lv2xlr8
Well-Known Member
For the last time, sarcasm doesn't work on the internet! :lol: Put some sarcasm tags.
For the last time, sarcasm doesn't work on the internet! :lol: Put some sarcasm tags.
^In all honesty I thought you were serious as well and I usually give the benefit of the doubt over the internet
Car Scrap Scheme Terrific Waste of Money and Resources
In January when the German government quickly implemented a car scrap scheme that pays motorists 2,500 euros ($3,328) to trash cars more than nine years old and buy new ones, other governments were full of praise - France and Italy followed, and the US, UK and now Spain have similar plans. But has this anti-recession measure done any good?
Cash for clunker an expensive proposition
In the very short term, yes. Car sales shot up 40% for the first quarter, but now overall retail sales in Germany are falling. That jolt to the economy may also cost the German government up to 5 billion Euros, while next year an auto buying slump is expected since prospective buyers already bought. Five billion euros could certainly buy a lot of bike, pedestrian and public transport improvements.
Perhaps most egregiously, still-good cars are being scrapped at an alarming rate (the law specifies the cars must be scrapped and not resold) while scrap metal prices have plunged. Here's the kicker: estimates say 3 of 4 new car buyers would have bought anyway. Now, what was the good side?
Scrapped is just another way to say "trashed"
Yes, cars are highly recyclable - in the U.S. the latest figures are that 84 percent (by weight) of a car is recycled, and 95 percent of cars go through the recycling process. End-of-life vehicles are our most recycled consumer product. But wait.
According to the UK's Environmental Transport Association, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development found that
?these schemes have a high average cost per ton of pollution avoided, and do not compare favourably with other alternative policy tools on purely environmental grounds.?
In fact, in a column, George Monbiot quotes a 2000 study from the journal Transportation Research that shows that while local pollutants (such as NOx and CO) may decline when scrapping is introduced; production and subsequently life cycle energy use and CO2 increase.
As the ETA itself says:
?Car scrapping schemes are good for boosting new car sales ? they have very little to do with the environment and to suggest otherwise is not just greenwash, it is hogwash.?
Specifically in Germany's scheme, someone could trade in a Volkswagen Lupo that creates 81 grams of CO2 per kilometer, and buy a 2009 Porsche Cayenne that makes 358 grams of CO2 per kilometer.
[So if the bill's not exactly green, will it achieve it's other, and, let's be honest here, primary goal; which is of course to bolster sales for the dreadfully slumping auto industry? Again, many think no.
Sarcasm or did you realize you stepped over the line and are now trying to cover? I don't know and I don't really care just an observation.Not very good at picking up sarcasm are we? :lol: Yes I wouldn't say something that's a obvious stretch after I've had what I'd consider fairly good debates with British Rover in the past C4C thread.
No sense of humor? Tounge in cheek? Well you're a salesmen, you have no soul :lol: (That's a joke for those of you with no sense of humor)
Then you shouldn't have taken what I said here seriously, They've obviously been doing something right to be in business for as long as they've been. So I would expect they'd have a top notch staff that doesn't screw around. There's always a few bad apples in the bunch. (I did get the 'buyer in florida' thing a couple of times at dealerships I didn't usually deal with.)
Unfortunately by me, dealers like that are still hidden amongst several other dealers who are nothing but actual 'scum sucking bottom feeders'. Thankfully most of the dealers who do try to screw their customers are on the brink of going bye-bye. As they rightfully deserve for being assholes.
A few bad apples spoil the bunch, but I'm not really stupid enough to say all salesmen are outright assholes with a straight face. Because it's a outright lie.
That said you've been sounding really 'salesmen-y' in both threads...:lol:
Sarcasm or did you realize you stepped over the line and are now trying to cover? I don't know and I don't really care just an observation.
What does sounding salesmen-y mean anyway? If it means actually taking the time to do research, look up facts, compile some statistics from my company's experience and the experience of other people I know in the business then presenting those facts in a reason point by point argument then yes I am being a salesman.
I could just pull random facts out of my ass like you , "95% of cars being traded in don't even have 100,000 miles," but then I would be wrong like you.
Right now 14 percent of the 58 clunkers we have taken in have less then 100,000 miles. The number of cash buyers has climbed to about 40 percent from 30 percent and most of the people that are financing have above average income even for CT. The average household income for CT is about 75,000 USD just so you know. They could pay cash if they wanted to but why should they if they can get interest rates of 3.9 percent or less?
Little from column A, little from Column B... I don't hold people who are trained to lie through their teeth, and are severely mis-informed trying to get me to buy their stuff very high on my list of people I give a shit about. I was technically hired to be a car salesmen...only I decided afterward that I can't constantly lie to people just so I could make a living.
No, being Salesmen-y is you trying to sell me your reputation/your stuff in such a way that will make me look like a fool if I do anything but wholeheartedly agree/or buy your stuff. The only markets by me that still are looking/hiring people are salesmen jobs. I've been to quite a few of their open houses and they just suck as people, quite honestly.
Except you haven't actually taken a look at what others are having traded in. Youtube is full of cars meeting their untimely deaths because of this stupid program. Hell even the vehicles I've seen with 100,000+ on the clock were vechicles that could easily do another 150,000+ before anything serious goes wrong with them.
Youtube videos are not a random sample. If you are taking videos of cars that you are clunking which vids are more likely to get the most hits?
The video of the obvious clunker smoking and falling apart before they even start the procedure or the nice looking one with no visible body damage or rust?
I know which one I would think would get the most hits. Just cause a car looks nice cosmetically on a video doesn't mean it is in good shape. I have appraised plenty of cars that looked great at first but after a more complete examination and a test drive were obviously total junk. On the flip side I have seen totally dogged out beat on cars that drove great and probably really did have 100,000 more miles in them.
Don't ever assume that just cause a car has made it 100,000ish miles it can go another 150,000 without major problems. Doing that gets you into trouble. Like I said before we rarely retail used cars that have close to 100,000 miles on them but if we have serviced the car for most of its life and it has good service history we might retail one.
Recently we sold a 2002 Saab with almost 70,000 miles on it. We had sold it new and had all the service records. The car had been maintained to the nth degree and was perfect inside and out. It looked like it had 20,000 miles not almost 70,000. We sell it to a long time customer who loves the car.
One week later it blows the transmission.
We are fixing it now but will have to eat several thousand dollars in repairs. We don't sell AS-IS cars so if something like that happens we will take care of it.
Couple of other examples. A 2000 BMW X5 we took in trade a year or so ago with the 3.0 engine. Those engines are usually very reliable and this particular one only had 130,000 miles and was in good shape overall. Salesman drove it out back where we park wholesale cars and left it there for the night. The next day one of our wholesalers came to pick it up and tired to start it. It would crank but not start. He screwed around with it couldn't get it to work. One of techs took a peek at it but also couldn't figure it out. Wasn't worth a whole lot of money before and now it is worth scrap because it won't start. I don't think anyone ever figured out what was wrong with it. We just took our loss and moved on not worth the trouble of paying a tech to diagnosis the problem beyond the 40 or so minutes they already spent looking at it.
Several years ago I took in a miled up but clean 318i coupe. Had almost 200,000 miles but was overall pretty good. Little faded paint little worn seats but drove fine. Still with that many miles and a 318i it was only worth about a grand maybe a little less I don't remember exactly.
Guy dropped it off friday to pick up his new car. I started it moved it to the back of the lot and put the keys on the UCMs desk so it could get picked up the next morning.
Our company wholesaler came to pick it up the next morning and when he went to start the car the ignition broke off in the column. The lock cylinder just spun around in a complete circle. Again not worth fixing just call a wrecker with a flat bed and drag it away.
In all my years in the business I can only think of a handful of cars who made it past 250,000 miles without having a serious engine or transmission replacement/overhaul. Most of them were Volvos but there were a couple of Saabs, a Dodge truck with just over 300,000, several Box cherokees past 250,000, one honda accord coupe and one toyota camry coupe.
Not many cars make it past 150,000 without some kind of serious need. Plus in the rust prone states the chassis of older cars can just give out before the engine does.
You are also forgetting the secondary goal of the CARS program. The primary goal was to boost NEW car sales. The secondary goal was to get inefficient cars of the road and replace them with more efficient ones. Even if the car can go another 150,000 more miles with minimal repairs, I still contend that is unlikely for the majority of these cars, the idea is to keep that from happening to use less imported oil.
So lets review primary goal to temporarily stimulate new car sales.
I think that has been a success. We were down to 94 new 2009 in stock cars for the whole autogroup last I checked on Friday. We had over double that at the start of July. We are also getting incremental sales from people who either have cars that don't qualify but by something new anyway and people that have a car that qualifies but by used because the real value of their clunker is close to 4,000 dollars.
Some of these people aren't even trading in their clunker they are keeping it but they are buying a car because they finally feel a bit more confident in the economy.
Secondary goal to get inefficient cars off the road and replace them with more fuel efficient models. The latest reports still show a nearly 10 mpg combined rated improvement from the clunker to the new car. When you consider that the clunker probably wasn't getting its original combined mpg rating anymore and that the new EPA rating is so dumbed down you that unless you drive like an idiot you should do better then the combined rating I bet the real world increase in gas mileage is over 10 mpg combined.
As opposed to a interest rate of 0 if they actually kept and maintained their existing car. Yeah going into debt just because the rate is low is a fantastic idea, what could possibly go wrong...oh wait...
Most of these people could have paid cash if they wanted to but why would you take money out of a money market account paying 2% or more when you can get a zero interest loan from the factory?
Once again smart consumers conserve their cash when loan rates are low relative to what kind of rate they can get in a relatively liquid investment.
One of the clunker deals we did for a Volvo went like this.
Worn out Grand Cherokee with body damage and a bad trans.
Needs thousands in repairs.
Yes it is drivable but not on the highway so what to do. Trade it in for a XC70 and take 10,000 dollars off sticker before the C4C money. Get a 43,000 dollars car for 29,500 dollars put down another 5,000 and fiance at 4.9% for 60 months.
Oh and 2009 Volvos have a five years 60,000 mile warranty right now with maintenance included. The only thing this guy will pay for in five years is his car payment, insurance, gas and tires.
Right now 2008 XC70s are selling for between 26,000 and 28,000 and those cars have less equipment then a 2009. He will never, ever be upside down in that car as he financed less then 27,000 dollars.
Again most of the people taking advantage of this program have significant resources. They have a ton of income and a ton of cash on hand because they have been hoarding it.
Again most of the people taking advantage of this program have significant resources. They have a ton of income and a ton of cash on hand because they have been hoarding it.
Ok so you had the bad judgment to try and work for a slimey car dealership who actually trains their sales people to lie therefore all salespeople are slimey. Good to know.
Ok so you can impugn my reputation at will but I can't counter with examples showing how my company and myself are not sleazy without looking like a sleazy salesperson.
Got it do you want me to tie one hand behind my back too?
Youtube videos are not a random sample. If you are taking videos of cars that you are clunking which vids are more likely to get the most hits?
The video of the obvious clunker smoking and falling apart before they even start the procedure or the nice looking one with no visible body damage or rust?
I know which one I would think would get the most hits. Just cause a car looks nice cosmetically on a video doesn't mean it is in good shape. I have appraised plenty of cars that looked great at first but after a more complete examination and a test drive were obviously total junk. On the flip side I have seen totally dogged out beat on cars that drove great and probably really did have 100,000 more miles in them.
Don't ever assume that just cause a car has made it 100,000ish miles it can go another 150,000 without major problems. Doing that gets you into trouble. Like I said before we rarely retail used cars that have close to 100,000 miles on them but if we have serviced the car for most of its life and it has good service history we might retail one.
I already knew the NYT was full of and run by fools.
OMG that Z28 is CLEAN and worth a FUCKLOAD more than $4,500! Seriously someone should save that thing before the goons at the dealership trash it. And the Blazer + Dakota with low mileage for their ages need to be donated to charity because they are likely a good A to B daily driver.
OMG that Z28 is CLEAN and worth a FUCKLOAD more than $4,500! Seriously someone should save that thing before the goons at the dealership trash it. And the Blazer + Dakota with low mileage for their ages need to be donated to charity because they are likely a good A to B daily driver.
Would you mind terribly getting your national friends together and attacking some random fort so we could defeat you on the field of battle again? Its been 140 years and i do believe i am getting the itch.
Also, BritRover: Remember, regional pricing variances. 3rd gen F-bodies are worth significantly more in the South and Midwest than they are in New England or California.
Here in Cali they ain't worth dick. A friend of mine had one that was 120k miles on it and quite clean. It had sat in his parents driveway for quite a while and things started getting stacked on it. He finally gave into the city telling him to get rid of the pile of junk. He couldn't sell it for 1k. It ran and the paint was repolished/waxed before trying to sell it to no avail.
One could argue that the people paying 4k for these or more are just lacking in intelligence...
I put this person on ignore now, now he's just getting annoying. He personifies the statement I made about how car dealership employees obviously do not know the correct market value for collectors, rare and or classic vehicles. I don't care what his little car value program says, private party (much less retail) that Z28 with less than 90k miles WILL SELL for well over $4,500 not just in Texas but anywhere in the mainland US.
#1
#2
#3
Those are a few general examples of what a lower mileage 3rd gen Z would sell for in the condition that the Z28 pictures was in...which is all/mostly original and clean. And remember this is ebay so you are getting a cheaper price than you would if you listed it on the classifieds.
He OBVIOUSLY has no idea what the value is of this CLEAN Z28 with this low of a mileage. And him throwing out that "slow" comment was just a moronic thing to do. He's obviously trying to provoke me as I own a 3rd gen Camaro.
Good riddance to this topic.
Up here in 'the north' that Z28, even being that clean is proabably a 2500 dealer trade in value (meaning in the real market you could get 4-5000 for it)...
That as well as both the Dakota and Blazer could and should've ended up as some teenagers first car.
Here in Cali they ain't worth dick. A friend of mine had one that was 120k miles on it and quite clean. It had sat in his parents driveway for quite a while and things started getting stacked on it. He finally gave into the city telling him to get rid of the pile of junk. He couldn't sell it for 1k. It ran and the paint was repolished/waxed before trying to sell it to no avail.
One could argue that the people paying 4k for these or more are just lacking in intelligence...