Yellow's The Color of The Day

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by NSXaholic:
These people (myself and Fun2romein included), would pick up the cheaper car.

Fun2romein NEVER SAID THAT. And for all either of us knows, Fun2romein has never even bought an NSX, let alone a new one.

Originally posted by NSXaholic:
I speculate the seller will let the car go for $70K to an interested buyer, in order to get it off his lot.

Again, mere conjecture.

I speculate that the seller will continue lowering the price and if he lowers the price to $30K you would go trade your '95 in for it. If you got to it before I did.

Originally posted by NSXaholic:
I do hope that you will take this in the spirit in which it was intended, and that there are no hard feelings.

No, no hard feelings at all.

Originally posted by NSXaholic:
After all, I've still got a lot to learn from you.

I would hope this isn't the only reason that you hope there are no hard feelings.

 

[NSXaholic]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
I would hope this isn't the only reason that you hope there are no hard feelings.

Absolutely not!! You are terrific guy, and somebody who almost always goes out of his way to help others. I look forward to developing a strong friendship over the years to come. That is the primary reason I wanted to make sure there were no hard feelings.

Regards.

[This message has been edited by NSXaholic (edited 02 February 2003).]

 

[NSX-GUY]

Well, I'm glad you two have kissed and made up. Sheeesh.

New NSX' sell what, about 200 copies a year ? Being there are only around 200 new NSX buyers around in the best of circumstances and given the economy is in the toilet and as such, the first thing to go is "luxury" items such as expensive cars AND we'll (probably) be at war within the next 4-6 weeks, is it any wonder these cars aren't selling ?

'01 Porsche Twin Turbos sold for $20K over the sticker when new, about $145K-$150K on average. They can't fetch $89K on eBay now.

For all intents and purposes (sorry) it's the economy

 

[Fun2romein]

Let me begin by saying that NSXaholics' assumption was absolutely correct. Being a wise and frugile spender of my hard earned cash I would time and time again (assuming all else equal on the 2 vehicles and titled issue only) take the savings over the bragging rights of original ownership of a new vehicle. While I believe the more attractive value for the titled 90 mile nsx to be in the 68-70k range I posse the question: Why incurr the rediculous depreciation of a brand new vehicle when for all intensive purpose a 90 mile car in my book is new? If nsxtacy wants to argue the technical definition of new vehicle I will grant the argument. Once a car is no longer held on an MSO by the franchised dealer and titled it is a used vechicle regardless of 10 miles or 1500mi.

Now on a more personal note: While I'm a new comer to the forum as opposed to the guru with 8000+ posts.... you can rest assured that I have owned many supercars from "rice burners" to Italian exotics... and you are correct I would never buy them new!!! For your records its a 2000 and soon to be delivered a 2002 spyder. (yes used by technical def. but with a 30k savings.)

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Fun2romein:
(assuming all else equal on the 2 vehicles and titled issue only)

All else is not equal; the warranty clock has been ticking since the car was titled, so the used car has a shorter warranty (perhaps as much as a year shorter).

Originally posted by Fun2romein:
and you are correct I would never buy them new!!! For your records its a 2000 and soon to be delivered a 2002 spyder. (yes used by technical def. but with a 30k savings.)

Thanks - you just proved my statement, where I said, "someone like you, who is willing to get a used car, would be a lot more likely to get one with 5-10K miles and save $5-10K, than to get one with 90 miles and only save $2K."

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 05 February 2003).]

 

[Fun2romein]

By def. a used vehicle assumes that the warranty clock has begun. However, on this forum we rant and rave about the low maintenance cost and reliability of our nsxs in relation to other exotics... with a 4 yr. 50,000mi warranty so what if its now 3yrs. 50,000mi? Are we so afaid of our NSX that we must have the reassurance of the manufacture forever? How many currently on this site have vehicles that are out of warranty and still profess loyalty to Honda? Given the low number of sales and a 12yr. old introduction date I would venture to say many. In addition, as I stated before the more attractive price for the 90 mile car is under 70k thus a 4-6k savings over a "new" one not 2k. Furthermore, I should state that for those of us who sale or trade cars as often as our shirts, your point is mute and only valid for those who are lifers of original ownership and even then what is so great about the bragging right of 5,10,15 yr. ownership and a 50-75% loss of your expenditure? In addition, the bragging rights and enjoyment of ownership of supercars like my NSX, Porsches, Ferrari, Lambo... is not diminished by this mute factor (new or barely new). What is a gratifying experience is the mere essence of the vehicle being parked in your garage and knowing that you have the ability and control to jump in and drive any time you wish for however long you want and personally, knowing that whether I owned the vehicle for 1 week, 1 month, 1 year it cost me less than if I had rented it for a day. Nsxtacy, Im not relpying to you in an attempt to convience you of my .02 opinion, but to let you know that I view your point and respctfully disagree.

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Fun2romein:
as I stated before the more attractive price for the 90 mile car is under 70k thus a 4-6k savings over a "new" one not 2k.

I agree with you that a good price for this car is slightly under $70K, representing savings of $4K (or more) compared with a good deal on a new NSX-T. Which goes back to my response to Vik's original question - that the reason this car has not sold with buy-it-now is that the price is too high, too close to that of a new one, with savings of "only" $2K. At a lower price than $71.5K, the car will sell, because there are people who DO want savings for getting a used car over a new one; heck, there is already a bid at $65K, and it may go higher. But, as you can see from the lack of a buy-it-now bid, this car is just not worth $71.5K.

What's funny about this entire "argument" is that it appears that Vik, you (Fun2romein), and I are all saying the same thing - that this car should sell for less than $71.5K. Vik says the seller will probably let it go for $70K. You say that it should go for under $70K. So both of you ended up agreeing with me by stating that a good price for this car is $70K or less. And that, quite simply, is why the car has not sold yet.

This auction is still open. Perhaps someone will bid this car to a price of perhaps $68-70K, where we all agree it belongs, and it will meet the reserve and be sold at that price. We'll find out in four days.

Originally posted by Fun2romein:
Nsxtacy, Im not relpying to you in an attempt to convience you of my .02 opinion, but to let you know that I view your point and respctfully disagree.

Where was it that we disagree, again?

 

[Fun2romein]

One additional matter to keep in mind, as the "new", (not barely new) nsxs are depleted from Acura dealers' inventory with a $7,500 rebate, the 03 with an invoice in the upper 70s to low 80s will make the 02 with 90 miles again very attractive even at 71.5k to the frugile buyer until again Honda gives the dealer incentive to sell below invoice which inturn affects the used car market.

Nsxtacy, were you and I, and perhaps NSXaholic and a few others on this forum disagree, is in the technical definition of, as NSXaholic put it in his very first post, the wording "brand new car". So, if we are agruing semantics you are correct. A titled car is used regardless of miles (90 or 1500) however, in colloquial terms to all "WE" layman the car in question is a brand new car. Let me further drive the point home with an example: in colorado a dealer is allowed to have demonstrators and until they reach 1500 mile need not be titled. So I pose the question... if the owner of an Acura dealership chose to take a 2003 nsx as a demo and accumulated 1480 miles at which point he decides to park the car and allow no more test drives until the car sold, not legally obligated to title the vehicle, but still on an MSO is this a more "new" car then an nsx titled with 90 miles? Wouldn't the owner of either car say that they bought the car new? So, I see and feel no harm in NSXaholic stmt. So, the real issue at hand is simple. Is the 02 with 90 miles, regardless of semantics, a good value at 71.5k or not? Without spending anymore time on this issue, a small assumption on my behalf and limited personal knowledge of one individual, I would like to say to nsxtacy in the best of compliments that I believe you have missed your calling in life.

Tony

 

[nsxtasy]

I see that both of these auctions closed with the car unsold. The first car didn't meet the reserve at $65K and the second car didn't meet the reserve at $60.1K.

It is my observation that prices for NSXs on eBay are often less than the actual selling prices I hear about for sales elsewhere. I believe that if both of these cars are described accurately and have no "issues", the first one should sell for $68-70K and the second one should sell for $66-69K.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 11 February 2003).]

 

[Fun2romein]

It is my opinion, ebay is not a true representation of what cars are worth. Most buyers are looking to "steel" the vehicles at rediculous prices, thus never making reserve.