Why does the price depreciate so much?
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Joined
·
1,420 Posts
One reason is that Maserati seems to be very lenient with negotiating price. Normally a huge chunk gets cut off if you ask "sternly".
Plus, people think they are luxurious and comfertable cars (like a benz or honda)... for some reason, they think they arent sports cars, but more tame... Then they buy it and drive it.
It isnt for some people.
Like the Lotus...
Plus, people think they are luxurious and comfertable cars (like a benz or honda)... for some reason, they think they arent sports cars, but more tame... Then they buy it and drive it.
It isnt for some people.
Like the Lotus...
Joined
·
822 Posts
The depreciation would not be from sticker but from what was paid for the car. I don't think anyone paid $130k.....
Joined
·
1,420 Posts
Beat you to it :]
Joined
·
286 Posts
that is an easy question. past reputation of the brand. peoples miss conception of the brand. I over looked the marque until i learned that ferrari owned them.
Also the price is high for a car with out the reputation of being highly reliable.
like Mercedes with has the rep but does not deserve it.
Joined
·
695 Posts
I did a quick check within 100 miles of my zip code, found 38 QPs -12 of which were 2007 - for sale. Cheapest asking price of the 2007s' were 100K. Most were $105K. So I reckon, a person shouldn't waste any time jumping on that 2007 $85K car.
It is difficult to find hard numbers for depreciation on "exotic" cars, $100k seem to be the top limit for detailed numbers by the normal sources. Consumer Report states that a car generally depreciates 40-60% in a four year period. Depreciation hits the worse, of course, in the first two years. By the fourth year, depreciation tends to start leveling off.
For giggles, I ran some numbers of some high-end cars that I am somewhat familiar. I am not comparing apples to apples, just doing an exercise. I arbitrarily picked three MY year old cars since that puts us more or less in the middle of the Consumer Report data:
2005 MB AMG SL65
$190K new
$104K used
45% depreciation
2005 Maser QP
$125 new
$70K used
44% depreciation
My own model:
2005 Maser Spyder CC
$106K new
$60K used
43% depreciation
2005 Bentley GT
$175K new
$120K used
31% depreciation
2005 AM DB9 coupe
$175K new
$131K used
25% depreciation
So Maserati is not the best but nor is it the worse - looking at various Mercedes Benz models, I found the original owners really take a beating on the high-end AMG models. I was quite surprised to see how well Aston Martins held their value - I pre-supposed much worse. Must be that James Bond connection.
BTW, back to the 2007 Maser QPs. The majority of 2007 QP at my local dealers are MSRP at $128K, so as $100K currently used, that is a first year depreciation of 22%.
Market Theory Plus
Back on subject - Brian's comparison numbers surprised me a lot since I'd always thought that Maseratis depreciated faster than other exotics. In hindsight I realize that I based that apparent misconception on my experience with Porsches, which do hold their value, and the fact that recent generation Ferrari's (360/430) are in such high demand that they actually appreciate.
I suppose the best answer to Manny's question about Masers depreciating so quickly is "Compared to what?" -- which is Brian's point. Of course, my mother always told me never to answer a question with a question, but what it amounts to is that to the automotive public at large we drive expensive, poorly supported cars with questionable reliability, a microscopic dealer network, and exorbitant service costs. Not surprising that there isn't a strong secondary market and -- without that demand -- limited resale value/high depreciation.
But all is not lost. All the positive press the QP has been getting bodes well for both the future of the brand and will (hopefully) translate into increased demand for used Masers. Of course, by the time that happens, we'll all be driving Aston Martins....
Not to change the subject, but does anyone else think this is one of the funniest (and truest) tag lines they've ever seen?!
Back on subject - Brian's comparison numbers surprised me a lot since I'd always thought that Maseratis depreciated faster than other exotics. In hindsight I realize that I based that apparent misconception on my experience with Porsches, which do hold their value, and the fact that recent generation Ferrari's (360/430) are in such high demand that they actually appreciate.
I suppose the best answer to Manny's question about Masers depreciating so quickly is "Compared to what?" -- which is Brian's point. Of course, my mother always told me never to answer a question with a question, but what it amounts to is that to the automotive public at large we drive expensive, poorly supported cars with questionable reliability, a microscopic dealer network, and exorbitant service costs. Not surprising that there isn't a strong secondary market and -- without that demand -- limited resale value/high depreciation.
But all is not lost. All the positive press the QP has been getting bodes well for both the future of the brand and will (hopefully) translate into increased demand for used Masers. Of course, by the time that happens, we'll all be driving Aston Martins....
Joined
·
793 Posts
Not at all unusual.
You buy a new car and you are paying tons of up-front expenses.
So, it's the price you pay to purchase some new cars.
Have you seen where Mercedes prices are today? In the toilet comes to mind.
AND, with car sales down, demand low, and with tons of cars for sale, prices drop to accommodate a market.
It's based also on demand for a particula car.
Maserati's are not in demand as are Ferrari's, and this is why on another thread I have stated my thinking that the Gran Turismo is not selling as Maserati had thought it would.
Buy smart and you don't take a beating.
Bond..
I was quite surprised to see how well Aston Martins held their value - I pre-supposed much worse. Must be that James Bond connection.
QUOTE]
I was at school with the current James Bond - he gets a free Aston and supermodels, I get a Maserati and am currently looking for the next Mrs CJ.
Joined
·
249 Posts
Few comments:
Ferrari does not own Maserati, Fiat does.
Maserati and Ferrari are no longer formerly linked operationally.
Maserati does still purchase its engines from Ferrari
and on the question of reputation: main cause, 80's/90's Bi-Turbos.
Joined
·
196 Posts
It's all relative. That pair of shoes that I bought for $250 6 months ago is now worth.... $30??
Don't even get me started on that $40 bottle of wine that I drank last night. I mean, talk about pissing money away
Even the house that I bought last year has gone down in value. Woe is me......
Dolle Dolf
Don't even get me started on that $40 bottle of wine that I drank last night. I mean, talk about pissing money away
Even the house that I bought last year has gone down in value. Woe is me......
Dolle Dolf
Joined
·
793 Posts
So what does all that have to do with the question of depreciation?
Joined
·
249 Posts
It was a response to a comment in the 6th post on this thread.
Few comments:
He said Ferrari "owned" Maserati, not "owns" Maserati. I will hazard a guess that he was also talking about looking at Maseratis while Ferrari still owned them.
Maserati and Ferrari are still, and will always be, "formerly linked operationally." Tricky thing, that past tense.
Joined
·
249 Posts
Sorry but I stand by my comment. Ferrari does not, and never has, owned Maserati. Fiat does. The fact that Ferrari had operational control over Maserati for several years does not necessarily mean that they owned Maserati. Maserati is 100% owned by Fiat and Ferrari is 85% owned by Fiat.Few comments:
He said Ferrari "owned" Maserati, not "owns" Maserati. I will hazard a guess that he was also talking about looking at Maseratis while Ferrari still owned them.
Maserati and Ferrari are still, and will always be, "formerly linked operationally." Tricky thing, that past tense.
This is worth knowing and clearing up since I - as many people are - under the impression that Ferrari owns/owned Maserati. From above I gather that the corporate structure is that both Ferrari and Maserati are divisions of Fiat (Maserati a wholy owned subsidiary while Ferrari is a partially owned (85%) subsidiary.) Additionally, Fiat must have placed Maserati under Ferrari's "guidance" to breathe new life into the mark.
In either event, Maserati has gained under whatever level of assistance they received from Ferrari and from the current sourcing of the engines.
Are any other mechanicals strictly Ferrari ?
That's my take away. Correct ?
Joined
·
249 Posts
Yes.
There is a lot of technology sharing between the two groups. Key areas being the engine, transmission, and braking systems. None of the technology in the Maseratis is "strickly" Ferrari. Maserati take the components/technology and adapts it to best fit with the different characteristics of its cars.
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
