RE: Porsche 911 (992) Carrera S Cabriolet: Driven

[garystoybox]

Ares said:

30% of working households have a household income of over £100,000

Times have moved on.

Not quite that much they haven’t.
I hate to correct internet ‘facts’ but as this this is my profession I will. The IFS will confirm that £100k gross (or c£65k net) pa. will put you in the top 5% of incomes based on 2 adults, no children. If you add working children still living at home into the equation then obviously things would look different, but I don’t think that’s what we are talking about. £100k net income would put you in the top 2%.
It’s therefore fair to say if you earn £100k gross then you are considerably better off than most.

[Ares]

garystoybox said:

Ares said:

30% of working households have a household income of over £100,000

Times have moved on.

Not quite that much they haven’t.
I hate to correct internet ‘facts’ but as this this is my profession I will. The IFS will confirm that £100k gross (or c£65k net) pa. will put you in the top 5% of incomes based on 2 adults, no children. If you add working children still living at home into the equation then obviously things would look different, but I don’t think that’s what we are talking about. £100k net income would put you in the top 2%.
It’s therefore fair to say if you earn £100k gross then you are considerably better off than most.

By field too....and I was quoting ONS figures that we've been using very recently for a research paper.

If you quote net income, then yes, you need to sit in the top 2% to have a net income of £100k, but gross sees more than 20% earning above £100k, and more than 30% of households having a Gross income of over £100,000 (and that excludes working children).

£100k+ earners are still a minority, but no longer a small minority, and no longer 'the rich' in the way they were 10/15yrs ago.

[cerb4.5lee]

GranCab said:

I see st4 managed to shoehorn his manlove of Lexus into this thread as well ....

I think he is starting to brainwash me now and I'm tempted to go and have a drive of a Lexus to see if they are as good as he suggests!

I will just have to ignore the fact that almost every review I've ever read about them state how nice they are to look at/sit in...but how dull they are to drive!

[Ares]

cerb4.5lee said:

GranCab said:

I see st4 managed to shoehorn his manlove of Lexus into this thread as well ....

I think he is starting to brainwash me now and I'm tempted to go and have a drive of a Lexus to see if they are as good as he suggests!

I will just have to ignore the fact that almost every review I've ever read about them state how nice they are to look at/sit in...but how dull they are to drive!

In defence of st4, his sales pitch about the Lexus was spot on. "Perfectly pleasant to drive" was his quote. They are just that. Pleasant. Inoffensive, capable, and nice. They are the Dan Walker/Cliff Richard/Terry Wogan of the car world. Safe, dependable, questionable gender orientation, a little beige, inoffensive, something you could get out in front of the vicar.


They shove a V8 im some of their sportier models in the same way that MTV sometimes wheels out Ozzie Osbourne. You know that the DNA say 'rock', but it's been sanitised and made 'nice' so as not to offend too much, just a little bit daft and bemused.

[st4]

cerb4.5lee said:

I think he is starting to brainwash me now and I'm tempted to go and have a drive of a Lexus to see if they are as good as he suggests!

I will just have to ignore the fact that almost every review I've ever read about them state how nice they are to look at/sit in...but how dull they are to drive!

Try one honestly. My GS is not dull to drive. My Merc was, the Lexus is a much more enjoyable and fun car to drive. An LC500 would be amazing for you.

[cerb4.5lee]

st4 said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I think he is starting to brainwash me now and I'm tempted to go and have a drive of a Lexus to see if they are as good as he suggests!

I will just have to ignore the fact that almost every review I've ever read about them state how nice they are to look at/sit in...but how dull they are to drive!

Try one honestly. My GS is not dull to drive. My Merc was, the Lexus is a much more enjoyable and fun car to drive. An LC500 would be amazing for you.

In fairness like you I also find my Merc dull to drive. I do think that the LC500 looks a cracking bit of kit for sure and I would love a go in one.

[GranCab]

Lexus GS ... mmmmmm it makes the heart beat a little faster ...

[up_shift]

Controversial opinion: 1) I think this looks stunning. 2) after driving various new 911's and my 996 (albeit quite modified) I feel like there's a certain purity and lightweight analogueness that the 996 has that was bred out over the years..

[up_shift]

Ares said:

I don't disagree, but it isn't now solely the preserve of the rich to own/drive a £100k car, £100k is no longer supercar territory. Most full size SUVs come in at £60-80k and quick head up. Baby M/AMG/RS start at £70k and quickly head north of £100k. Large saloons are tipping into £100k without trying. etc etc.

Unless you are a Guardian reader (or a Corbynite), £100k income is no longer 'rich' - over 1.7m people earn over £100,000, and 30% of working households have a household income of over £100,000

£100k cars are no longer exotica. 10-15yrs ago, it was the preserve of the rich. Aston Martins, Bentleys, Top end Porsches, Ferraris etc etc

What was seen as being the 'rich' benchmark now starts at £200k.

Times have moved on.

Bit of a simplistic way of looking at it given the general cost of living etc will also have gone up. I don't agree that 100 doesnt equal exotica - you just have many more car makers, merc et al who are making premium cars. The definition of supercar and rich itself has changed given that you now have hatches that make supercars of yesteryear look pedestrian and plans that make expensive cars more accessible.

We live in a day where arguably people can access the 100k barrier yes, but arguably they are still in the relative few

In many parts of the country, 100k is still rich, and spunking what would be 5 years salary to many still makes it an exotic dabble and it tends to be the well off that can buy astons, porsches, bentleys and afford the running costs, service costs, insurance costs on top of that - as well as the general cost of living..

They're still very much toys for the well off imo, as for whether 100k is rich or not? It depends if we define it as being able to afford XYZ or whether we're talking comparative to xyz. I don't think it's really any different to how it was at times over the past 10 years.. and I don't think 100k p/a was ever really 'rich'. Better off, certainly. But more people earning more doesn't make that any less the case - there's just 'more well-off people out there'.

Not sure on accuracy but a quick search shows 1.2m people on over 100k vs a population of 66m (of which in 2011 64% were working age, lets say that's now 55%) that gives 3% of the working age population earning >100k ?

Edited by up_shift on Wednesday 13th March 01:28

[2Btoo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

This sounds about right to me. Trying to link someone's income with the value of the car they drive is never successful. Now that so many cars are leased and not owned then it seems that anyone can drive any car they like. Look at the developing row on the Fiona Onasanya thread to see another example of it.

[NigelCayless]

So how much as a percentage of income do people think it is reasonable to spend on a "fun" car?

[LordGrover]

Pumpsmynads said:

I love the new range. I’m finally at an age/wealth where these are on my radar. Just the Carrera really rather than the s.

Just a quick general 911 question to fellow PHers. Which options are a necessity? (I know, sorry.)

I’ve been on the configurator and all I really would choose is a colour and some wheels. Maybe privacy glass. Everything else I wouldn’t know what I’m missing. Maybe the sports seats?

I've been playing with configurator. Without going silly I ended up with this: http://www.porsche-code.com/PL5K5UV6

[Tim bo]

st4 said:

Well, I do think Lexus are the best of all.

One might even want to wait until Lexus make the LC500 convertible. Think of the v8 noise. More of a GT than this and probably less storage space but what a spendid splendid car.

Each to their own I guess. I found the LC500 to be relatively staid to drive - little of the feedback you'd expect. The V8 lacked low-down torque (though it did come alive above 4,500 revs). I found the interior truly dreadful, in ergonomics, looks, touch-and-feel, placement, tech, pretty much the lot. I was initially undecided about the exterior looks, but ultimately concluded they're too fussy and overdesigned with little coherence flowing front to back. Looks are indeed subjective though.

All in all not a patch on a Porsche, in my view. But then I'm not sure a top-end GT Lexus really competes in the same market as Porsche.

Edited by Tim bo on Wednesday 13th March 10:03

[2Btoo]

NigelCayless said:

So how much as a percentage of income do people think it is reasonable to spend on a "fun" car?

Anything between 0% and 500%, maybe?

I'd permit them to spend more than 500% or less than 0% if circumstances dictated it ....

[anonymous-user]

st4 said:

You have a cleaner. You’re rich.

No, it means I go to work to earn money to not waste my time doing things I don't like.

[Robert-nszl1]

LordGrover said:

I've been playing with configurator. Without going silly I ended up with this: http://www.porsche-code.com/PL5K5UV6

Love that blue. My first ever (996) 911 was a dark blue metallic. Ocean blue maybe? Looked fantastic in the sunshine, possibly the best colour car I've ever owned

[Zoon]

yonex said:

st4 said:

You have a cleaner. You’re rich.

No, it means I go to work to earn money to not waste my time doing things I don't like.

Tenner an hour, two hours a week.

[Dr Nookie]

Ares said:

30% of working households have a household income of over £100,000

Appreciate it's off topic, but how can that be true? Only a fraction (probably 5% of the households I know touches that or even close). Most fall into the main earner 40-50k, secondary 25-35k. Perhaps true in a few square miles in London, but 30% of all working households...

[kbf1981]

Top 1% in the UK:

- Top 1% for income = £99k salary / income
- Top 1% for wealth = £688k in assets owned

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United...

Where pistonheads people get the idea that every other person earns £100k from, is bonkers, and not true. If you live in london surrounded by bankers the whole time, maybe you have a skewed perspective. In the vast majority of the country, £30k is considered a good salary. Look at the data.

[Ares]

Dr Nookie said:

Ares said:

30% of working households have a household income of over £100,000

Appreciate it's off topic, but how can that be true? Only a fraction (probably 5% of the households I know touches that or even close). Most fall into the main earner 40-50k, secondary 25-35k. Perhaps true in a few square miles in London, but 30% of all working households...

ONS stats.