05TLMAN

STL

I was wrote that post BEFORE I read your #34 post.

STL

And you totally left out the fact that the car that was bought would be worth something at the end of that 8 year term. I tried to point that out several times, and for some odd reason you kept telling me I was reading you wrong (when I wasn't -- you were omitting a revelent fact).

I totally agree, but have not yet been in that situation. The vehicle I bought a couple years ago was used and there weren't any financing deals that were lower than my already low mortgage.

I have never disputed that. I have said perpetually having a lease payment is considerably more expensive than buying a car and driving it eight (or more) years.

There you go again, implying buying costs more money -- which is false if you keep the vehicle a decent amount of time.

STL

I do sometime "latch" onto things.

It's really the fact he kept refusing (at least initially) take into account that the purchased car is worth something at the end of eight years that really got me going. In the end he never really accepted that either -- instead he just argued the figure I estimated for the car's worth. I think I did a pretty good job with that estimate, and it seems to jibe with the experience I had selling a car a couple years ago. In fact, my neigbors sold an 8-10 year old CL earlier this year; I believe they were asking in the mid-7ks for it -- IIRC then that further backs my estimate.

05TLMAN

Maybe you have selective reading, but I clearly stated the following:

"BTW, I didn't want to totally destroy you on the idea of finance, but this is the shocker, the buy out at the end of the 4 year 2005 lease senerio is $17851.45. Go back to my calculation:
$695.40(finance)-$515.38(lease) multiply by 47 payments equals $8460.94
$695.40(finance) multiply by 13 remaining payments equals $9040.20
Add these two numbers up, that's how much extra you paid to "have" equity at the end of the FINANCE, which is $17501.14. "

I did not say not to buy the car at the end of the lease did I? If I did, I would not have pointed out the $350 difference. I am not against finance, nor am I against buying the car out, but it is clear that you STL are against leasing a car, since you believe that leasing cost considerablely more money than finance. And that is exactly why I stated the above quote to prove to your kind of thinker that leasing does NOT cost a whole lot more than finance. And if you choose still not to believe the numbers, then....

05TLMAN

Your logic is flawed here STL. I said if you got money to burn, buy the car out right. That means that you got too much money that your house is paid for and you have a million dollar sitting in your bank account that you don't know what to do with it, then you buy the car out right. I mean think about it, if you have money to burn, would you "keep the vehicle a decent amount of time"? I'd be changing cars every 6 months!

STL

Exactly, if you have money to burn then you'd be getting a new car every couple years and thus leasing would make the most sense. If you cannot afford to make a car payment the rest of your life, you should buy the car and drive it 8+ years to really get your money's worth -- because that is thousands of dollars cheaper than leasing two cars for 4 years each.

STL

I read that, but that's only half the story because we talking about an 8 year term here (and least that's what YOU started with). Yes, at the 4 year mark the buyer has paid more so far (and still has another year to go) but buyer makes ALL that up and thousands more by continuing to own the car 8 years. Maybe you have a selective memory, because I have said all along that leasing makes sense if you intend to get new car every several years (and thus have a never-ending car payment) -- but buying and driving a car for 8 years will save you thousands.

In fact, you did originally imply not to buy the car because you talked about leasing another car for 4 years.

Again, I have ALWAYS said buying a car and driving it a "decent amount of time" is considerablely CHEAPER than leasing. And you haven't shown me anything to disprove that fact. You have shown that leasing isn't much more than buying over a 4-year term when the leaser decides to buy the car at the end of the 4 years, and I've NEVER contested that -- but we originally were talking about an 8 year term. I guess you're trying to change the original arugment now because you were wrong.

STL

The above quote is from your original arugment and is really what I've been arguing about all along. That statement is not completely true, because the leaser would actually be out more money than you stated above. That is because the buyer would actually own an 8-year-old TSX worth anywhere from $5k-$8k (remember we're still talking CAD here) while the leaser would have nothing. For reason I cannot understand, you keep refusing to acknowleged that fact.

05TLMAN

Man you do like to argue STL! Which is fine, I love to educate people on this matter anyways. I talk faster than I type, but I don't want to pay long disctance calling you, otherwise you would have shut up by now cause you would have understood what I was saying and have no other point to argue.

You see, leasing is not fixed, you are not screwed if you decide that you don't want the car in 3 years, you can still trade it in if you wanted to, it all depends on the KMs you have driven on the car. If you are driving mostly in the city like me, and amount to around 12000km a year, by the end of the 4 years, you would only have 48000km on it. When you bring the car back to the dealership at the end of the 4 years, the dealer will appraise you car and see how much your car is worth. Now do you think that a 4 year old TSX is only worth $15523 before tax(this is the buy out price) with 48000KMs? Obviously it's worth more than that, but how much more? It would be up to the market to determine the value. A clean 2002 Base TL wholesale for $19400, I think this is a comparable value with the TSX in 4 years, so let's use this number. Basically, when you bring in your end-of-lease vehicle to trade in for a 2009 TSX, you have positive equity of $19400-$15523=$3877 towards the 2009 TSX, that plus tax is a $4458.55 saving. Now you don't actually get this money, what it does is that it goes towards the principle amount that you are borrowing to lease, and what this does is it reduces also the interest that you would have to pay for 4 years on $4458.55, which is considerable amount of interest. If you take all this into consideration, then your total saving is a little over $5000. I am pretty sure they don't teach you this in school.
The equity that you speak of at the end of the 8 years is also dependent of the market, could be more could be less, but it's the market that determines how much your car is worth, not you. I don't know the US market, maybe the value of Acura holds way better than the Canadian market, that's why you are thinking of high numbers. What ever number that you come up with, subtract the $5000 from that number, then you have your equity at the end of 8 years. Keep in mind, the above example applies to the 2009 TSX as well, so by the end of 2013, if you choose to trade it in for a 2013 TSX, you will once again have positive equity. Now don't tell me all this typing doesn't convince you to open up your mind about lease even a little bit.

gdcwatt

If you have to finance here in Ontario you also are financing a pretty significant amount of tax (15%); if you lease, you pay the tax on the payment when you make the payment. Hmmm, pay massive amounts of tax and car now, or ...

My personal conspiracy theory is that the Ontario government wants people to keep buying new cars, so that Ontario workers can keep building them, and dealers can keep selling them (domestic and imports), so it wants people to turn them over every three or four years. To that end, we have emissions testing (which has been shown to be somewhat, ah, flawed from an environmental perspective) which will help encourage some people to lease, because that way they won't have to worry about their 5 or 6 year old car passing the e-test, with uncertain future penalties; they just exchange it for a new model, where they'll suffer more massive amounts of depreciation, and dealer profit. So, various governments keep getting their 15%, and people keep paying forever to keep their neighbours in those high-paying auto-industry jobs. And because people seem to be able to come up with $500 every month more easily than $800, the sales guys can talk another $20, or $30 a month from you.

If you can afford to buy, you'll save a fortune that way, unless you're trying to write it off, and those rules everywhere are so different. But would you rather have credit card debt, or a lease payment; there are cases that can be made for both, although thanks for showing us all the math.

xenonhid

Well Said Wise one. When i was 18 I did not have a car. The TSX is my first Car ever , that wasnt until I graduated from college and started working.

It was worth the wait for the TSX

fuckleberry

hmmm so in in 2011 ~ 2012, $8K is unrealistic price for a 2004 TSX (Non-navi) ?

fuckleberry

just get a nice used car otherwise I get the feeling you be putting it up for sale by your freshman year. Problly even before that.

STL

Just to be clear, we're talking $8k CAD which is about $6.7k USD.

STL

Yes I do -- when people blatantly leave out part of the facts.

Interesting before you said the buyout would be $17851.45 (see post 26 ). Once again, you seem to be changing things to better your arguement.

WOW, before when I tried to compare a 1998 TL you said, "TSX is no TL, so it will not yield the same price in 8 years" (see post 32 ). And my comparison to that 1998 TL was much more realisitic because I was using the 2.5-liter TL -- whereas the 2002 TL you're trying to use has a much larger 3.2-liter V6 engine.

Count Blah

But why is it no one can spell "lose"?

05TLMAN

Please learn to READ, or maybe you are just playing dumb. I clearly stated that the buy out price is $15523 before tax. What is $15523 plus 15% tax STL, may be you need me to teach you how to use a calculator?

STL

Stop assuming everyone lives in Canada and knows your tax is 15%. Furthermore, when you stated the previous number didn't specify before or after tax! I guess you expect everyone to be a mind reader.

I see you failed to respond to the last point in my last post. I guess I cannot blame you -- after all it clearly shows you're willing flip-flop if it suits your arguement.

dom

X 1,000

05TLMAN

I clearly wrote "$15523 before tax" in my example, it's not my fault that you don't know that tax is 15% here, but it is your fault to assume that I am trying to change numbers to favour my arguement. It is clear that you are trying to argue with your ass but not your brain. And don't even try to argue this point, we both know through all the posts that you live in the US and I am in Canada, so why would I assume that you live in Canada?

With regards to your last point, I did point out that the value of TSX is not the same as the TL, but I did not post a number saying that what the difference might be, because all these numbers are just assumptions. If you want to live by the number, that is your business. But I know for a fact that the black book don't make car deals, if you are selling me the car, you would want as much money as possible, no matter what the value in the black book is. I used these numbers strictly as a reference purpose, give or take a few hundred dollars.

Aside from wanting to argue STL, you still have not point out what you are argueing about. I stated clearly right from the beginning that my example was to show people a choice, and clearly I have stated that(but not to you I'm afraid). Please state your point, otherwise just move on to the next arguement in this forum that you have scheduled on your agenda. And we will all thank you for not dragging on with this thread.

STL

So it was okay for you to use the book value of a 2002 3.2-liter TL as a reference, but it was not okay for me to use the book value of a 1998 2.5-liter TL as a reference? And that's despite the fact the '98 TL is much closer (like in engine size as well as original MSRP) to a TSX than a '02 TL. That blatantly shows your double standards!

On the contrary, I've stated my point many times over. The fact that your original example left out a very large fact -- in the end that 8-year old car does indeed have value. Your post about "positive equity" did finally begin (after ignoring it many times) to address that, but that's precisely where you applied your double standard assuming a 2002 TL was equal to a TSX. I do understand your example about "positive equity" but I feel the numbers are flawed (for reasons already stated). I should also point out that to leasing and swapping cars every four years means you take the worst years of depreciation. Also, from your example the only way to take advantage of this "positive equity" AND avoid the taxes is to keep leasing -- but that's no way to save money. I have said all along that leasing does make sense if you want a new car every few years, but if you want to save money it is more cost effective (in the long run) to buy one and drive it for 8+ years.

05TLMAN

No! It's not OK! Because you are in the states and I am giving an example based on Canadian Market, with Canadian dollars, using Canadian lease rates and assuming numbers that you forced me to assume using Canadian black book. And for you to throw in US market trade values to this calculation is clearly a mistake, one that YOU choose to make to continue your arguement.

Like I pointed out earlier, I am much better at TALKING about this than TYPING. It was intended to be short and brief and to the point. However, I should have realized that there will be people like you that are die hard "NO LEASE" fans out there that try to pick on my example. I did not through out my posts suggest that leasing SAVES money did I? And I did state earlier in my posts that if you have nothing else to do with the money you have sitting in the bank and you want to buy a car, then it is a good idea to buy the car out right and save all the interest charges. So you basically are just stating the obvious. And if you think that leasing is just for people that wants a new car every few years, then if have failed to comprehend my point, and you my friend, do not have an open mind and in this case, you are lost.

STL

I did convert the USD price to CAD. Just to show you I wasn't off base, I looked up the Canadian Black Book value of a 1998 2.5-liter TL with 96k miles (that's 12k/year for 8 years) and it gave me this:
Low: $6,000.00 High: $8,250.00
So my $8,000 figure was not off base -- despite your claims.

Out of curiousity, I also checked on a 2002 3.2-liter TL with 48k miles and found this:
Low: $16,251.00 High: $18,501.00
So it appears your $19,400 value is the value that's off!!! And that's NOT even taking into consideration the 2.5-liter '98 TL is much closer to a TSX than a 3.2-liter '02 TL. For the record a 1998 3.2-liter TL with 96k miles is worth:
Low: $8,000.00 High: $10,250.00
So when you compare those number to the 2.5-liter numbers above, you can clearly see there is quite a bit of difference in value between a the different engines.

For the record, I used the Toyota portal (from http://www.canadianblackbook.com/html/consumer.html ) to find these values.

STL

Nope, you've just failed to make a compelling argument. I will say that leasing does offer more flexibility, but that does come at a price.

STL

One more thing to point out, all these number are trade-in values. Now I see you were talking "wholesale" values. So if you want to go with them, then my $8,000 figure (for a '98 2.5-liter TL) that you claimed to be too high is actually probably too low!

05TLMAN

OMG!!!! Not only can you not read my posts, you can not even read what others write. I am quoting right from the web site to which the link you have provided:

"Canadian Black Book values are available to the public through the manufacturer sites listed on the left side of this page. These sites will provide values for any make and model (e.g. You don’t have to go to General Motors to get a GM price).

The on-line prices we provide to manufacturers for use on their web sites are "Trade-in" values. These are prices calculated differently than “wholesale”. It is a range of value we would expect a dealer to give a consumer trading in a vehicle on the purchase of a new vehicle, based on the dealer not seeing the car and allowing for worse case scenarios. A dealer having to repair, clean, market and maintain that vehicle on their lot until sold, is investing a significant amount. Additionally, if that vehicle does not sell within a reasonable timeframe, the dealer will have to auction the vehicle, adding to their expense.

The figures provided in our industry publications are "wholesale" values.This is a baseline value we would expect a dealer or wholesaler to pay at an auction for a vehicle. One of the differences between a wholesale value and a Trade-in value is with a Wholesale value, the vehicle is "seen" and comes with certain guarantees provided by the auction house.

We strongly suggest you use these prices as a guide only and read the disclaimers presented on the manufacturer’s’ sites. Our apprehension is having a consumer expecting to much for a vehicle that was "unseen" by the dealer. Then having put the dealer in a position where he must defend a lower value than indicated on the web sites. If you would like more specific pricing you can purchase our Wholesale/Retail Guide"

Please read the last sentense, it says "If you would like more specific pricing you can purchase our Wholesale/Retail Guide". The numbers I quoted are from the Wholesale/Retail Guide. Now do you understand what "more specific pricing" means? It means more acurate, more realistic pricing. Somehow I don't think you understand.

jlukja

05TLMAN

WOW!!! This boy finally gets it! That's the whole point! Leasing offers more flexibility and this flexibility doesn't cost you what most Anti-leasing people would tell you. Finally, he gets it!

STL

1) Do you really expect me to buy this Canadian guide just to get access to these wholesale numbers? You do remember I live in the US, right?

2) Yes, trade-in values are different than wholesale values -- but I've never seen a trade-in value more than a wholesale value. I think you need to re-look up the wholesale value of a 1998 2.5-liter TL with 96km (oops I think I said k-miles before when I meant km -- damn metric units ). If the dealerships are quoting between $6,000.00 and $8,250.00 for trade-in then the wholesale figure will be higher. Just for grins, telll us the wholesale value for a 1998 3.2-liter TL with 96km too.

STL

I don't believe I ever said anything to the contrary.

What I don't quite get is that you make it sound like the dealer will give you some "positive equity" when moving from one lease to another. If that really happened in the real world, then why would someone be happy just to have the dealership agree to offer full pay-off on their current lease? It seems like that's more of the norm.

05TLMAN

Not asking you to buy one, you are the one with the link, just pointing out that the numbers that I used in my example are based on Wholesale numbers. Thus more accurate than yours.

STL

I totally agree that the wholesale numbers are more accurate, but like I said before the trade-in values are always lower. The fact that you berated me when I said a '98 2.5-liter TL was worth $8k when it's within the trade-in value range (and knowing the wholesale figure will not be any less) is what ticks me off. Then you turned around and use a '02 3.2-liter TL in an example when it's obviously worth more than a 4-year-old TSX will be.

05TLMAN

Actually, the trade-in value are "usually" higher. Think about it, if you are trading in an old TL to buy a new TSX, the dealer wants to sell you the TSX, thus will give you a bigger trade in value than the actual worth of the trade to get your business. The difference will be absorbed by the dealer from the gross he makes off you of the TSX. That's what you would do as a smart consumer. The dealer will show you the wholesale value, and tell you that the car is only worth what the book says, and it usually is lower than what people would like to let their car go for, but that's the market value. If you want more, it will be up to the dealer to give you more if they know at the end of the day, they sell you a TSX and make a couple of Gs. And that's why the value are "usually" higher. The occation that the value is lower than wholesale is because you just got sold by some salesperson telling you your car is worth shit. And that you will have no one to blame but yourself. So once again, I am still right regarding this whole issue. But I am sure you have something else to pick on.

STL

The upper trade-in value for the '02 3.2-liter TL was $18.5k and you claim the wholesale value is actually $19.4k. I see that the '98 2.5-liter TL has an upper trade-in value of $8.2k and you're trying to tell me your wholesale figure in less than that? Nice try...

jlukja

And the goes on.

05TLMAN

OMG!!! I am talking about the ACTUAL trade-in value when you give the dealer a credit card saying that you are ready to make a purchase! Not a number that's posted on the internet! Are you trading the car to the people that's publishing the numbers? Are they giving you a guarantee on the numbers? NO! They don't sell or buy cars!

dj Dozhe

I think I just shat myself.

STL

I'll give you one thing, you're good at changing the subject when shown you're wrong. I do agree with you on one thing, our back-and-forth arguing has gone on far too long. I'm done here...

05TLMAN

I am not the one changing the subject. Ironically, I think it is you that's trying to change to subject. Anyone else that read the whole thread will agree with me and understand what I am trying to say. It is you that's trying to pick apart everything I wrote that do not understand the point. But that's OK STL, just remember the next time when you are ready to make a car deal, read over the thread and give yourself the CHOICE that I have provided you with.