Anyone into cars but not credit?
Discussion
SWoll said:
okgo said:
Marketing is quite powerful.
Why have I got a Mont Blanc card holder, the same thing can be bought for £20 from Marks and Spencer, for example.
Because you're a flash git? If the expensive product is purely functional and doesn't offer any advantages over the cheaper alternative other than a logo then why bother? The same clearly can't be said when comparing a Fiat Panda to a 911, especially for someone who enjoys cars and driving. Why have I got a Mont Blanc card holder, the same thing can be bought for £20 from Marks and Spencer, for example.
Why does anyone buy pictures to hang on their walls? Why do people paint their house anything other than magnolia. Neither offer any functional advantage but people like them and therefore it makes their lives happier.
Someone mentioned watches earlier. A basic digital £4.99 Casio tells the time just as well as an expensive self winding analogue watch, in some respect better as it's probably got a stopwatch and calendar function as well. So the more expensive watch has no functional advantage but not everyone buying is doing to so to show other people they can afford a more expensive watch (although looking at the watch forum there may well be a fair few
).funkyrobot said:
Who is inferring intellectual superiority? Just my point of view.
Love the circumstance comment though. Shows that some people do think they are more special than others.
Some people are more successful than others in terms of profession, education, income + savings. Many of these 'successful' people can easily afford nice cars and buy them comfortable with cash, loan or PCP. Many of them are on this site. You seem to have an issue with this. What cars would you own if you won the lottery? Say 10 million?Love the circumstance comment though. Shows that some people do think they are more special than others.
For avoidance of doubt, I am not saying that the scale is linear. i.e. city trader earning 250k net is not more successful person than a teacher or a better person, they are definitely more successful in terms of their income. Some of these very high earners in very good jobs will look down their nose at people with less than them. Not really a surprise is it? These sort of people are not worth knowing and will come crashing down to earth hard if it every goes tits up (divorce, lose their job)
funkyrobot said:
SWoll said:
I'm not sure anyone other than you does TBH? You seem to be stating the obvious, whilst inferring intellectual and/or moral superiority on your own behalf, when I'm pretty sure your situation is due to circumstances rather actual choice?
Who is inferring intellectual superiority? Just my point of view.Love the circumstance comment though. Shows that some people do think they are more special than others.
sonnenschein3000 said:
It wasn't just to post that... I joined because I had a question about my headlamp bulbs, and I posted a new thread about that, before I said the above.
I was just trying to join in...
Welcome and a good second post straight to the groin of the credit-loving, masses of PH. I was just trying to join in...
...good luck with the bulbs BTW.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 20th October 13:13
sonnenschein3000 said:
Cash buyer here.
As my parents told me "If you can't afford it, don't buy it" and "borrow to invest, not to spend"
"If it flies, floats or f**ks then rent it" is probably just as suitable financial advice when it comes to new vehicles as to boats and planes. As my parents told me "If you can't afford it, don't buy it" and "borrow to invest, not to spend"
If you can lease or finance something at a fixed known cost over a fixed term that is cheaper than the depreciation of the asset.... then please explain how purchasing that product outright is financially savvy?
Leasing/financing the asset puts the burden of depreciation risk onto the financier.... buying it puts the depreciation risk on you. Unless you plan on keeping a car indefinitely then financing can be a better option. And as a car ages the maintenance and repair costs can start to get ever closer to the cost of leasing a new one. This is particularly true if you drive a lot of miles each year.
SWoll said:
I'm suggesting that the majority of posters who run what they themselves refer to as 'bangers' do so because of necessity rather than because it's the option they have chosen from all of those available to them.
I don't think that is 100% of the issue though.Pretty much EVERYONE can get credit these days.
And afford SOMETHING toward a monthly finance payment.
So the banger driver does have a choice.
And not spaffing loads on depreciation of a 66-plate "poverty-spec Eurobox" [insert PH cliche of choice here] makes him feel damn good about the choice he made!
spookly said:
"If it flies, floats or f**ks then rent it" is probably just as suitable financial advice when it comes to new vehicles as to boats and planes.
If you can lease or finance something at a fixed known cost over a fixed term that is cheaper than the depreciation of the asset.... then please explain how purchasing that product outright is financially savvy?
Leasing/financing the asset puts the burden of depreciation risk onto the financier.... buying it puts the depreciation risk on you. Unless you plan on keeping a car indefinitely then financing can be a better option. And as a car ages the maintenance and repair costs can start to get ever closer to the cost of leasing a new one. This is particularly true if you drive a lot of miles each year.
True point about the depreciation risk, but with the servicing you can buy service pack for e.g. 5 years when you buy a new car.If you can lease or finance something at a fixed known cost over a fixed term that is cheaper than the depreciation of the asset.... then please explain how purchasing that product outright is financially savvy?
Leasing/financing the asset puts the burden of depreciation risk onto the financier.... buying it puts the depreciation risk on you. Unless you plan on keeping a car indefinitely then financing can be a better option. And as a car ages the maintenance and repair costs can start to get ever closer to the cost of leasing a new one. This is particularly true if you drive a lot of miles each year.
Also... If i'm not mistaken, when you get a lease, it will be on the RRP/list price of the car. For example, say something like the 6-series BMW... If the car has a list price of 70k, the lease is based on this. However, if you're a cash buyer, there have been people who have gotten a 6-series for about mid-50k through these websites like drivethedeal, etc. - although huge discounts are not always the case, depending on the car.
spookly said:
If you can lease or finance something at a fixed known cost over a fixed term that is cheaper than the depreciation of the asset.... then please explain how purchasing that product outright is financially savvy?
What you are missing is that it is usually IMPOSSIBLE to have finance be cheaper than depreciation.This is obvious.
The lease company has to pay for the depreciation (you can't escape that).
So they charge that and add on an interest charge too.
Otherwise they will lose money.
However, what has changed is the following:
Interest rates are nearly zero.
Lease companies finally got their act together and buy HUGE volumes in bulk securing a significant discount from OEMs.
So the lease company's depreciation is much lower than the punter's depreciation.
They pass some of that saving to their customers to make the numbers work for both lease company and punter.
walm said:
What you are missing is that it is usually IMPOSSIBLE to have finance be cheaper than depreciation.
This is obvious.
The lease company has to pay for the depreciation (you can't escape that).
So they charge that and add on an interest charge too.
Otherwise they will lose money.
However, what has changed is the following:
Interest rates are nearly zero.
Lease companies finally got their act together and buy HUGE volumes in bulk securing a significant discount from OEMs.
So the lease company's depreciation is much lower than the punter's depreciation.
They pass some of that saving to their customers to make the numbers work for both lease company and punter.
So you agree that to the buyer the cost of leasing in some cases is less than the depreciation if purchasing outright then? In which case, what exactly is it that he's missing? This is obvious.
The lease company has to pay for the depreciation (you can't escape that).
So they charge that and add on an interest charge too.
Otherwise they will lose money.
However, what has changed is the following:
Interest rates are nearly zero.
Lease companies finally got their act together and buy HUGE volumes in bulk securing a significant discount from OEMs.
So the lease company's depreciation is much lower than the punter's depreciation.
They pass some of that saving to their customers to make the numbers work for both lease company and punter.
Alucidnation said:
Christ, this thread is comedy gold.
Long may it continue (although playtime is nearly over).
Well, we can't all get our kicks discussing what plant a leaf comes from now can we?Long may it continue (although playtime is nearly over).
Perhaps http://www.gardenersworld.com/forum/ might be more your thing?
SWoll said:
Alucidnation said:
Christ, this thread is comedy gold.
Long may it continue (although playtime is nearly over).
Well, we can't all get our kicks discussing what plant a leaf comes from now can we?Long may it continue (although playtime is nearly over).
Perhaps http://www.gardenersworld.com/forum/ might be more your thing?
Anyway, i still haven't found what plant it is.
SWoll said:
walm said:
What you are missing is that it is usually IMPOSSIBLE to have finance be cheaper than depreciation.
This is obvious.
The lease company has to pay for the depreciation (you can't escape that).
So they charge that and add on an interest charge too.
Otherwise they will lose money.
However, what has changed is the following:
Interest rates are nearly zero.
Lease companies finally got their act together and buy HUGE volumes in bulk securing a significant discount from OEMs.
So the lease company's depreciation is much lower than the punter's depreciation.
They pass some of that saving to their customers to make the numbers work for both lease company and punter.
So you agree that to the buyer the cost of leasing in some cases is less than the depreciation if purchasing outright then? In which case, what exactly is it that he's missing? This is obvious.
The lease company has to pay for the depreciation (you can't escape that).
So they charge that and add on an interest charge too.
Otherwise they will lose money.
However, what has changed is the following:
Interest rates are nearly zero.
Lease companies finally got their act together and buy HUGE volumes in bulk securing a significant discount from OEMs.
So the lease company's depreciation is much lower than the punter's depreciation.
They pass some of that saving to their customers to make the numbers work for both lease company and punter.
Just trying to explain that finance has a bad rep for a good reason and that our current situation is rare.
Perhaps he knew that.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff