Originally posted by itsnotagsr
Lets assume you bought a new commodore 3 years ago, and meggala purchased a 10yo MB.
In those 3 years, the commodore has depreciated by 14 000*
In the same 3 years the MB has depreciated by 5800*
Has the MB cost 8200 in repairs over the 3 years ?
.....If it hasn't, then the new car option is actually more expensive in real terms.
I know this argument makes some very broad assumptions, but i am merely highlighting that "new is not necesarily better" financially.
meggala, out of interest, what did the SEL cost you over a 3 year period ?
*redbook values used as an assumed reference point

Comment