S2000 #8 overall in holding its value
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8,595
Likes: 54
From: Temple City
Originally posted by NYCS2
Why would you use a 2003 msrp as a figure to find the value after 36 months, wouldn't you use a 1999-00 msrp? And if you did the percentage it would actually go up with correct msrp #'s. Also those number are rounded to the closest whole #, so with those figures we are #8, but yes we are in good company
Why would you use a 2003 msrp as a figure to find the value after 36 months, wouldn't you use a 1999-00 msrp? And if you did the percentage it would actually go up with correct msrp #'s. Also those number are rounded to the closest whole #, so with those figures we are #8, but yes we are in good company
You use the 2003 msrp as a figure because the residual value (the percentage) is an estimate that is derived in the year 2003, as it is always estimated and derived every year. Usually a company called ALG, automotive leasing guide, makes the estimates. These estimates are used to determine lease rates and residual values. Thats why rounding or using 1999-2000 msrps is not correct, because the percentages are going off of estimates. Actual results may vary. =)
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,159
Likes: 0
From: YANKEE WORLD
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jyeung528
[B]
You use the 2003 msrp as a figure because the residual value (the percentage) is an estimate that is derived in the year 2003, as it is always estimated and derived every year.
[B]
You use the 2003 msrp as a figure because the residual value (the percentage) is an estimate that is derived in the year 2003, as it is always estimated and derived every year.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Saint_Spinner
Car and Bike Talk
42
Jan 10, 2009 10:42 AM