c_hunter

I got the same e-mail; Sasair is correct -- that is a used RDX.

buckeye#1

Sorry guys,didnt read the email that close

flar

That's a fast trade-in. Or is this likely a demo model?

(Crossing fingers that it isn't a "too many unresolvable P0747 errors lemon law resale" car. )

sasair

It is likely one they used as a loaner is my guess. They probably have a magic number that they go by for mileage as to what the ideal is for selling their loaner vehicles and I would guess it isn't very high. I've never had a loaner with more than 10k miles on it from pohanka.

CL6

I'm just curious but when you pay, say, $200 over invoice or even $200 below dealer invoice what kind of service do you expect from the sales person?

sasair

I never expect any kind of service from the sales staff. they are there to answer questions about the vehicle if I have any, but I have almost never run across a sales guy that knew more about a car I was interested than me. they are just a necessary evil since most dealerships don't let you deal with the sales manager directly. I don't even like to have the sales guys put my license plates on.

RDXC90

I expect to be treated professionally. Some people might value better service for a higher price, but for others like myself, PRICE is more important.

May be I am a little naive here, but I expect to be treated the same as anyone else. The question should really be what kind of scores do (you) the sales person expect from your customer when Acura calls to survey them?

Danbury

I'm curious what kind of services they have to offer? I've bought 10 new cars and they all provided a road test, gave their sales pitch, and negotiated a price. Some tried to sell extras, most were low key. I can't even remember the names of all but 2. They almost never acknowledge you when you are in for service b/c the deal is done.
Now the service managers are a different story. They provide warranty info, service advice and are the laison between the dealership and the customer.
I think the service manager has the most difficult job at the dealership.

CL6

I guess I meant going over the car, explaining how things work, stuff like that.

Service managers have it tough because they have to break bad news to you (how much repairs cost, etc.).

flar

Basically, unless you held them up at gunpoint to give you the car, they agreed to the deal because it made sense for them. There shouldn't be any reason for them to treat you differently because you negotiated better. Hopefully they have more respect for you if you knew what you were doing.

I gave my guy a break - he tried to go over a couple of things when I was getting ready to drive away, but the dealership was already closed and he was unable to explain to me how to pair my phone so I let him off the hook and drove away with no further explanation. He wanted to do right by me and did a lot of little things for me like scraping stickers off of the windows and helping me remount my Fastrak transmitter - all that despite my negotiating below invoice - but I let him go because it was a waste of my time when I went over his head and I like to tinker and figure things out on my own anyway.

(I gave him one of the two 4's in my followup survey for not really knowing how to pair the phone. I probably should have been more critical, but he knew the basic concept and he was trying so I gave him a 4 and most everything else was a nice 5.)

dbl2010

Any recent experience around Pittsburgh area? Initial replies that I got from 2 dealers for RDX with tech are around $35500, which is very high compared to the deals I am reading here. Anyone with a sweet deal in the area? Or any advice would be much appreciated.

flar

Who and how are you asking for these deals? Is this after haggling?

When I talked price I went in with around $33,000 (old invoice less dealer holdback plus a few dollars). They'd generally come back close to invoice, if not invoice. You have to start low to get them to go low.

Also, fleet managers or internet managers usually cut the bull out quicker than the typical salesmen.

dbl2010

No haggling yet. I just contacted via email to learn their opening price. But I feel it is a bad start. Or am I wrong?

flar

I don't think I ever started with their offers - I went in with my own after having read the pricing threads on edmunds cartalk. It may be an issue of you approaching a couple with some lowball offers and starting the negotiations. They may view email requests for offers as a seller's market.

You should also check their inventories first and see how many RDX they have on hand. If you can get their VIN numbers you can see if they have old stock as well. The older stock has cost them financing money to keep on their lots so they should be getting more desperate. Some dealers have their inventories accessible online complete with VIN numbers. Current models being produced these days probably have VIN numbers ending in 15000 or higher. Some dealers have models with VIN numbers in the low thousands which is a sure sign the vehicle is getting on their nerves.

dbl2010

Thanks for the tips. I am currently away from the area, so trying to start with some email negotiations. I will visit them next week and see the VINs, and hopefully find something.

tamlong

$37,165.00 MSRP
$34,145.00 Invoice
$33,873.00 Selling Price
499.00 Doc. Fees
2,379.44 7% Sales Tax
18.00 GA Title
3.00 GA Lemon Law Fee
$36,799.04 Drive Out Price

Wheel Locks, Splash Guards and Cargo Tray ($69+$139+$142=$350) NO Charge

Danbury

I think you got a good price but these figures do not add up to the out the door price.
Most sites list MSRP as 37,165 but invoice as 33,290. 33,873 is a good selling price but I wonder what the 499 doc fee is? Is it something specific to GA?

IwantanRDXbad!

I do not get it. Will they stop production? Not sell the base? Sorry for the confusion, I must be having a "moment". Thanks!

flar

33,290 is apparently an old figure for invoice on a tech and doesn't include the destination charge of 670. When I was negotiating last month one dealer told me that it didn't reflect the recent $1XX increase on invoice, but negotiated anyway. Recently Edmunds.com is now quoting 33,475 for invoice reflecting a $185 increase (which is what my memory says the one dealer had quoted). If you add the destination charge of 670 then you get 34,145 just as tamlong quoted, so it seems right.

Danbury

Thanks for the update flar. Maybe Dom will update the RDX Pricing thread for us at the end of the month.

smjc_99

Boken14,
Can you give me the sales agent you bought the car from B water Acura so that I may talk to him to purchase the RDX

Thanks

RDXC90

Supposedly, the newer ones shipped to the dealers in 2007 has the new invoice price (VIN ~ 16000). But if you are negotiating on an older stock, then the old invoice would apply. When I got mine, I didn't ask to see the invoice. If I were to do it again, I would check it.

flar

Why check it? The price you negotiate can be anything - there is nothing magical about the invoice price other than it happens to be the amount of money that the dealer once sent to the manufacturer. Since then there were costs due to renting the land it sits on (or paying property taxes, etc.), costs due to financing since most dealers don't own their stock outright, lost opportunity compared to having a more popular model sit in its place, kickbacks to the dealer from the manufacturer, etc.

You could negotiate to get the RDX for $10 if you could find a dealer willing to go that far to get one off of his lot - what does it matter what the invoice was at that point? Similarly, if the car was popular you might not be able to get a dealer to sell one for $$$ over the MSRP.

And yet we all want to know how much we got the car "over/under invoice". It's really just a mind game and ego stroking at that point...

1092

If true, it will confirm the poor engine choice. A V6 was what the market wanted. If they combine a similar mileage V6 with the tech package, they hit a home run. From day one they blew it.

c_hunter

We have seen the "no more base past March" rumor floated once before, and the actual truth in that case was that the dealer was not going to order more base RDXs (whether it's because Acura is cutting off orders or just the dealer is unknown). The core issue seems to be that inventory is high so they don't need to produce more base models. For that matter, we were told that all RDX production (base and Tech) was halted for a while, presumably to let supply catch up with demand. They planned to sell 40K RDXs this year, and are on track to sell more like 21K or so. Clearly they will be making some sorts of cuts in the production schedule for *all* RDX trim levels. They have to.

As I have mentioned before, given that all the other Acura models come in non-Nav and Nav versions, I would not expect the RDX to be any different. I think there are buyers who feel strongly about both trim levels (ie, I specifically didn't want Nav but other people don't want an RDX without it) so it makes sense for Acura to cover both bases.

I probably would not have bought an RDX if the only choice was the Tech model, because that price range pushes me closer to the MDX (and other vehicle choices). At $30K street price, however, the base seemed like a remarkable value to me and I have been very happy with the vehicle. I would have liked BlueTooth, but that's the only thing I am missing.

RDXC90

Flar, I agree with you that there are overhead and carrying cost incurred by the dealerships. Those are real cost that they have to manage, but I won't factor them into the price negotiation because I don't know what they are and I don't care.

We all know that the invoice is not the real price paid by the dealer for the car
(due to holdback, incentives, etc. that you already mentioned) but I still think the invoice is an important figure in a relative sense.

It makes a difference if I am considering two otherwise identical RDX Techs at the same dealership. I expect that I can negotiate a lower price on the one with the old invoice compared to the new one because it cost them less ($185 difference)

flar

My point is that either you can negotiate the lower price or you can't. What does invoice have to do with it? As I said, you could buy the car for $10 if you were a good enough negotiator. When people say "I got the car for invoice" it seems that they are saying "I got the car for the lowest price I can imagine getting it", but really it's irrelevant. They are buying in, however slightly, to the nebulous idea that "the dealer has to at least get back what they paid" - no, actually, they don't "have" to do anything.

Speaking in more specific terms, and even acknowledging the cognitive dissonance that the invoice price represents any type of landmark whatsoever in the negotiation, once both cars are on the same lot, it doesn't matter what he paid for one vs. the other. What matters is how much it is costing him to keep the cars on the lot (and for a high demand car it might matter how much it would cost him to replace the car with the next acquisition, but that doesn't apply to the RDX here due to oversupply). The history of each doesn't matter - if he can get you off the lot with a car, it doesn't matter to him which of the 2 it is. It is entirely a game of "what I have on hand vs. what it takes to move them".

In the end, it's not just that "there are other factors that come into play to evaluate how much they paid" - it's that "how much they paid" is completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. "How much they are paying right now" in terms of lost revenue, storage space, etc. are really the only factors that balance against "how much the market will pay". If they paid $1,000,000 for the RDX Tech on their lot, I would still offer around $33,000 for it because that is what I am willing to pay for it. Though I'll admit that I did come up with my starting point based on research into cost figures but that was more of the starting point that I went in with and was based on low-balling what I saw people paying for their RDX on the net. People were paying less than invoice but not getting them for close to "true cost" so I went in with a figure close to "true cost" to see how much below invoice I could get them to go. The justification for my "close to true cost" figure was not because I thought I "should not" or "could not" go any lower, but because it was lower than I thought the final price would likely be based on empirical negotiation data and it was near a "cognitive landmark" for them.

RDXC90

Yes, either you can or you can't. I see your point that how much the dealer paid will not and should not influence how much you as a buyer are going to offer them. But I think it CERTAINTLY does influence their decision to accept or reject your offer. Being a good negotiator will only get you so far. I think it is unrealistic to suggest that anyone can buy a new car for $10 if he is a good enough negotiator.

I agree that knowing the market (what others are paying, what other dealers are willing to sell it for) will help one to negotiate a good price.

"How much they paid" is NOT completely irrelevant. If it was so, one could argue that your dealer should have been happy to give you their entire inventory of their RDXs for what you paid $33960. Since that would take care of the storage space problem, save him the flooring and other cost of keeping all his RDXs. (I can see the Ad now, a TEN for ONE sale. Buy one RDX and get 9 Free! )

In a less extreme example- If their cost is irrelevant, maybe we should expect a dealer to be willing to sell the RDX Tech at the same price as the regular RDX since arguably neither are in high demand?

I know sometimes people put too much emphasis on the invoice price thinking that's the true dealer cost. It isn't! Hopefully, more people are realizing that now. You mentioned something about calculate true cost, I think that's a good idea, and negotiating from there make sense.

So, having said that, I am not going to hold my breath waiting for an RDX owner to sign in with their $10 purchase

flar

I guess I started the exaggeration with my $10 example, but you are taking my "doesn't matter what the dealer paid" point and carrying it a bit further than it was intended. I'm not saying "you can pay anything for the car", I'm saying that "the exact sum that the dealer paid" may be a specific number, but it isn't a limit or wall.

It's primarily relevant because the dealer knows that the average customer is uncomfortable with the idea that they might negotiate under that number. "How can I sell you it for that number, that's less than I paid" is an outright lie that is used all the time and it is delivered to have an emotional impact on the buyer. It ties into the buyer's "I'm stealing the car" nerve and twists it and makes the buyer back down, but the dealer who has been in business for a while doesn't really have such a nerve (or the nerve is still there, but represents the most minor of stumbling blocks).

It's like "we have to charge you for these accessories, once they are on the invoice we can't take them off and think of all of the time our employees spent putting them on there". That is a total and complete lie intended to make you think like you are stealing food out of a baby's mouth if you try to negotiate them off. And, empirically, either there are a lot of starving babies out there, or in fact, that's not the consequence when several of us managed to write the accessories off of the deal sheet.

Look at how many people negotiate to invoice and then the dealer puts gas in the car and washes it - the gas cost them money and the person who washed it is paid by the dealer - that's below invoice.

Look at how many people negotiate invoice and then don't pay for the accessories on the car. That's going below invoice.

Look at how many people negotiate below invoice - that is paying less than the dealer paid - sob a little for the dealer, but it is happening.

(And with dealer hold-back it's all just a "virtual" cost anyway.)

If cost really mattered then the dealer would nickel and dime you on the balance sheet for every little item that went into the car when you hit invoice on the "amount paid" side - but it doesn't. The buyer is the one that usually balks at negotiating below invoice and then the dealer still takes a loss (if for no other reason than putting gas in the tank) and so obviously the dealer had no qualms about losing money on this car, but somebody did - it was the buyer. Do you think a dealer worth owning a dealership really believed that selling you a car at invoice covered their costs?

If they're willing to lose the cost of a tank of gas ($40 to $50 here in CA) or the cost of some wheel locks, a trunk tray, and mud flaps (a couple $100 cost for a typical "protection package"), they should have no qualms with shaving a hundred or so off the price you are paying for the car. And they should have no qualms about ignoring the $185 price increase on the invoice over last year's invoice price for this model vs. that model...

And, yes, they could very well sell you an RDX Tech for the base RDX price - but, empirically there haven't been any reports of a dealer that desperate to empty their lots. If sales truly went to zero and they got down to 0% financing and the lowest lease rates they could stomach and the sales were still zero then they might start selling RDX for, who knows? So far the limit of what people have been able to negotiate given the current slump is the cost of some accessories, a tank of gas and/or maybe a couple hundred $ below invoice (and only in some markets).

RDXC90

Flar, I think we are actually in agreement about 97%.

This discussion about invoice and holdback is going a bit further than I expected, but if our fellow forum members permit:

Invoice is NOT the True cost that a dealer paid for the car! It's less than invoice.
The dealer pays (or finance) the invoice amount up front, but they get a holdback from the manufacturer after they sell the car. (Kind of like a rebate. They can use it to offset some of the things you mentioned.)

So, the True cost = Invoice - Hold Back (and other things like dealer incentives)

For Acura, I understand that the hold back is 3% of base MSRP. I have read somewhere that it is being dropped to 2%, but not really sure about that. The actual holdback $ amount is shown on the invoice of each car. That's another reason why I should've asked to see the invoice.

This "hold back" is one of many reasons that a dealer can be profitable selling at OR even below the invoice price.

With this in mind, I don't think anyone should be surprised that some ACURA dealers are willing to sell below invoice based on the current demand of the RDX.

c_hunter

To be fair, let's say this:

I don't want to side with the dealer, but it does cost them some overhead to keep vehicles in inventory and sell them. And most sales guys at least want to make their flat $100 fee (or whatever) that they get when going below invoice.

I went $475 under invoice, so they still got roughly $400 or so above the absolute barebones "cost" of the car. I am sure some of that was eaten up by overhead, the $100 commision, etc. Meaning the dealer probably only profited a couple hundred bucks on the car. But compared to letting it sit on the lot and accrue interest, that is not bad, especially for a vehicle like the RDX which is not selling well.

flar

I'm curious about these other "dealer incentives". What other incentives are provided in a case like this other than the holdback? My impression is that things like the advertised interest rates and leasing terms make it cheaper for the end consumer to purchase the car, but they don't make it cheaper for the dealer to provide the car - are there others that I am missing? I imagine that maybe they get a commission on the financing package if the customer finances...?

(In a case like the RDX, I'm wondering if the manufacturer helps by providing 0% financing to the dealers for the RDX that sit on their lot?)

Yes, and that is an interesting part of your equation because it increases over time and provides an incentive to "sell now and cut their losses" even if they have to sell for less than invoice. As such, I'm not sure that it belongs in an equation that we should be evaluating because if you look at "incentive to sell" they evaluate their cost via the other terms of the equation and then rather than considering "how much they've paid in overhead", they are likely to consider "how much they are going to pay in overhead if they don't sell the car". So, I would write this equation as:
I can't say for certain, but my deal likely went below even their true cost. I had researched the value of my trade-in very thoroughly. 7 parties gave me the exact same story - at 140K miles no dealer would try to resell and all were contacting the wholesale network to take the car and auction it and getting the same figure as what they could get for the car via that route. I even went to my own dealer who sold me the car to get an independent and unbiased appraisal and they told me the exact same story and the exact same figure with no reason to lie. Carmax also verified the story and the figure. One of the Acura dealers also said "we don't want your trade-in because we can only get (that figure) for it and so you should sell it on your own". Basically, the dealers would get a fixed amount for my car. I'll admit that is a presumption, but there were at least 2 parties involved in that research that were not involved in an attempted trade-in. My dealer was giving me a price to use for negotiation, not an offer on the car, and offered to scout for buyers for me if I was going to sell it on my own. And Carmax claimed that if they were going to wholesale a car that they did it without profit as a service to their potential future customers (I wouldn't believe that on its own other than they came back with the same figure as everyone else including my original dealer).

The dealer I bought from offered me $500 over wholesale for my car and $500 over invoice on the RDX. I negotiated them down to invoice on the RDX and $1250 over the wholesale on my trade-in and they ate the cost of the accessories on the car. In essence they were selling me the RDX below invoice by offering me more money for my trade-in without appearing to do be going below invoice. In the end, I'm pretty sure I went below even their true cost on the car with the trade-in games they played.

c_hunter

There is sometimes "manufacturer to dealer cash" on some cars (rarely Acuras, but the old MDX and RL got it at the end of the 06 model year). The dealer can optionally pass it on to the customer, or use it to augment their bottom line.


That does sound like you did OK on the trade. They probably came out even on the trade or made a very slight profit.

CarMax would not have wanted a car with 140K miles, so they would have lowballed too. They have a ranking system for cars, and the best cars fall into the "desirable" category. They want those bad, because they can make a sure profit on them, so they give a very good buying offer. Desirable cars are generally no older than 2-3 model years old, have about 12-15K miles per model year (the lower the better) and are in demand in some part of the country. My car fit into that category, and CarMax was $3K higher than the best offer I got from an Acura dealer (in fact they were only a few hundred less than the private party price I was envisioning). Vehicles outside that desirable rating get little or no interest from CarMax, and that sounds like the line they were giving you. Their bread and butter is newer used cars with low miles.

flar

How is that different from the "holdback"? Is it because "holdback" is automatic across the model line and a fixed percentage of the price whereas this cash is variable and only offered on some models?

From the evidence, it would appear that they lost $1250 on the trade. The "negotation" on my tradein was really money coming off of the RDX as the wholesale network doesn't negotiate for cars headed for auction. To wit:

There was no doubt there. Carmax specifically said that they didn't want the car. They said "We will not take your car as we cannot sell it, but we can sell it to a wholesale auction company for XXX" which is the exact same story I got from every Acura dealer and my own Audi dealer including the exact same amount in each case.

The car wasn't "ranked" for desireability. Or, if it was, it was on the bottom rung marked "no desire". It was not salesworthy for their purposes. They were offering to do me a favor in helping me transfer it to an auction company for a price set by the wholesalers network.

Could there have been a fee that they were holding back when they gave me the "destined for wholesale" quote? Perhaps there was, but the Sales Consultant told me up front when I gave him the mileage that it was likely going to fail to meet their standards and that they would sell it to a wholesaler for me at no profit. Should I believe him? Well, I might not except that my dealer gave me the same story and same number as a favor to aid me in my negotiations...?

Through all of this, it became pretty clear that there was no "negotiating" on my car - there was a fixed price that the wholesale buyers network would pay for it sight unseen because it was so old that it had become a faceless commodity for auction.

That's a story I heard from several people in the waiting room. It wasn't my story, sadly - the car was destined for the auction chopping block from day 1 unless I wanted to sell it myself... :-(

In retrospect, at the time I thought "hey I got a decent price for the RDX and they are giving me good value for my car - close enough to what I expect to sell it for myself that I'll take the easy way out and just trade it". But I should have thought about the fixed wholesale value of my car and realized that if they'll offer me that much more for my car than they are allegedly going to get for it, then I should have tried taking my car out of the equation and asked them to go lower on the RDX instead - and then turned around and sold my car on its own.

Ah well, I'll never know now, but I won't lose any sleep over it...

c_hunter

Yeah, any sort of trade is somewhat of a black hole, and the trick is to get a value you feel comfortable with. It's never going to be a jackpot. Dealers will sacrifice some $$ on a trade to sell a new car, but they almost always come out even or ahead on a trade, even when they give you the wholesale/auction story.

Dealer cash differs from holdback in the sense that holdback is a permanent part of the vehicle pricing structure. Dealer cash is a temporary incentive used to spur sales.

GeekMa

Bigs-

I am also in Seattle. Did you purchase an RDX? How much and where? I can't get anyone to give me a price over the internet. Thamks.

Hoopics

Just started looking for a non-tech RDX. How do folks think the prices below are, and how much better can I do?

The pre-haggling prices I've been quoted are: $30,411, $30,672, and $31,014.
I also want to get running boards and have been quoted (installed): $559, $600, $699
For the roof rack have been quoted (installed): $479, $499, $618

Given what I've read I feel like I should be able to get $30,500 including the running boards and the roof rack. Anyone think I can do better, or that I'm high to hold out for that?

CL6

If you smoke crack you can.

Hoopics

Is it that far off? The best deal I have on the table currently is $31,449, including the best price for an RDX, installed roof rack, and installed running boards.

Here's my thinking: $30,411 is $303 over invoice.

The roof rack can be purchased on line from some dealers for $325, a savings of $150, suggesting a real cost to them of even less than that.

The running boards are available for $439, a savings of $120.

Installation on both is sunk cost for them, as they pay the service center staff regardless, so that's $0.

$31,449 - $303 - $150 - $120 = $30,876. Their hold back on these cars is $1000. If they sell it for $30,500, they make at least $624 on the deal, and I suspect more based on their actual accessory costs. Given how much inventory is available in our area, I suspect they'd be happy to be rid of these at any figure that is a net positive for them.

If I'm still smoking crack with any of the above, I do want to know, as I may be walking into dealership with these numbers soon. Thanks.

GeekMa

I am having a difficult time getting prices via email from te Acura dealers in the Seattle area. Has everyone else here been able to get them? If so, can you give me some pointers on what kind of approach to take with them?

I wonder if they think I will pay more b/c I am a woman and am not as informed. Which is certainly not true, given my presence here, but there is a bias at car dealers.

I appreciate any assistance anyone here has to offer.