3 ms·
This is equivalent to raising the MSRP by $1500 and including 3 years of a free OnStar subscription with every purchase. Viewed in that light, what's so bad abo
by alistairSH 4y ago
This is equivalent to raising the MSRP by $1500 and including 3 years of a free OnStar subscription with every purchase. Viewed in that light, what's so bad about this?
It's bad because it's duplicitous. GM advertises an SUV for $50k when it's really $51.5k.
IMO, mandatory costs (tax, regulatory, or otherwise) should always be included in the normal retail price (or fee if we're talking subscription services).
- NovemberWhiskey 4y ago>GM advertises an SUV for $50k when it's really $51.5k. ... you haven't shopped for a car recently, have you?
- alistairSH 4y agoLol. Yeah, just some round numbers, not actual pricing. I don't understand who's buying these new SUVs. I felt sick paying $42k for my Ridgeline and the Yukon and similar are >50% more expensive. Maybe I'm just frugal?
- NovemberWhiskey 4y agoMy point, which either was strongly-rejected or mis-perceived as snarky by readers, was more that manufacturer MSRPs for cars are certainly not now (nor have ever really been) anything more than initial anchoring points for price bargaining with dealerships, who are the actual sellers. Pricing power is with the dealers right now and so you see large markups over MSRP for "market adjustment". Three years ago, pricing power was more with buyers and no-one in their right mind would pay MSRP.