4 ms·

I am still uncertain how your calculus work. In the US, at least, if you buy a car and sell it the same day you are still out of sales tax (depends on location)

I am still uncertain how your calculus work. In the US, at least, if you buy a car and sell it the same day you are still out of sales tax (depends on location), various fees and the depreciation due to not having a clean title. On German cars this is about 20% of the cost (again, depends on location). I am sure a CLA45 (I suppose you mean that, not GLA) head unit with labor is less than $10K you'd lose on selling a $50K car (as you said, 9 payments of 400 pounds). So, as it seems, it could not be a possible reason for a sane person (lose 10K vs lose 4K + some insurance premiums in the range of few hundred bucks over the life of the car).

gambiting 6y ago
No, a GLA45 - not sure why there's confusion, as a matter of fact I know a GLA45 is available in the US as well? And.....well, I can present my maths clearer, sure. But I think you're missing the part where I said I had the car since 2016 - so obviously got 4 years of use out of it. Had I sold it day one then sure, I can't beat the depreciation. But assuming a well structured finance agreement you(with some luck) beat the depreciation around year 2-3. By year 4 you should be able to sell the car with some "profit" for yourself unless something bad happened. I don't know the equivalent financial product in the US, but here in UK I had what's called a PCP - personal contract purchase. It means that the bank loans you money for a car, you buy it, it's in your name(not owned by the bank, it's not a lease), but you pay off what the bank assumes will be the depreciation over 4 years, and then after 4 years you can make the final "lump sum" payment of whatever remains and that's it, or you return the vehicle to the bank and pay nothing more. So it's in some ways similar to lease, but in some ways it's better(the car is always yours from the start so you are always free to sell it at any point without asking your bank for permission). So in my specific case, I was paying £400 a month for 4 years, then the "lump sum" payment at the end of the PCP was set at £20k. I have reached the end of my agreement, but found a buyer willing to pay me £24k for the car - so I sold it to them, paid off the bank, and was left with a nice £4k in my account(which I then used to purchase another vehicle). Now, MB UK wanted £3600 for fitting the new head unit(it was a lot of electical stuff in the car that would have to be replaced, tons of labour). Had I paid for it, that alone would have wiped off what I made/saved on selling the car at the end. It would have been(financially) an incredibly bad investment, as like I said, the value of such mod is zero or less. And(once again, for the 3rd time), this wasn't a reason to swap. I have and am losing money on the next vehicle that is currently standing in my driveway. But certainly a lot less than on fitting a new headunit to my previous Benz.
- pandaman 6y ago
  My bad, I checked Costco website for the price and they only list GLA 250 trim in the GLA model, sorry about that. > And(once again, for the 3rd time), this wasn't a reason to swap. So why did you bring it up as a reason to swap? Obviously people lease or whatever their cars and get new cars after 3 years and the new cars have new features how does it contradict my point that people do not sell their cars for the gimmicks?
  - gambiting 6y ago
    Because, like I said: >>Well, one of the(but definitely not the main) reasons I made a list of reasons - like, I'd like a car that uses less fuel. Car that doesn't wake up the neighberhood when I start it. Car that can actually take some shopping from IKEA. These were the main reasons for a swap. But obviously, there is a secondary list to this - car that doesn't have a shit audio system. Car that has comfortable seats. Somwhere on that list is a car that has android auto support. All of this has contributed to me swapping. But logically thinking, there was nothing wrong with the car - I could have just paid it off and kept it. It's very specifically not a lease so I don't have to hand the car back after 4 years, keeping it(either by paying it off or refinancing) is actually an option. I think what I am saying is that the lack of something like android auto(in a scenario where it cannot be easily retroffited) can and does contribute to a decision to change the entire car - it's not just a stupid tech gimmick that no one cares about as some much earlier comments were trying to suggest.
    - pandaman 6y ago
      Well, logically thinking, if you were completely satisfied with the car except for Android Auto and owned the car ( really owned, not PCP or whatever where you actually owe money to the bank and the car is a collateral on that loan) would you sell it? If not then can you really count it as a reason? This word implies it's a sufficient condition, but I am not in UK and not even native English speaker, so I might be wrong here. And just FYI - you don't have to hand over a leased car, at least in the US, you can pay it off and keep it.

gambiting 6y ago

No, a GLA45 - not sure why there's confusion, as a matter of fact I know a GLA45 is available in the US as well? And.....well, I can present my maths clearer, sure. But I think you're missing the part where I said I had the car since 2016 - so obviously got 4 years of use out of it. Had I sold it day one then sure, I can't beat the depreciation. But assuming a well structured finance agreement you(with some luck) beat the depreciation around year 2-3. By year 4 you should be able to sell the car with some "profit" for yourself unless something bad happened. I don't know the equivalent financial product in the US, but here in UK I had what's called a PCP - personal contract purchase. It means that the bank loans you money for a car, you buy it, it's in your name(not owned by the bank, it's not a lease), but you pay off what the bank assumes will be the depreciation over 4 years, and then after 4 years you can make the final "lump sum" payment of whatever remains and that's it, or you return the vehicle to the bank and pay nothing more. So it's in some ways similar to lease, but in some ways it's better(the car is always yours from the start so you are always free to sell it at any point without asking your bank for permission). So in my specific case, I was paying £400 a month for 4 years, then the "lump sum" payment at the end of the PCP was set at £20k. I have reached the end of my agreement, but found a buyer willing to pay me £24k for the car - so I sold it to them, paid off the bank, and was left with a nice £4k in my account(which I then used to purchase another vehicle). Now, MB UK wanted £3600 for fitting the new head unit(it was a lot of electical stuff in the car that would have to be replaced, tons of labour). Had I paid for it, that alone would have wiped off what I made/saved on selling the car at the end. It would have been(financially) an incredibly bad investment, as like I said, the value of such mod is zero or less. And(once again, for the 3rd time), this wasn't a reason to swap. I have and am losing money on the next vehicle that is currently standing in my driveway. But certainly a lot less than on fitting a new headunit to my previous Benz.

pandaman 6y ago
My bad, I checked Costco website for the price and they only list GLA 250 trim in the GLA model, sorry about that. > And(once again, for the 3rd time), this wasn't a reason to swap. So why did you bring it up as a reason to swap? Obviously people lease or whatever their cars and get new cars after 3 years and the new cars have new features how does it contradict my point that people do not sell their cars for the gimmicks?
- gambiting 6y ago
  Because, like I said: >>Well, one of the(but definitely not the main) reasons I made a list of reasons - like, I'd like a car that uses less fuel. Car that doesn't wake up the neighberhood when I start it. Car that can actually take some shopping from IKEA. These were the main reasons for a swap. But obviously, there is a secondary list to this - car that doesn't have a shit audio system. Car that has comfortable seats. Somwhere on that list is a car that has android auto support. All of this has contributed to me swapping. But logically thinking, there was nothing wrong with the car - I could have just paid it off and kept it. It's very specifically not a lease so I don't have to hand the car back after 4 years, keeping it(either by paying it off or refinancing) is actually an option. I think what I am saying is that the lack of something like android auto(in a scenario where it cannot be easily retroffited) can and does contribute to a decision to change the entire car - it's not just a stupid tech gimmick that no one cares about as some much earlier comments were trying to suggest.
  - pandaman 6y ago
    Well, logically thinking, if you were completely satisfied with the car except for Android Auto and owned the car ( really owned, not PCP or whatever where you actually owe money to the bank and the car is a collateral on that loan) would you sell it? If not then can you really count it as a reason? This word implies it's a sufficient condition, but I am not in UK and not even native English speaker, so I might be wrong here. And just FYI - you don't have to hand over a leased car, at least in the US, you can pay it off and keep it.