Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 19:35:21 -0700 From: B&D <NO_SPAMnopsamCOM> Subject: Re: Saab Depreciation: Greater than most?
On 5/2/03 4:13 PM, in article 3EB2FBB6.8B16B7C8nopsamsizefitterzzzz.com, "Johannes H Andersen" <johsnopsamsizefitterzzzz.com> wrote: >> Parts & labor are, from what I know, comparable. For me, it just means that >> a 3-year tradein is the best bargain. >> >> Dave Hinz > > Cars like Porches and Ferraris have surprisingly low depreciation. These cars > might have been driven hard and are presumably expensive to maintain. I think > the reason is that the new price is beyond reach of many, so that any small > reduction is welcome. Yes, that is definitely the case. Although Porsche here in CA can be had at around 5y old for surprisingly lower than one would expect. >Owning such cars, you still become member of an > exclusive club. Mercedes and BMW have models in the higher echelon, this > may influence the whole range. Marketing term is the "halo" effect - where the higher, more prestigious models help sell the lass capable ones. > Saab of course lack a real > prestige model in their range. Since the Aero tops out at MSRP US$43k or so, this would be true. If Saab had a $60k+ car it would bolster some sales. Maybe. Would be a different sort of car company, though. Perhaps the problem is that the cars fall in such a narrow range? The least expensive 9-3 is greater than half the cost of the highest 9 5 Aero with all the options. With the 9-2, if executed properly, and a properly executed 9-3X there might be a wider range with aspirational top ends, and obtainable by joe sixpack low end? Dunno. >However, we can only enjoy the comparative > excellent value and longevity of a 3-year old Saab. Yes, got the wife a 95 Aero Wagon - had to buy new since the Aero wagons weren't available off-lease. For my sedan needs, I will pick up a 3 year old 9-5 or 9-3 in a couple of years and proceed to drive it into the ground over the next 120k miles! :)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
