06-19-2005, 10:04 AM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Holland
Posts: 140
|
You are thinking rational
IMHO someone who is thinking rational will never buy a Porsche. There's lots of other cars out there for less money.
I'm in Europe/Holland and my new MY01 BoxsterS set me back 80k euro's which is more than I payed for my house. No way I can rationalise it. I just had the money to spent, only live once and wanted to spoil myself with a open sportcar (open was THE criteria because I like cabrio's).
Considered:
- F360 spider
- Corvette Convertible
- Honda S2000
- Audi TT cabrio
- Porsche Boxster
Never considered a 911. Too big for my taste and engine in the back !!!!????!!!!
Corvette Convertible is to big/heavy, F360 spider I could buy but questioned whether I could affort the running costs and why think of a S200/TT when you can affort a Boxster.
So I ordered MY ultimate Boxster. An S, speedyellow, special paint on dash, GT3 rims, sportsuspension, no psm, no airco, sport-exhaust, full leather, sportseats and some other nifty things. Rational NO WAY, fun ALL THE WAY.
Though about letting Gemballa put a 450bhp bi-turbo set on it. Then I became rational again;-)
So basically If you shopping in this range. Think rational about how much money you can spent on something non rational/bisare hobby of yours and then let your heart get in and buy the best possible within the rational set budget. For me there was no question about it I had to have the S because I like power (there is never enough) and could affort it. For you the base might be better because you have other things in your heart. But _PLEASE_ don't rationalize buying a Boxster. There is nothing rational about it !
Mark.
|
|
|
06-19-2005, 12:11 PM
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 416
|
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"
|
|
|
06-19-2005, 03:25 PM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: london
Posts: 9
|
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...
|
|
|
06-20-2005, 07:51 AM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 401
|
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.
-
|
|
|
06-20-2005, 08:19 AM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 8,083
|
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?
|
|
|
06-23-2005, 10:00 AM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 21
|
Respectfully disagree, Brucelee
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
Quote:
|
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%...
|
|
|
|
06-23-2005, 10:16 AM
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 8,083
|
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?
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:11 AM.
| |