Base Model is better choice than S

[tqtran]

My thoughts exactly.
Enjoy what you have because you are in a small percentile of people that are in the position to say, "I enjoy driving my Porsche"

[mrockrat]

I love my boxster i had enough money to buy an 03 facelift or an 02 s i drove sevaral and decided on the 03 base never looked back and never been beaten by a z4 yet...

[Lux]

Bruce, you sell cars so you must know what you're talking about. But I don't understand the comment on faster depreciation. There's less S cars, and as more enthusiasts discover the Boxster I would assume supply/demand would generate a higher price for the S.

The only reason I can see an S depreciating more is because people are getting rid of them for way less than it's worth. Again, supply is less than a base model so it doesn't make sense.

Here's what I see on KBB based on 2002 Boxster and Boxster S w/ 25000 miles:
Box msrp: $42600 Private sale: $27950 Cost to own: $14650
Box S msrp: $51600 Private sale: $34950 Cost to own: $16650

So the difference is $2K.

The S comes with a few extras like bigger wheels, interior bits, etc. that would easily make up the $2K difference. Not to mention the obvious bigger motor.

-

[Brucelee]

In real terms, I will pay an extra $10K to buy an new S vs a standard Box.

Say three years later, I go to buy a used Box. I will likely pay about $5 more for the S vs the standars Box.

So, the S has depreciated at a faster rate, ie, it has not maintained that edge of $10G but that edge has declined some 50% or $5G.

So, in relative terms, the S "incremental cost" has degraded faster than the base car's depreciation, which is less than 50%.

This is not surprising. The cost of options follows this path generally speaking. For example, you may pay $2G for the full leather interior or similar option. 3 yrs later, it is worth $425 as an add-on value in your car.

Now, as to WHY this is, well, I never try to figure this out. The market is the market!

Make sense?

[ho2go]

Would it not be better to compare the price diff between the base and S in percentage? I don't think a cold-hard $10k figure is an appropriate basis of comparison as time progresses (you have to leave room for that price difference to depreciate as well, no?).

For easy figuring let's say a new new base model is $40k and a new S is $50k. So you'd have to pay 25% above the cost of the regular Box to get into an S. This translates to a $10k difference.

Now let's say the avg used Box (regular model) after several years is $32k. In this case the basis of comparison to see which model has depreciated faster is 25% above $32k = $40k for the S. The original $10k difference is now $8k (but more "fair" I'd think).

According to Lux's MSRP figures earlier in this thread (KBB used 2002 MY w/ 25000 miles):

Box msrp: $42600 Private sale: $27950
Box S msrp: $51600 Private sale: $34950

we see that in 2002 one paid 21% more than a new base model to get a new S. And according to the private sale figures, today you'd pay 25% above a used regular Box to get a used S. Meaning the base model is depreciating faster than the S *assuming* the KBB prices are indicative of what consumers actually pay (big assumption).

Please correct/update the calculations if you have more accurate prices. I tried to get real-world asking values from autotrader.com but couldn't separate regular model vs. S model pricing.

Sorry to math-out like that, hope it was clear (-ish). ;b

Originally Posted by Brucelee

In real terms, I will pay an extra $10K to buy an new S vs a standard Box.

Say three years later, I go to buy a used Box. I will likely pay about $5 more for the S vs the standars Box.

So, the S has depreciated at a faster rate, ie, it has not maintained that edge of $10G but that edge has declined some 50% or $5G.

So, in relative terms, the S "incremental cost" has degraded faster than the base car's depreciation, which is less than 50%...

[Brucelee]

I absolute terms, the amount one takes on depreciation for an S is larger than one takes for a standard boxster, over say a three year period. To me, this means that from a financial perspective, the S is going to cost me more in pure depreciation than the standard car will over that same time. If this were not true, to me the S as a new car would be an no-brainer.

Moreover, the KBB data is faulty here. In reality, a 2002 S will likely net you about $5K more than a standard Box, not $7 as they say. This is not the only place where KBB falls down BTW.

Of course, it all depends on how you look at it. To me, the used Box S is the car to buy, as much of the cost diff has been wrung out of it by the marketplace.

Make sense?

[tqtran]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

the KBB data is faulty here. ...This is not the only place where KBB falls down BTW.

I second that. One of many things designed for a false sense of confidence in.

[Lux]

[Brucelee]I absolute terms, the amount one takes on depreciation for an S is larger than one takes for a standard boxster, over say a three year period.
Agreed. This is the "cost to own". But you must also agree that it is much less less than the initial $9K difference to buy.


[Brucelee]Moreover, the KBB data is faulty here. In reality, a 2002 S will likely net you about $5K more than a standard Box, not $7 as they say.
OK, so using the original KBB formula and adjusting the S price to [base+$5K] you still only pay $4K more out of pocket instead of the $2K per KBB. Yes, it's still $4K more than the base. But you get a whole lot of goodies for that $4K.

People can throw the "it's not worth an extra $9K" BS all they want. That's subjective and everyone's entitled to their opinion. But the fact is that it only costs about $4K extra in the end to own an S.

-