument breaks down completely. Why create a lease subsidy when you don't have to? There is an obvious answer and that answer is that they can't move their desired volume without risk. If you want to believe otherwise, which is what all your comments say, then the majic question again is why introduce the risk? Every business in the world - except for BMW if your pricing argument is to be believed - avoids risk. Instead BMW runs to it like some daredevil living on the edge? They need to conquer the high residual they put in leases - a residual whose purpose is to make the lease price of the new car lower in the first place. That is what your argument states. I don't think so. You'll never get me - as a businessman who was behind pricing strategy in every business I was involved in for the last 20 years - to believe.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    That is is where your whole argument breaks down completely. Why create a lease subsidy when you don't have to? There is an obvious answer and that answer is that they can't move their desired volume without risk.

    LJ I do know that you know the answer to your own question. And the reason I know this is because you yourself have mentioned many times the importance of having the financial resources and economies of scale of a large auto company. Well it so happens that BMW wants to grow big enough to accomplish those things. BMW is growing bigger in terms of its financial resources for R & D and Capital expenditures. BMW's goal of introducing 30 new models within three years is all about growing bigger and more competitive in its industry.

    Up to now they've accomplished their desired growth with competitive lease deals and at the same time they're earning a profit on those lease deals.

    There is something wrong with sales growth and profit losses. There is something wrong with stagnant sales and profit losses. But what is wrong with with BMW 's profitable growth? I dont know? But you do mention the word risk.

    The risk? Ofcourse there is a risk--what business do you know outside of government is non-risky. But so far BMW is growing in a profitable manner and that IMO is the best kind of growth. What should not be forgotten is that while leases are profitable BMW still sells most their cars to purchasers (58 percent).

    Google and the most successful companies on earth today are confronted with their own risks. Risk is not a BMW distinction. There is not a single non-exotic auto maker that does not offer generous purchase incentives or "lease deals with inflated residauls. NONE! So yes I repeat risk is not a BMW distinction.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    You're glut portrayal is inconsistent with the current high resale values of the 3 series. It is inconsistent with their financials. It is inconsistent with what's going on outside in the real world.

    Not sure if this applied only to 3 series, but the top five brands for best retained value for four year old vehicles in Canada are:

    Toyota (57.5 per cent)
    Honda (52.6 per cent)
    Mazda (45.3 per cent)
    Acura and Audi (tied at 44.4 per cent)
    The industry average was 37.7 per cent.

    The top-five light-truck brands for retained value:

    Honda (49.9 per cent)
    Acura (49.7 per cent)
    Lexus (48.2 per cent)
    Toyota (47.9 per cent)
    Nissan (47 per cent)
    Industry average: 37.4 per cent.

    See the article here link title
    BMW, MB and Lex did not make the list for used cars.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    No Dewey - you don't get my point at all. My point is that if the industry norm is 58% residual on leases after 3 years why would any "in demand" brand go higher than that. To do so means you are either leaving proit on the table or you need that higher residual risk to move product at your desired sales level. There is only an A or B answer here and I have no doubt the answer is B. To be clear I'm not saying BMW couldn't move a lot of cars at higher lease prices. I'm saying they couldn't move their desired volume at those higher prices. Going higher on lease residuals means cutting lease prices and that in turn means your product is on a discounted sale vs the industry.

    Risk - there's a big difference here. Of course every business has risk. But in this case the risk BMW is taking is a voluntary one that doesn't need to be there if you followed industry norms instead. That's exactly what all the analysts that follow the company were saying in March and it's why they were not impressed with BMW's unit sales gain in February. The aggressive pricing and conservative risk sales approach is to go lower than industry norm on lease residuals. It's also an indication of pricing power. Pricing power and controlled costs are exactly what analysts are looking for.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    I found this on another site:

    iDrive or COMAND looks good yes but in actual operation makes you want to rip your hair out. Top gear tested the S550 and they literally had 12 steps to change the radio station using COMAND. That is if you memorize the menu order and layout to know where to go. Not to mention the lag b/t each menu as it loads.

    Any comments from MB owners or afficiandos?
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    1) My point is that if the industry norm is 58% residual on leases after 3 years why would any "in demand" brand go higher than that.

    Is the norm really a 58 percent residual?

    And even if that is the case a 58 percent residual on a Taurus and a higher residual on a BMW 3 series will equate to substantial losses for Ford and great profits for BMW. Why? Because of the substantial differences in their Resale values. So comparing residuals to the norm is not necessarily the best way in determing an automaker's profits in leasing.

    So why is BMW leaving money on the table with inflated residuals?

    Profitable sales growth (please note that I said profitable not unprofitable). BMW does not want to grow by taking over VW. Nor does it want to be niche player selling cars at undiscounted prices because that would mean a bigger automaker would takeover BMW. BMW wants profitable growth and to grow without acquistions. IMO that is the best kind of growth even if it means good lease deals for the consumer especially when BMW itself is profiting from such deals. It is a Win-win situation.

    2) That's exactly what all the analysts that follow the company were saying in March and it's why they were not impressed with BMW's unit sales gain in February

    The analysts opinions focused on two specific issues related to BMW incentive:

    The X5--which happens to be in an industry segment where incentives are the name of the game (even for the spanking new Toyota Tundra model)
    The BMW 7 Series---a dated model that happens to be among BMW least successful models.

    Name me a company and I will name you a sceptical analyst. It is their job to be sceptical and not cheerleaders (although that is not 100 percent true even during our post-Worldcom era).

    3) Pricing power and controlled costs are exactly what analysts are looking for.

    Precisely right and that is what makes BMW such a profiable company. BMW has enormous pricing power compared to almost every other luxury marque. Have you ever cross shopped a BMW with equivalent options to a competitor? BMW earns heavy gravy with their pricey options and that results from their pricing power. Even after incentives BMWs are in most cases pricier.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Thanks for the Canadian informantion.

    I guess we Canadians are more frugal than Americans. The auto lux market on a per capita basis in Canada is a fraction of what it is in the USA.

    And many frugal Canadians dont want to be stuck paying higher out of warranty expenses for a lux mobile than they would with a mainstream Honda.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Top gear tested the S550 and they literally had 12 steps to change the radio station using COMAND.

    Mercedes Evaluates Driver Distraction

    Imagine how distracting that must be?
    What is really funny is that MB is researching ways to decrease driver distractibility by keeping their eyes on the road.

    Funny how MB has not yet reached the conclusion yet that chucking out the COMMAND systems from their cars would be the best way to reduce driver distractibility :confuse:

    If you want a good laugh refer to the link above.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    Profitable sales growth (please note that I said profitable not unprofitable). BMW does not want to grow by taking over VW. Nor does it want to be niche player selling cars at undiscounted prices because that would mean a bigger automaker would takeover BMW. BMW wants profitable growth and to grow without acquistions. IMO that is the best kind of growth even if it means good lease deals for the consumer especially when BMW itself is profiting from such deals. It is a Win-win situation.\

    If you want to believe that - be my guest. But BMW, a niche player in a much much larger industry just became the first company I know of (based on your assessment, mine is totally different) - other than monoploies in special situations - that wants future risk and lower current profits. Again be my guest if you really believe that in your heart. None of it adds up or makes any sense to me.

    BTW - the analyst complained about lease discounting thru high residuals. It was crystal clear in the asessments I read. I think 5 years of static profits (no growth at all really) amid big sales unit increases proves out that they are making zilch on what should be much higher margin incremental unit sales. But we differ completely here on everything so I'll leave it at that.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    I think 5 years of static profits (no growth at all really) amid big sales unit increases proves out that they are making zilch on what should be much higher margin incremental unit sales.

    Did you say BMW profits??

    Apparently you are a believer of German Accrued profits. But what you did overlook is BMW's current higher margins and higher Returns on Capital for 2006.

    And even if you did not overlook the 2006 figures it would not make one single bit of a difference.

    Why?

    I've news for you ---nobody and I repeat nobody uses German profits in any form of analysis since it is known that German companies use humungous reserves and accruals to minimize profits.

    Unlike USA and elsewhere Germany reports one set of figures for both the public and the tax man. Therefore they have an incentive to report lowball profit figures to minimize taxes. In other words BMW's real profits are likely to be far higher than their reported profits. That is why I've been focusing on free cash flow all this time.

    other than monoploies in special situations - that wants future risk and lower current profits.

    You've never ever heard of sacrificing margins for the sake of more sales volume? Well at least we agree on one thing and only one thing: We differ and we will leave it at that.
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    Gentlemen, I'm a not a CPA but I have read Graham and Dodd and their successors, one of whom drives an Exploder and lives in Omaha. Without taking sides here, isn't "free cash flow" the single, absolute best measure of a company's performance, one that can't be jiggered with?

    Similar to EBITDA?

    How do financial analysts for the wire houses see BMW? How has BMWs stock done? Does the market think that their strategy is good?

    Speaking of the 7 Series (someone in the above exchange thought it was a tired design), the resale values seem very high, higher than even the S Class and, surprisingly, not at all diminished by the horrible I Drive or abysmal reliability in the early years of the current body style.
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    Good catch on both phenomena. IMHO, even if the profit margin had been huge, there wouldn't be any need to incentivise (thereby narrowing that margin) if the products were moving at brisk pace. Who would pass up on profit if goods were selling?

    The real question is, has the manufacturing of BMW and MB become so efficient that they can take that kind of hits at the financing end and still be profitable because the manufacturing cost is going down even faster than the shrinking per vehicle revenue that they are generating due to all those discounts (subsidized financing is just another way of discounting). I have my doubts about that.
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    How does the market place think of BMW stock? Well, Dewey already told us, it has one of the highest "cash flow yields." In other words, its stock price has one of the lowest multiples on its cash flow. What does that mean? Investors apparently don't expect much profit growth from the company (it's a polite way of saying that investors are expecting at least a cyclical down turn at the company).
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    I prefer free cash flows but at the same time I do not ignore earnings. Using both figures are very helpful. If earnings in a company are growing exponentially but free cash flows are declinng exponentially then you know there may be potential problems.

    EBITDA? I never look at those reported figures. Reported EBITDA figures are arbitrary in the sense that they can be caluculated differently by each company. I prefer to take figures and calculate them my own way (Free Cash Flows as I define it )versus someone else's way.

    Also the TDA part of the EBITDA formula is problematical :

    T-Taxes-what company doesnt pay taxes? None

    A-Amortizations and D-Depreciation--how many companies do not have capital equipment and buildings? None.

    Private Equity funds use EBITDA to value companies in order to see how they can maximize debt and minimize equity for an acquisition:

    (Debt + Equity - Cash) /(EBITDA)

    I am not in the pivate equity business of buying companies and financially restructuring them so I have little use of EBITDA as a valuation tool.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    Enron went bankrpt on great EBITDA numbers. EBITDA - which is also free operating cash flow is a yardstick but there's plenty of other things to watch to ensure the EBITDA repesents real cash. Often it does not.

    Nothing is better than looking at cash to cash on an annual change basis and adding back dividends, cap expnditures (but you need to be on guard for bad internal capitalization), and then adjusting for all one-time (or a series of money flows in or out) related to acquitions, divestuitures, stock buybacks or new issuances, bond redemptions,purchases etc. As well you want to look at major changes in accounts receivable and accrued liabilities. Bottom line - if profits are not backed up by cash - they are being manipulated. Best way to look at cash is over a 2 year or longer period.

    BMW's cash changes leave a lot to be desired as Brightness so accurately points out. I've said before I hardly think the company is in trouble, but there strategy is revenue growth wihout profit grwoth and the hamster example is a good one. I honestly think the Quandts are positioning the company for sale. I've seen the actions and strategies they are following often enough to recognize them.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    In searching for a replacement for my subi, I have decided that a vehicle with easy to open back/rear doors is a must have. AWD is nice to have but not a deal breaker. The vehicle must have car like driveability. Reliability, reasonable gas mileage and room to carry bulky items are also important.
    With these criteria in mind, it looks like I have little choices but looking at mini van or mini mini van since they offer rear (powered)sliding doors. I think the candidates will be Sienna, Odyssey or Mazda5. The 5 seems to have suspension issues according to my research on Edmund, but it drove very nice during my test drive yesterday.
    If I ended up getting either the Sienna or the Odyssey then I may have parking issue since my garage can only accomodate one large and two small vehicles. Also, I would like to upgrade my GS into an LS460 in a year or two.
    What should I do?
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Scrubbed down and mopped up, the Lounge is now open again.

    How about we try to respond to 2001gs430, "Luxury Lounge" #764, 10 Apr 2007 11:36 am which got lost in the food fight yesterday?
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Not really the place to talk about minivans, but the Odyssey is probably the best of the vans.

    If you get a minivan, do you need a car like the LS?
    A new GS, or similar car might be better.
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    How urgent is the need for the mini/microvan? From what I'm gathering, the segment of small minivans with luxury accourtrement is just heating up in the next couple years. The Mazda 5 is quite underpowered compared to what we usually talk about here. Both Sienna and Odyssey are really big; you gotta test drive them with your loved ones and see if you are really comfortable with that size.
  • designmandesignman Member Posts: 2,129
    The vehicle must have car like driveability.

    Have you driven the minivans? They do NOT fit the criteria of car-like driveability IMO. However they seem like they can't be beat with regard to room. I considered a minivan but wound up with an Outback wagon. That was five years ago and I still have it. It's a compromise. Which Subi do you have and why are you getting rid of it?
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    "Carlike driveability", ay? What about the Mercedes R63 AMG?
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    Very similar story here. We went to the dealership three years ago for a Sienna, and came out with a Highlander because Sienna was just too big and ponderous to drive and too long to park. Those slider doors however could be really handy, like gs430 mentioned. Mazda 5 with a 250hp V6 would be quite nice if they made one; this being the luxury lounge, having the interior dressed up to the luxury standards would be even better. IMHO, that's the sort of vehicle from BMW and Lexus, among others, we can probably expect in the next couple years. R class ride quality is excellent, but it does have a few issues that are associated with versin 1.0 effort:

    1. length; it's just as long as a full size minivan; hence hard to park, and unwieldy in the garage;

    2. reliability is a real question mark there;

    3. no sliders;

    4. interior space utilization is quite poor, especially compared to what the sibling company's Caravan does.

    On the plus side, some of the lease deals on the R class are quite attractively priced (at least as of last month; there may have been the usual April price increases due to residual reduction and money factor raises; the usual mfr tap dance to soak the summer drivers this time of the year) . . . so it might be a place to hang out for a couple years until we have the competition arriving and making the whole segment much more interesting.
  • esfesf Member Posts: 1,020
    There you go. We on the forums (not necessarily the 3er forums) know more about cars than 99% of the rest of the world, and that was a low punch. I think we all know that the BMW V6 is one of the best in the business...

    Just kidding, guys.

    ;)

    Their inline six is smooth as silk.

    '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
  • esfesf Member Posts: 1,020
    The 5 seems like the right car. It fits all of your criteria. Although the Odyssey is the best minivan out there, it may just not be right for you garage.

    Good choice on LS460. It's just impossible to go wrong in that class of cars. I would like to buy my wife an S550 4Matic early next year. We were going to get an A8 this year, but there were some complications... and now she likes the S-Class better. Who am I to object?

    '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    ...Their inline six is smooth as silk. ...

    I've read that for so many years concerning BMW's inline 6. Having experienced a 2006 330i and a 2007 335i, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. I don't find it particularly smooth. At least, not as smooth as all its praise would have someone think. It's no smoother than most of the V6s on the market of comparable displacement. In fact, I find Honda's 3L V6 in the Accord to be smoother than BMW's I6. The BMW, to me, is on par with Honda's 3.5L V6; another one that's not too particularly smooth.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    Did not realize the Lounge was open for business :D

    You are correct about the minivan talk not belonging here. However, in my case, it will affect the decision on my lux mobile down the road, so please play along for a little bit...

    If you get a minivan, do you need a car like the LS?
    A new GS, or similar car might be better.


    You are thinking exactly like me, but my wife already said she likes the new grandpa Lex (LS460) for our next lux ride. Personally, if we ended up getting a minivan, then I would prefer a real sporty car like an M3, RS4 or even some thing from Lexus.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    How urgent is the need for the mini/microvan? From what I'm gathering, the segment of small minivans with luxury accourtrement is just heating up in the next couple years. The Mazda 5 is quite underpowered compared to what we usually talk about here.
    Well, the Subi lease if up end of Sep, so there are about five months to find its replacement. I found the Mazda 5 is just about perfect given its role in our household, but I got real turned off when reading about its suspension issues in the forum. I do hope others will come out with comparable products soon.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    Which Subi do you have and why are you getting rid of it?

    Got the Impreza TS about four years ago. We love the car, but for some reasons that it's been a target for bad drivers. It got hit twice while moving and numerous other counts while parked. Just for comparison, my GS got dinged once in a mall parking lot over the same 4 years.
    The reason that I even consider minivans is that my client may want to send me to their new project in Greenwich CT for a little while, and that would mean some road trips with the wife and our 1 year old daughter between Toronto and Greenwich.
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    I don't even know what the R is like, but heard a lot of bad comments on these forums so far. I would only consider Mercedes R if they put it in writting that my loaner vehicles would be the same or better in the event I must bring it back for ANY unscheduled service that takes longer than 1 hour.
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    I didn't realize you are planning for that long of a drive, between Toronto and Greenwich. In that case, full size minivan like the Sienna (with AWD if winter trip is in the cards) is highly recommended; AWD for parking in the cities and towns that you are not familiar with (being able to park on the snow banks, where others are avoiding). Unless you are thinking of buying a new stroller every time you go to Greenwich, there's precious little space left behind the second row in any smaller vehicle after the stroller is packed in there. Also, before long, your wife will probably realize the value of bringing a nanny/babysitter on trips like that so that the two of you can enjoy your time together around NYC in the evenings, and that she is not left entirely alone without any help when you are with clients. She will probably fight the idea initially (first time mothers often think hiring help somehow implies undermining their own role as the child's primary care giver), but having help will reduce the tension inevitably resulting from your being torn between the clients and helping her out with the baby. I have a one year old myself. Good luck whatever you end up getting.
  • designmandesignman Member Posts: 2,129
    Volvomax said:
    Not really the place to talk about minivans...

    2001gs430 responded:
    You are correct about the minivan talk not belonging here.

    Just to clarify, this thread was started within the intention of including any conversation with the realm of decency and civility. It is a general meeting place for those who are inclined to particpate in the luxury-car forums but not exclusive. It is modeled in the ilk of the "Subaru Crew Cafe" thread which states in its masthead "This is the place for Crew members to kick back, relax, and talk about...whatever!" This is the spirit of the thread, so your conversation about minivans is welcomed as far as I am concerned and as long as Edmunds agrees. It appears that they have.

    This is a friendly, digression-free thread. Tisk tisk for it having to be padlocked recently. ;-)
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    I agree with everything you say. Especially the tsk tsk part! ;)
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    I DID give my advice on the Odyssey and asked if a new GS wouldn't be a better choice than an LS, esp if the person in question is getting a minivan.
  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    I have an '01 330i, & IMO, the "smooth as silk" metaphor certainly applies. What makes the 3 liter inline 6 such a marvelous engine is its seamless power delivery. No peaks, no valleys. It's enormously satisfying.

    Admittedly, I have no experience with comparably sized Honda or Nissan V-6s. But I have spent much time driving Toyota 3 & 3.5 liter V-6s, & they're not nearly as pleasing to the senses.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    You are correct. Toyota's V6s just aren't all that smooth. Some of the thrashiest around, even in the luxury cars.

    As far as the 330i being "enormously satisfying," that's debatable. I was left wanting. However, the 335i was quite satisfying!
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    This is a friendly, digression-free thread. Tisk tisk for it having to be padlocked recently

    I was mainly responsible for that padlock incident. I owe you, Pat and all forum members an apology for what happened.

    My work involves spending a lot of time on the web and unfortuantely I do digress too much of my work and leisure time in forums like this. And that is not an excuse for what happened. I can assure you that no future padlocks will happen on account of me and please I dont want anyone to respond to this post since I think enough has already been said.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    A V6 is an inherently unbalanced design.
    You can fix it w/ balance shaftes and the like, but an I6 is perfectly balanced. Plus torque output is easier to achieve.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,671
    I went from an Audi A4 V6 to a BMW 528i I6 and while the Audi 2.8 is not a bad motor its is nowhere near as smooth as the BMW 2.8.

    I'd find it pretty hard to believe any V6 could match a Bimmer six of similar displacement.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    There is no V-6 that can match the smoothness of even a Jeep straight 6. Which is why Volvo stays with straight 6's, as does BMW. Even the GM inline 6 is a remarkable smooth engine, and most GM engines sound like they have rocks in the crankcase....
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,938
    I don't know, the Honda 3.0 244HP V6 is pretty darn smooth, powerful, and fun to use all it will give you.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Well, ok, IF there is a V-6 that comes close, Honda would build it, or Toyota.... You make a good point. Although, I'm driving a Lexus with a Toyota 3.5L six today, and didn't really notice any smoothness that made me mistake the motor for a V-8.
  • esfesf Member Posts: 1,020
    I agree... but IMO the Audi six-cylinders are the weak point of the brand. As opposed to BMW's buttery six, where Audi shines is in eight-cylinder and four-cylinder engines. The 2.8L, 3.0L and even new-ish 3.2L are extremely boring engines. Although I was a bit surprised that the A6 3.2 quattro I rented in Los Angeles was pretty quick, it can't match the 530xi/535xi, let alone my S4.

    I think BMW and Porsche could put up a fair fight for "best six-cylinder engine," and although Porsche wins in my book, BMW is not far behind. There are also the VQ V6s from Nisfiniti, and the VW/Audi 3.6L FSI isn't half-bad. Just my two cents.

    '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
  • 2001gs4302001gs430 Member Posts: 767
    Brightness, you must be reading my mind, it sounded as if you have done all this before...
    Sienna is the only minivan available with AWD I believe. Also, we don't believe in flying with our daughter being so young, not to mention the amount of stuffs that would have to be lugged along.
    Don't get me started with the nanny thing. You are so right about first time mother and getting a nanny. Just last week, I went to Greenwich to scout out the location, so I set her up with a very nice older nanny from the Far East for a try out. She would help with the baby, cook, clean and do all house chores, all for 2 weeks worth of my pay per year. The week went by beautifully, but as soon as I came back, my wife claimed that she no longer want to have a nanny and the biggest single reason she gave was exactly what you said :confuse:
    In any case, I have been all over the places with respect to the choices for the subi's replacement.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,938
    I test drove the RAV 4 3.5V6 and it was very smooth.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • lexusguylexusguy Member Posts: 6,419
    There are also the VQ V6s from Nisfiniti, and the VW/Audi 3.6L FSI isn't half-bad. Just my two cents.

    Nissan is going to push the VQ37HR-TT into the 450hp range. No production BMW inline has ever gone even close to that. Will it be Nissan v. Porsche?
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    Ljflx, I get a lot out of reading your posts (along with those by Briteness). As a car nut and a guy running a company, your financial stuff is a nice comparative reference and a step-back from the daily fire fighting that I do. One question: in looking at cash on an annual basis , I think that adding back in cap expenditures would be risky. What you want is CASH. Not a cancelled check for a new plant that really isn't necessary or, to give it a Rhode Island flavor, extra lobster pots that "would be nice to have" but will never be fished.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    That's why I said you need to be on guard about capex in that post. But just using cash is no good either - at least from a perspective of your future. If you don't invest in yourself you'll be dead in the water 5 years down the road. So capex is an addback for sure provided it's good capex. So you need to read between the lines on capex.
  • esfesf Member Posts: 1,020
    Well, you realize that BMW just hasn't really felt a need to. The tuners have been having a ball with the N54 engine, and can easily tune it to 400+hp-- and BMW could probably do an even better job increasing the power.

    If BMW had wanted to make the new M3 with an inline six, there's not a doubt in my mind that they would've taken the 335i's engine and tuned it to 400-450hp. However, they have the super-slick, M5-derived V8 instead. Neither are bad choices.

    But yes, many magazines will inevitably compare the new Skyline to the 911 Turbo. I don't really think they're direct competitors, though. They may end up having similar performance numbers (although it would take a ton of effort on Nissan's part to get the Skyline to go from 0-60mph in under four seconds, as the Turbo does), but the experience of owning the Porsche contrasts markedly with that of owning the Nissan.

    '06 Audi A3 2.0T • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.