Vote against the, “cash for clunkers bill”, part of obomas nutty stimulus plan.

Really? Great. Is there a reference to that somewhere?

It is so much cheaper to have parts replaced. I thought I wanted a new camaro, I’ll let someone else purchase the depreciation. As the boomer population declines the demand for new vehicles will too.

Vote against the, “cash for clunkers bill”, part of obomas nutty stimulus plan.

+1. However, a well off friend suggests leasing if you want a sports/performance car for a year if you’ve never owned one (and have some ambivalence).

I won’t lease but others do. I won’t borrow more but others do. I would never ever tap home equity but others did.

I know the difference between want and need. I buy new and drive it till the wheels fall off.

Dealer: Good morning sir, how can we help?
Buyer: I’ve got $15,000 and I want that car.
Dealer: But Sir, those cars cost $26,000.
Buyer: Too bad, I think it’s worth $15,000.
Dealer: Well, we have a different model for $15,000. It only has a V6 engine.
Buyer: But I’d only pay $10,000 for that.
Dealer: Well, we have a different model for $10,000. It only has a 4cyl engine and the lights are optional as are the seats.
Buyer: But I’m only prepared to pay $7,500 for it!
Dealer: Have you looked at our used cars yet sir?

(Sorry PCH101, you must have been posting at almost exactly the same time as me.)

You missed the supply component of the economics course. Profit is an inherent part of the market pricing model.

If producers can’t make a profit over time, then they stop producing (or they run to the government for money.) No supply –> no consumption.

Your $26,000 car for $15,000 isn’t going to exist because nobody can keep the lights on building it for you. You want Dom Perignon champagne on a Budweiser budget, but you’re going to have to just skip the Dom. Nobody is going to sell you the good stuff at your price.

If you want a new $15,000 car, then you’ll have to accept a larger car with outdated technology (which is probably being sold at a loss that is being subsidized with a taxpayer bailout) or a smaller vehicle with less content. If you can’t hang with that, then you’ll need to buy used or find a nice bus pass.

The companies that survive this thing will not be following your advice, because they’d die if they did.

Who said anything about a profit? The market dictates what the selling price is. Within that selling price it’s up to you to figure out how to make a profit. Or else to not be in that business.

If nobody is buying filet mignon until the price drops to $2, that is the market price of it. They can wish all they want to get more, but no one will buy.

All the way up the supply line prices will adjust to fall in line to meet the market, or they will no longer stay in business.

There is no divine right to a profit, and hence no divine right to set the price at $26,000. The carmakers don’t decide if that price is correct in an oversupply, the market does. And the market is saying, no.

The far more intelligent onboard diagnostics is a plus too.

The wife’s older car had most of the expensive repairs done, never saw a body shop but lacked nearly all of the current safety items, not to mention many of the current conveniences. We made the move in late 2007 for no other reason than for the improved safety. She is worth far more than saving money by driving a older, less advanced car.

If I am not mistaken, 2010 will see several new safety features hit the market, like reliable onboard tire pressure sensing. If that is the case, for heaven’s sake, hold on to what you have for another 9 months and get something much more likely to keep you from ending up in the back halls of a nursing home strung up on cables, dining through a tube, and wearing a diaper.

When I was a kid in the ’60s, Chrysler had a 5 year/50k mile warranty, which to my recollection was the best on the market. Their cars were quite good during the ’60s as well. If they were as good now, I might be driving one.

I don’t have any intention of trading my ‘99 Accord 5-speed, w/ 153k anytime soon. But I’m Mr. Conservative with money, and have always paid cash for my cars (new or used).

The tipping point that turned me away from GM was a Buick. After the warranty expired, it was costing me over $1000 in repairs annually just to keep running. I figured as long as it was lower than the annual depreciation, I would keep it. Then a couple of years ago, it cost me $5000 (!!!!) and I was hoping that was a one time anomaly. Then last year, it ran me $7000 to fix various engine leaks and electrical things that should not break. They broke at different times and I did not know what would go next. I had had enough. I have more than one car, but the Buick was the first car I had ever owned (I had a Vega that eeked out 120,000 miles and 12 years) that didn’t make it to 10 years old.

Americans hanging onto their cars until the car dies should bring up the resale value of those cars that are sold beforehand, shouldn’t it?

My parents are very fiscally conservative, but new cars were one of their luxuries, and while they had one car they kept for years and years, the other would be a leaser they replaced every few years. They grew up in the Great Depression so I didn’t begrudge them that.

I agree, the Warranty has a lot to do with it. However if your 3 yr/36 runs out on a Dodge the chances are that you are going to take a pretty big maintenance hit soon. If your Honda Civic runs past its warranty, the chances are a good deal less. My last car was a 98 Civic with 190k miles on it. Still running good. The new owner, a relative, is still running it at 250k. The manifold has developed a hole, but in this state, the only penalty is a loud car, so no repair. Other than that there has never been a repair on the Civic that was not due to wear and tear (tires, brakes etc), even the clutch is the original. The car has actually appreciated in value judging by the offer that our relative is getting for it, from other students.

My neighbour gave their Dodge POS Ram to their son for college, three days after the warranty went out, the A/C packed up. And on and on. The kid can’t afford the mainenance, he is one of those that offered a good price for our relative’s (nephew) Civic.

But then it is not that the Civic is Japanese (another neighbours Suburu has been a nightmare), it is how reliable the car has been reported to be. There is a contributer to this website that runs an excellent website that keeps track of reliability (Michael Karesh). There is Consumer Reports and the like. It is hard to kill a Buick, some Caddy’s and other US cars.

I think that those cars that offer increased reliability, as well as good fuel economy and make practical sense for their needs will do well in the future

Plus, of course, right now, mix in the current economic conditions and very few will change.

Our company will change cars however, because they are operated as a monthly cost. So if we change into new warrantied versions for about the same monthly cost, it will be done. It would be a bonus if the monthly goes down, or our finance guys might push the limit down to save some $$$, but the trades should hold up for the vehicles they bought.