KBB Value dropping drasticly

Red__Zed

I'm not sure I follow your first paragraph.


How well the Z has held value depends on your perspective of what the car is. It has been weak relative to those expecting it to be a hit car. Your expectations were likely just more reasonable.

koeppelnissan

The drop is also regional - with all the snow in the Northeast, Z transactions have been slow, and this will ramp up in the next few months. Also keep in mind that Nissan lowered the price of a new Z last year by $3000. That affects the value of used ones!

luigi90210

what point did he prove? besides that you are being a bigot

you cant compare what you can and cant get taken off a car from the dealer as its on an individual basis

not everyone gets 2k off a mustang, and there are some people who just pay MSRP on a vehicle no questions asked
what you are doing is trying to intorduce a new variable which is inmeasureable without paying some stupid amount of money to have it done


the graph provided was more than enough to give Ballpark figures as far as value retention goes, this is by no means an exact model of it
if you want an exact figure put together, by all means put one together yourself and share it with everyone, or dont, i dont really care, the figure provided earlier is more than enough to give me an idea as to what my car is worth...

__________________
SOLD 370z
New Car:classified
DD:2011 Mini Cooper S stock

Justice97

Personally I could care less if KBB was 10K. It is my toy, not a financial investment.

Red__Zed

I already did the numbers, they're floating around in one of these other threads that comes up once a month.

Mfr incentives are separate from negotiation, and several companies track average price paid.

Do you know what the word bigot means?

watson853

^ thanks for adding nothing to an otherwise really informative thread.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

b15

I stopped caring about my car's value after I buy it a long time ago. Cars depreciate, some more than others. It's out of your control, just have to face the reality when it's trade in time.

Red__Zed

Disappointing to see how the ownership IQ has dropped like a rock as of late.


Front end variance on purchase price overwhelms any possible meaning the chart could have. It's not like we are picking apart the life cycle differences (last year of s2000) or allocating for anything else. Even kbb tracks an "fpp" stat you can use if you are too lazy to look up time based incentives.



If you actually care about such things, looking at lease residuals is more informative in many ways. It's a bit skewed by how hard the manufacturer is pushing sales, but they do the hard math so you don't have to.

Zteve

honestly i could care less about resale value. i did not buy the car to sell it i bought it to drive.

__________________
2013 Midnight Blue 370Z Base w/Sport Package

edub370

u are all better people than me. i actually care about a cars value. guess thats my mistake lol

__________________

Rockhound

Relative to what? That's a very vague statement. ‘Those’ people must be folks who don’t have a good understanding how depreciation applies to a mass-produced vehicle that lacks a strong cult following and forces serious compromises on an increasingly beige-seeking consumer base.

Relative to the German competition in the M3 for example, yes, the Z’s residual is lower in my woefully misinformed example. If we assume that the average transaction price for the 370Z tended to be at a greater discount from MSRP than the M3, which you would likely suggest, then the gap in value retention begins to narrow. If the average transaction price on that mythical 2009 370Z was $28k, that brings the trade value residual up to 61.4% (still assuming the $17.2k trade value) – versus 63.7% residual for the nearly 2x priced M3 (assuming transactions ran close to MSRP for the M3, which you’ve suggested). I guess I just wouldn’t classify over 60% value retention over a five year span as ‘weak’ – regardless of my expectations.

I do get what you’re saying – if someone gets $10k off a $27k Mustang in 2009, and they can trade it for $14.6k, the residual for that individual is an astounding 86%.

It's probably also worth noting that the thought of the Z34 being a ‘hit car’ flew out the window some five years ago. A moderately ‘expensive’ (all relative, of course) Japanese, non-V8, 2-seat coupe launched during a pronounced recession wasn’t ever going to fly off the showroom floor, and it hasn’t. The thought of exclusivity keeping prices up artificially is also rendered moot because the Z isn’t some bespoke, one-off status symbol – even though it may feel that way to many owners. It seems to me that the shock over the Z’s depreciation is based upon wholly unfounded expectations.


My point was this: you’re defending the Mustang’s residual value by arguing that there are huge incentives, and that you can get $10k off a new Mustang. That’s kind of damning with faint praise, if I can use another antiquated cliché to describe it. Cash incentives to move metal can be detrimental on used car values, too – NADA estimates that $1,000 in cash incentive reduces a one-year old used version by $600.

Just as Nissan's recent price-drop on the Z may already be showing a pass-through effect to used Z values.


I work in an inexact science day in and day out. I usually have to normalize against some constant assumption to make meaningful comparisons. Normalizing a chart of one appraisal service’s valuation of cars of the same age with the same mileage against MSRP isn’t the catastrophic blunder you make it out to be, if you approach it with the proper caveats in mind. I mean, I guess it is if you have a different agenda to push. I comprehend that the starting price is important, but as a quick look, I compared against MSRP. Some folks pay MSRP, too - not everyone drives a hard bargain.

I never promoted that table as the gospel for residuals; it just served as a basic comparison tool. You seem very bothered with the Mustang example in particular.


I don't think anyone is suggesting that - I just don't think the data bears out that the Z has experienced horrible depreciation. I think there's some shock in seeing what deprecation looks like when you started near $30k 5 years ago. And for folks who don't intend to sell the vehicle, it is kind of a moot point anyway.

Red__Zed

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.

JungleZ

Nissan Fails Again. Almost towards the last in 2014 Consumer Reports Best and Worst picks.

Footloose301

I've never had an issue.... Reliability is a 10 from me. 53k on my 2010, zero issues besides lacking the extra 100hp it should have from the factory

__________________

2010 40th Anniversary 370Z

Rockhound

Pot, meet kettle. I'm not anti-Mustang, but I'm not one to turn away from a good p!ssing match, so here we are.


I did a bit of research online for owners' claimed purchase prices for their new S2000s. I found an average discount of $5,474 for new '08/'09 purchases (calculated against each year's respective MSRP). Some of the owners' dialog sounded more like negotiation than pure Honda incentives - I know those are easily confused.

I also took a look at a few new Mustang GTs on a local Ford dealer's website to compare to Ford's claimed MSRP. Doing so provides an obvious bump in the Mustang's residual, assuming the same incentive applied to the '09 MSRP, in fact now it would be the third highest on that same list - I hope you'll find this acceptable. The Z still falls 'above average' in this truncated list, so there's that, I guess.

I used Edmunds TMV value for new base 370Zs and 335i sedans to estimate a discount from MSRP for those two models as well...here's a new chart that should make you feel better:




No, I'm not confusing the two - I just think your claim of $10k off of a base Mustang GT seems awfully optimistic and isn't in line with current incentives. To get there you'd have to also throw in some negotiating, I'd think, or were there specific $10k incentives offered in 2009 on a $27k Mustang?


It seems like I threw in a caveat for the S2000 on my initial post. My limited research suggests that some folks were getting significant discounts on the S2000 going back to 2004-07, well before the last '09s rolled out. Part of what also hurts the S2000 residual is also what hurts the Z, it didn't sell particularly well, it appeals to a very small enthusiast market and general public awareness is very low (which is a shame).


Which is it? (Yes, I know the 335i isn't a flagship.) Even taking into account TMV pricing on the 335i, it still has worse residual value than the 370Z, so I guess us Z owners can take solace in that.

Anyway, I'm done bickering. My first post in this thread was legitimately submitted because of my own curiosity in the Z's value - and I think that, as you yourself have mentioned, the Z's value retention is pretty decent with all things considered.