Edmunds.com FINALLY has their True Cost to Own figures up for the 92x; the detailed information includes anticipated depreciation figures. I don't know how up-to-the-minute the figures are, and I'm assuming the numbers are based on historical performance with some guesstimated correction factor for sales, etc.SpAcEmAn SpLiFF said:i just need to know how all the gm employee discounts and current sales of the 9-2x will cause the car to depreciate. thanks guys
If you buying a new car with a sticker price of $29k for $19k what price you think this car will be worth a year later? Keep in mind a 2002 Saab 9-3 SE was sold for $37k in 2002, only 3 years later this car could be brought today for only $13k.Aegon said::roll:
Maybe one with 100,000 miles. I doubt they will depreciate that quickly.
aero1116 said:I see used 2002 wrx's selling for around $16k still. However, with the name of Saab, it's probably going to go down a bit more than one labeled as a Subaru. Strange? I know... :roll:
Exactly. I would compare the depreciation on the 9-2x with the Impreza. After all, a Firebird doesn't depreciate much different than a Camaro. The 9-2x Aero may depreciate a little more if it is less desirable than the WRX since the Saab has a little less boy-racer appeal. However, these cars are at the end of their model run (it has been a long time since they've been redesigned I mean) and the WRX is getting outgunned by the EVO and SRT-4. That means depreciation will probably accelerate.Aegon said:In my mind, the best selling point for the 9-2X was that it is Subaru.
No doubt the Impreza is a better car (AWD, duh) than a Neon, but the SRT-4 is a compact that is faster (and cheaper) than the WRX, so that's why I said outgunned. I was actually looking at the SRT-4 before the Saab deal came along, so I wouldn't say *nobody*Aegon said:For the record, I'll claim that nobody who drives a WRX would trade for an SRT-4.
You don't want to drive a FAST rental car, do you? - J/KGuy1138 said:No doubt the Impreza is a better car (AWD, duh) than a Neon, but the SRT-4 is a compact that is faster (and cheaper) than the WRX, so that's why I said outgunned. I was actually looking at the SRT-4 before the Saab deal came along, so I wouldn't say *nobody*
Exactly. Rebates and incentives are short term effectors on used car prices. Couple that with the possibility of no turbo for 06 and limited production, and depreciation should hold steady since it's already been slammed down ~25% from GM.cman321 said:a big misnomer is that when a car is heavily discounted to sell NEW, that it will have poor resale value. A 19k Aero w/ a 10k discount should have decent resale. The 10k was really just a market adjustment to get the car down to a market price. Now that the car is there, why would is continue to depreciate at a greater rate than other cars.
I find it hard to believe that a 17k retail civic will have more value in 2 years than a 29k list (19k rock bottom new price) Saab.