I think you are imagining a lot of content to my posts that is not there. I'm not "attacking" resale value, nor am I "defending" any car. My point is simply that the depreciation deltas are smaller than your error bars, making it tough to draw a conclusion from the data.
Posting that chart is misleading, the MSRP variance gives on the order of ten percentage points of flex, estimating conservatively. That says nothing of the issues using final production year vs first production year and the like. Those are acceptable items to include, properly qualified of course. You mentioned none of that.
Since you seem to be rustled at the idea of the Mustang doing OK, we will do with the S2000. Take a quick google search to see what 2009 S2000s were selling for--it's very close to what the used ones are selling for...Honda incentivized them very heavily.
All that said, the Z doesn't have terrible residuals for its class of car. I think the performance is surprising for some because other Z cars have had very high residuals, but that in no way makes the Z a "bad" car. A lot of the residual.
Finally, you and others seem to continue to confuse negotiation with mfr incentives. For an easy example, go take a look at pickup trucks. You will literally never pay MSRP. If you went into a GMC dealer for a truck, you'd probably pay 10K less than sticker without negotiating at all. Certain manufacturers utilize this tactic more than others. American companies use it the most--it heavily affects Corvette and Mustang prices on your chart. Lifecycle end incentives affect the S2000. BMW discounts the 335i, but not the M3. It's amazing how the ordering reads almost in line with expected discounts.
|