No Malibu for you
42 RepliesJump to last post
One of my kids is up for a new car to replace her 2003 Taurus. The Taurus is a good car but it’s getting old of tooth with over 80,000 miles and deminishing returns are starting to factor in. The deal is my kid picks out the car and I write the check. Originally, my kid wanted a Toyota Camry, but with our current track record of owning two lemon Camrys in a row she’s gonna pass. She had settled on a new Chevy Malibu. Nice car, as nice as the Toyota my wife drives and more comfortable than the Accords we test drove. But with the bail out going down there is no way we’re going to by car made by GM. So, now it’s on to Ford to look at the Fusion. Possibly, she’ll go with an Accord.
This is the no bullshit process that is taking place in my house right now. I imagine the same process is taking place in many households. I can't say whether those who say people won't buy a car from a bankrupt company are right or wrong. I only know that I won't. Meanwhile Senators Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai have killed the auto bailout. Does anyone really believe the republican senators in charge of the bailout talks for the republicans, each and everyone of them from an auto belt state, have the best interests of the country at heart? Obviously it is their constituents best interst to drive the big three out of business. But at what cost? The U.S. taxpayer will get to pick up the retirement and healthcare costs of everyone of the million plus people put out of work. The taxpayer will also end up paying the warranty claims. Over the coming two to five years the cost to the economy will far exceed not only the 14 billion needed now, but the tarp bailout as well. 14 billion will seem like chump change by comparison. And for those who say that the UAW killed the bailout, think again. Or more accurately, try thinking at all. The auto belt senators wanted parity between their workers and Detroit's. And they wanted it in 2009. Under the current UAW contract they will have that parity by 2011. Today a Toyota line worker makes a higher hourly wage than does the same GM worker. In return for making less money, the GM worker has better health care and retirement benefits than does the Toyota worker. Shitty benefits sit just fine with the auto belt senators. If crap benefits are good enough for their people ,well they should be good enough for everyone. The UAW balked, as they should have. Toyota, followed by Hyundai would have never come here had they been forced to pay scale when it came to benefits. They purposely located their plants in economic shithole sections of the country so that their only competion for jobs would be Wal-Mart. The auto belt senators were more than happy to agree to screw over their own constituents to win the production plants. And they did. Now they're screwing over everyone. The economic cost that a big three bankruptcy will cause will touch every person in this country. Many on this board will not be in this industry a year from now. Thank those senators. Of course, years from now we will emerge from the recession/depression and the big three will be gone. So, the senators get what they want. But with no domestic competition how will those auto belt workers fare? Especially with a million experienced workers ready to step in and take their place? Wal-Mart will be a better place to work. Higher pay-better benefits-easier work. And as for the product? Well those fine folks from Toyota aren't building good cars today. I have proof in my driveway. Lack of competition isn't going to improve that situation.[quote=BondGuy]One of my kids is up for a new car to replace her 2003 Taurus. The Taurus is a good car but it’s getting old of tooth with over 80,000 miles and deminishing returns are starting to factor in. The deal is my kid picks out the car and I write the check. Originally, my kid wanted a Toyota Camry, but with our current track record of owning two lemon Camrys in a row she’s gonna pass. She had settled on a new Chevy Malibu. Nice car, as nice as the Toyota my wife drives and more comfortable than the Accords we test drove. But with the bail out going down there is no way we’re going to by car made by GM. So, now it’s on to Ford to look at the Fusion. Possibly, she’ll go with an Accord.
This is the no bullshit process that is taking place in my house right now. I imagine the same process is taking place in many households. I can't say whether those who say people won't buy a car from a bankrupt company are right or wrong. I only know that I won't. Meanwhile Senators Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai have killed the auto bailout. Does anyone really believe the republican senators in charge of the bailout talks for the republicans, each and everyone of them from an auto belt state, have the best interests of the country at heart? Obviously it is their constituents best interst to drive the big three out of business. But at what cost? The U.S. taxpayer will get to pick up the retirement and healthcare costs of everyone of the million plus people put out of work. The taxpayer will also end up paying the warranty claims. Over the coming two to five years the cost to the economy will far exceed not only the 14 billion needed now, but the tarp bailout as well. 14 billion will seem like chump change by comparison. And for those who say that the UAW killed the bailout, think again. Or more accurately, try thinking at all. The auto belt senators wanted parity between their workers and Detroit's. And they wanted it in 2009. Under the current UAW contract they will have that parity by 2011. Today a Toyota line worker makes a higher hourly wage than does the same GM worker. In return for making less money, the GM worker has better health care and retirement benefits than does the Toyota worker. Shitty benefits sit just fine with the auto belt senators. If crap benefits are good enough for their people ,well they should be good enough for everyone. The UAW balked, as they should have. Toyota, followed by Hyundai would have never come here had they been forced to pay scale when it came to benefits. They purposely located their plants in economic shithole sections of the country so that their only competion for jobs would be Wal-Mart. The auto belt senators were more than happy to agree to screw over their own constituents to win the production plants. And they did. Now they're screwing over everyone. The economic cost that a big three bankruptcy will cause will touch every person in this country. Many on this board will not be in this industry a year from now. Thank those senators. Of course, years from now we will emerge from the recession/depression and the big three will be gone. So, the senators get what they want. But with no domestic competition how will those auto belt workers fare? Especially with a million experienced workers ready to step in and take their place? Wal-Mart will be a better place to work. Higher pay-better benefits-easier work. And as for the product? Well those fine folks from Toyota aren't building good cars today. I have proof in my driveway. Lack of competition isn't going to improve that situation. [/quote]That's a lot of words.
BondGuy, you have single-handedly contradicted the experience of most US consumers. I take that back - having to buy a new U.S. made car because 80,000 miles is too much is pretty much par for the course. I have a Toyota Highlander and a Honda Accord. Not a lick of trouble, and both have over 85,000 miles on them. To me, they are preactically brand-new. My in-laws drive a Malibu POS, with about 40K on it, and a Ford something-or-other with about 50K on it, that’s a heap of sh1t also.
The problem is, those foreign car makers actually know how to run a business. They sell cars that people will buy, at prices they will pay. The U.S automakers make cars that they cannot even sell for full-price. BondGuy, you are living a fairy-tale. So, explain to me (in less than 700 words please), exactly how a bailout will help GM? Will they magically find religion? Do you REALLY think their insane plan to rescue the company on the backs of fuel-efficient vehicles will work? What exactly will make them profitable? If a 160B company can't weather a recession, they don't deserve to be in business as they are.I, heh, think you're over exagerating here. I think that's what you want to believe. I'm surprised by this post to be honest, BG. Your posts usually don't scream "I stayed up 'till 4 in the morning concoting this scenario with no basis or facts to back any of it up". Just buy the poor kid a Toyota or Honda and be over with it. Why are you making a big deal out of this and what's the need for the contrarian attitude? This "two lemons" BS screams a need for attention.but with our current track record of owning two lemon Camrys in a row she’s gonna pass.
[quote=B24]BondGuy, you have single-handedly contradicted the experience of most US consumers. I take that back - having to buy a new U.S. made car because 80,000 miles is too much is pretty much par for the course. I have a Toyota Highlander and a Honda Accord. Not a lick of trouble, and both have over 85,000 miles on them. To me, they are preactically brand-new. My in-laws drive a Malibu POS, with about 40K on it, and a Ford something-or-other with about 50K on it, that’s a heap of sh1t also.
The problem is, those foreign car makers actually know how to run a business. They sell cars that people will buy, at prices they will pay. The U.S automakers make cars that they cannot even sell for full-price. BondGuy, you are living a fairy-tale. So, explain to me (in less than 700 words please), exactly how a bailout will help GM? Will they magically find religion? Do you REALLY think their insane plan to rescue the company on the backs of fuel-efficient vehicles will work? What exactly will make them profitable? If a 160B company can't weather a recession, they don't deserve to be in business as they are.[/quote] I knew someone would respond with a "my japanese car is so good i would marry it if I could" story. Thanks for not disappointing. Who said we are getting rid of the car because it's a probelm? It's not. Unlike some people, you for example, we can afford to drive new cars. It's really simple. My daughter said she wanted a new car. I said go pick one out. Your thinking is really skewed. You assumed something was wrong with the car. Google Toyota lemon. Over 1.7 million hits. The company you worship is far from perfect. Just my dumb luck to pick two bad cars at random. I'm sure they are able to build a good car, I just haven't gotten one yet. Add to that, to find a car in the color my wife wanted the dealer had to trade for it. The three on the lot had defective paint jobs. Some people don't care about bad paint, we do. Why are you driving two high mileage cars? Just curious as to why a successful business person would drive high mileage cars? I mean, i have a Jeep with 82k on it, but it's a third vehicle kept around to do tow/off road duty. Primary vehicles are no older than two years. So what's the story?Bondguy, why is it that you purchased another camry when the first one was a lemon?
I, heh, think you're over exagerating here. I think that's what you want to believe. I'm surprised by this post to be honest, BG. Your posts usually don't scream "I stayed up 'till 4 in the morning concoting this scenario with no basis or facts to back any of it up". Just buy the poor kid a Toyota or Honda and be over with it. Why are you making a big deal out of this and what's the need for the contrarian attitude? This "two lemons" BS screams a need for attention. [/quote] Believe what you will. No BS. The only two Toyotas i've ever owned, both bought new, were and are lemons. To be clear, I've bought two lemon american cars over the years, one Mercury and one Lincoln, but the previous Camry was by far the worse of the lot. And that's saying something as Ford bought the Merc back from me without going the lemon law route. It was a production line mistake that should have never escaped the factory. Still, topped by the dead in my driveway Camry that Toyota couldn't fix and wouldn't own up to. Facts to back that up? Ok, come take a ride in my wife's Camry. Then you'll believe.[quote=Bondguy]but with our current track record of owning two lemon Camrys in a row she’s gonna pass.
Ten years between cars. All manufacturers build lemons. I figured the 97 lemon was just dumb luck. This was a car for my wife who isn't a car guy. She likes the plain jane everyman/gal cars like the Accord and Camry. She actually wanted another Accord. It would be her forth since dumping the Camry. However the Accord was due for a major makeover and buying an 07 would put her in a dated car within a year. Not a problem for her as she could care less, but a problem for her carguy husband. I talked her into going with the newly redesigned Camry. Which, now I never hear the end of.Bondguy, why is it that you purchased another camry when the first one was a lemon?
[quote=BondGuy] [quote=B24]BondGuy, you have single-handedly contradicted the experience of most US consumers. I take that back - having to buy a new U.S. made car because 80,000 miles is too much is pretty much par for the course. I have a Toyota Highlander and a Honda Accord. Not a lick of trouble, and both have over 85,000 miles on them. To me, they are preactically brand-new. My in-laws drive a Malibu POS, with about 40K on it, and a Ford something-or-other with about 50K on it, that’s a heap of sh1t also.
The problem is, those foreign car makers actually know how to run a business. They sell cars that people will buy, at prices they will pay. The U.S automakers make cars that they cannot even sell for full-price. BondGuy, you are living a fairy-tale.
So, explain to me (in less than 700 words please), exactly how a bailout will help GM? Will they magically find religion? Do you REALLY think their insane plan to rescue the company on the backs of fuel-efficient vehicles will work? What exactly will make them profitable? If a 160B company can’t weather a recession, they don’t deserve to be in business as they are.[/quote]
I knew someone would respond with a “my japanese car is so good i would marry it if I could” story. Thanks for not disappointing.
Who said we are getting rid of the car because it’s a probelm? It’s not. Unlike some people, you for example, we can afford to drive new cars. It’s really simple. My daughter said she wanted a new car. I said go pick one out. Your thinking is really skewed. You assumed something was wrong with the car.
Google Toyota lemon. Over 1.7 million hits. The company you worship is far from perfect. Just my dumb luck to pick two bad cars at random. I’m sure they are able to build a good car, I just haven’t gotten one yet. Add to that, to find a car in the color my wife wanted the dealer had to trade for it. The three on the lot had defective paint jobs. Some people don’t care about bad paint, we do.
Why are you driving two high mileage cars? Just curious as to why a successful business person would drive high mileage cars? I mean, i have a Jeep with 82k on it, but it’s a third vehicle kept around to do tow/off road duty. Primary vehicles are no older than two years. So what’s the story?
[/quote]
Why are you driving two high mileage cars? Just curious as to why a successful business person would drive high mileage cars? I mean, i have a Jeep with 82k on it, but it’s a third vehicle kept around to do tow/off road duty. Primary vehicles are no older than two years. So what’s the story
Really? That is the dumbest comment ever. Why are you primary vehicles only two years old max(PS thanks for taking the brunt of the depreciation when I buy the used one, could you call me next time you are selling a car?)
My biggest client drives around a 8 year old buick something… And that is his “new” car.
[quote=chief123] [quote=BondGuy] [quote=B24]BondGuy, you have single-handedly contradicted the experience of most US consumers. I take that back - having to buy a new U.S. made car because 80,000 miles is too much is pretty much par for the course. I have a Toyota Highlander and a Honda Accord. Not a lick of trouble, and both have over 85,000 miles on them. To me, they are preactically brand-new. My in-laws drive a Malibu POS, with about 40K on it, and a Ford something-or-other with about 50K on it, that’s a heap of sh1t also.
The problem is, those foreign car makers actually know how to run a business. They sell cars that people will buy, at prices they will pay. The U.S automakers make cars that they cannot even sell for full-price. BondGuy, you are living a fairy-tale.
So, explain to me (in less than 700 words please), exactly how a bailout will help GM? Will they magically find religion? Do you REALLY think their insane plan to rescue the company on the backs of fuel-efficient vehicles will work? What exactly will make them profitable? If a 160B company can't weather a recession, they don't deserve to be in business as they are.[/quote]
I knew someone would respond with a "my japanese car is so good i would marry it if I could" story. Thanks for not disappointing.
Who said we are getting rid of the car because it's a probelm? It's not. Unlike some people, you for example, we can afford to drive new cars. It's really simple. My daughter said she wanted a new car. I said go pick one out. Your thinking is really skewed. You assumed something was wrong with the car.
Google Toyota lemon. Over 1.7 million hits. The company you worship is far from perfect. Just my dumb luck to pick two bad cars at random. I'm sure they are able to build a good car, I just haven't gotten one yet. Add to that, to find a car in the color my wife wanted the dealer had to trade for it. The three on the lot had defective paint jobs. Some people don't care about bad paint, we do.
Why are you driving two high mileage cars? Just curious as to why a successful business person would drive high mileage cars? I mean, i have a Jeep with 82k on it, but it's a third vehicle kept around to do tow/off road duty. Primary vehicles are no older than two years. So what's the story?
[/quote]
Why are you driving two high mileage cars? Just curious as to why a successful business person would drive high mileage cars? I mean, i have a Jeep with 82k on it, but it's a third vehicle kept around to do tow/off road duty. Primary vehicles are no older than two years. So what's the story
Really? That is the dumbest comment ever. Why are you primary vehicles only two years old max(PS thanks for taking the brunt of the depreciation when I buy the used one, could you call me next time you are selling a car?) OK, you've got a deal. You can have the Camry today. I want $18,500 for it. PM with your name and phone number.
As for your client with the old iron, yeah, there are people like that out there. But it doesn't make sense for a person in our line of work to drive an old car. You can't tell people you are a successful wealth manger and then drive up in a beater car. There's a serious disconnect there. Sooner or later someone who counts, like the rotary club member you just tried to impress at a luncheon, is going to see you getting into your car. Or, you may have to drive them to lunch. They MIGHT give you a pass on showing up in something like an Accord. But they aren't going to ignore a ten year old Accord. Nor are they going to be impressed with a five year old Accord. Show up in something new or close to it. The car is a business tool just like your good suits and expensive shirts and shoes. It's all part of the success package.
Buying new a new car every two years isn't necessary but isn't as dumb as you make it out to be either. Take B24's aging Accord. At 105,000 miles that car will need about $1200 worth of dealer service just to maintain its reliability. That's $1200 bucks worth of under the hood work just to protect the engine and prepare it for its second lifetime. That on a car that is worth 8 grand tops. But it doesn't end there. The car will need tires. Accords are a problem in that department. On some model Accords the tires cost $250 to $300 a piece to go OEM. Which is another issue i'll get to in a moment. Tires add another $1000 to the cost of keeping the car. Then there are shock absorbers. That's another couple hundred dollars. Not to mention front end suspention parts that SHOULD be replaced. By now the exaust system is done. And somewhere between the five and seven year mark the electrical system starts to buy the farm as relays corrode beyond servicability. It's not the car's fault. It's just age. Add in that many people don't use dealer service and just as many people maintain their cars for 30 cents on the dollar. The use of cheap after market parts instead of OEM parts further compromises the reliability of the car. As a car ages people become reluctant to spend top dollar to maintain it. For example, who's going to spend $1000 to put OEM tires on an Accord EX with 150,000 miles on it? Not the college kid who's driving it. So they go down to the local discount tire store and buy something not quite right for $40 bucks a tire and call it good. But it is far from good.As for me, I don't care about depreciation. I've traded cars after owning them a month. I dumped a Cobra after 8 months and I just dumped my R56 MCS after 14 months. It drives my wife crazy, but life is way too short not to do what you want. And i know, it's really being stupid with my money. OOOOh, shoot me I blew 7k on my Mini Cooper! I've lost more than that in 15 minutes on the options floor. At least I got 17,000 hell raising miles out of the Mini. Great car, but it was time. Time to find a new toy!
My biggest client drives around a 8 year old buick something.. And that is his "new" car.[/quote] OMG! Your client drives an eight year old GM product? Don't tell B24, he hates American cars. By the way, the Buick Something was one of their best models ever! Smart client!
A popular misconception. Don't any of you guys research before you post. Number one vehicle overall- FORD F150 Number two car/US sales-Chevy Impala So, if the F150 is number one out of all vehicle sales and the Impala outsells every car except the Camry, how is it that Detroit has lost the consumer voting with their dollars election?Consumers vote with their dollars; Detroit has lost the election.
I kind of agree with Chief on this one. Why do I care what some schmuck from rotary thinks. I have a 6 year old car(BMW 5 series) and my wife has a 6 year old SUV… and sometime for fun I drive the first car I ever bought 99 Firebird(Yeah. I kept it…no power lock or windows but it make deducting miles off other cars plausible).
As an advisor I don't put too much stock in toys(cars,bikes, etc..) because they all depreciate and I find most people who have them have nothing else. If a rotary member has an issue with what I drive(i have no rotary clients, maybe that is why) maybe I will point out I have more money stashed away in retirement and brokerage accounts then they have in personal networth including the toys and their house.By Jim Henry
At first glance, the U.S. list of 10 best-selling cars and trucks looks like the usual suspects, especially at the top. The Ford F-150 pickup is No. 1, followed by the Chevrolet Silverado, Toyota Camry, and Honda Accord, marching along as they have been ... hut, two, three, four.
But the Top 10 list through April, 2008, is a snapshot in time. Yes, the Ford F-150 is No. 1, but it's going into the fourth year of a nosedive. The generally unexciting Toyota Camry is still the No. 1 car, ho hum, but if you extend the dotted lines, the Camry could someday unseat the F-150. At the other end of the Top 10 is the Ford Focus, a familiar name, but one that has had to fight its way onto the list since last fall.
Squash, tell me, do you show up at meetings wearing a tired suit, stained tie and shirt with frayed collar and blown out elbows? If not why not? After-all you don’t care what people think.
You might get away with your six year old E39 because most people aren't car savy enough to know what it is or how old it is. One advantage of high end German metal. That you don't get why client/prospect perception is important I can't explain it to you. But try showing up at an important meeting wearing dirty blue jeans. Get back to us and let us know how that works out. Unless the prospects are farmers I don't think it's gonna work out all that well. I could be wrong I've never tried it. Lastly, if your first car was a 99 Firebird you're young. You are going to look silly trying to convince 50 and 60 year old rotary members that you've got more wealth than they do. Remember, members of the Lions club run the town. The Rotarians own it. So, forget the I'm richer than you are line because believe me, these guys know better. And, they really don't care. You guys are making way too much of the new/used car thing. Cars are not a major expense. relatively speaking the cost difference between new and used is chump change. So why is there an issue?B24, how about digging up something newer than six months old? The F150 is still number one. When I read a headline like that my first thought is all the anti advisor headlines i read in Money magazine and the like. The reporter had an agenda, one you agree with so you believe it. And maybe at the time it was valid. Closer to lying with statistics if you ask me. Similar to what we read from the do it yourself press.
Interestingly, even major ratings companies have an anti american bias. On one site, though two american cars rate higher than every vehicle except Acura, in that ratings company's "Top Picks" category, based soley on the ratings, the american cars are left off the list. Go figure!
[quote=BondGuy]
Remember, members of the Lions club run the town. The Rotarians own it.Never heard that sentiment before. Interesting…
You guys are making way too much of the new/used car thing. Cars are not a major expense. relatively speaking the cost difference between new and used is chump change. So why is there an issue?[/quote]
How do you figure that the cost difference between new and used is 'chump change' given the significant depreciation hit in the first 12-24 months?
[quote=HymanRoth] [quote=BondGuy]
Remember, members of the Lions club run the town. The Rotarians own it.Never heard that sentiment before. Interesting....
[/quote]
How do you figure that the cost difference between new and used is 'chump change' given the significant depreciation hit in the first 12-24 months?
[/quote] Hyman, I apologize, maybe it's not chump change to some. But everything is relative. And the retail pricing does not factor in a significant difference in the 12 to 24 month time frame. I'll give you an example. In October of 2006 a friend enlisted me to negotiate a deal on a new 2007 Honda Accord EX. The car listed for about $24,000 and she bought it for $20,500 plus or minus a few bucks. A good deal at the time. Moving on-today on the net the twin brother and sister to her car are listed at $18,000 to $20,000. So where is the big price break? it's not there. You wanna know why? Because everyone believes that Hondas are the best cars to own. Them and Toyota. So, when a dealer gets a clean almost new low mileage car in stock, guess what happens? They mark it up. And they'll hold that price because they know they can get it. Again, where is the signifcant depreciation? It's not on the buy side. And that's what I was talking about. For these kinds of cars there isn't a big difference between new and almost new pricing. Dealers control the pricing and they get top dollar. Again the difference between new and almost new is small. interstinly, I see used Honda Civics listed for more than I paid for my daughter's Civic in the summer of 07. The sell side is another story. There could be significant depreciation. But, that expense is totally within the seller's control. The dealer paid somewhere in the neigborhood of $15,000 for that 07 he's got on the lot at $19,500. He'll sell it for 19k or better because he can. Note that the car the seller sold to the dealer could have been sold privately for the same price the dealer is going to get for it. So, in that sense, depreciation can be minimized. Still, using our example, if my friend sold her car privately today, got the going price of about $19,000, it would have cost her about $1500 in depreciation. That for two years plus of use. So, again, $1500 hundred dollars is what it is, it's money, but not a lot of money. Thus-chump change when it comes to the big bucks world of buying cars.
To each his own. If I had a $150k total-vehicle budget, my family would have a $90,000 boat and two $30,000 cars…oh, wait… I do! To each his own.
How do you figure the Lions run the town and rotarians own it? Everyone in the rotarian group in my town is either trying to get business(EDJ reps, Primerica reps, or a hodge podge of retired people(most of whom where airline pilot who lost a good chunk of there pension), but nobody with any connections are in rotary. And I am pretty sure that the Lions group in my town and the next one over are no longer there.
I think groups of these types are dying breeds.