Useful Links

Koolau · 03-23-2009, 01:16 PM

Three cars w/total Edmonds (seller) value 9K
House estimated 425K
'bout 2.1%

I learned something about depreciation during this 'episode'. Buy a Honda.

Nords · 03-23-2009, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29

I'm not sure why that's embarrassing unless we're making it a competition to "out-cheap" each other -- who ever owns the cheapest beater of a car wins?
... or is no one willing to admit it for fear of losing their credentials as a ~~cheap bastid~~ strong-saving LBYMer...?

I'd never enter a "cheap" contest against this board's posters. Some of you guys make Amy Dacyczyn and even Jeff Yeager look like wild-eyed hard-partyin' carefree spendthrifts...

Mickey · 03-23-2009, 02:06 PM

Okay, I was the one to put the >31% vote in there - 'cause I took purchase price of [new] car versus purchase price of house (had car before house).

If I get a do-over - to use current values based on Zillow and Edmund - then I would be at 16.7%.

Said poll is now releasable to whomever you wish to use as a perfect lesson, boys and girls, in how depreciation of new vehicles actually works!

Marilyn

[Wanders off, thinking "Don't care! Wanted the car, got the car, keeping the car! It's paid for! So there!..."]

haha · 03-23-2009, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratface

.66 and 2.33. What does it mean?

It means we are bored.

Westernskies · 03-23-2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha

It means we are bored.

FUEGO · 03-23-2009, 02:42 PM

Interesting note: I dug through the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances here:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/o...tables.int.xls

Looking at "Table 9 07", it shows the median value of vehicles and primary residences for different groups in the US. For those owning a primary residence, their vehicles were worth $18,400 and their houses were worth $200,000 in the year 2007 in 2007 dollars. This works out to a vehicle to house ratio of 9%.

Interesting to note that for households with above median net worths, the ratio decreases as the net worth increases. The wealthy spend more money on houses than they do on cars? The thought being that houses appreciate, and cars depreciate, so wealth building tendencies lead the wealthy to spend more on appreciating assets than depreciating assets (just my theory).

As of now, this poll looks like our median ratio is right around 5%, making us look like some high net worth individuals, indeed.

FinallyRetired · 03-23-2009, 02:45 PM

About 1% or less. I've never been a car guy. I figure anything above and beyond something to get you from point A to point B without breaking down is a waste of money. I buy used cars and run them into the ground.

Khan · 03-23-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords

I'd never enter a "cheap" contest against this board's posters. Some of you guys make Amy Dacyczyn and even Jeff Yeager look like wild-eyed hard-partyin' carefree spendthrifts...

Wise decision.

Car ~$5000
House ~$75000
1/15
~6 %

2 years ago, car ~$800
bit more than 1%

FUEGO · 03-23-2009, 03:13 PM

I'm still waiting for the post that says "Car = $400, house = car, so 100%".

Nords · 03-23-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO

I'm still waiting for the post that says "Car = $400, house = car, so 100%".

Yeah, but JG is banned and UncleMick had to find a new home, so the field is wide open on that contest...

Back in the 1980s I had a shipmate who owned a beater car and camped in a tent for $1.50/night. His ratio would probably be well over 1000%...

kyounge1956 · 03-23-2009, 05:11 PM

Well, if you had asked me this three years ago, I could have said the ratio was darn close to zero, but I still had a driveable car. At the time my 1980 Toyota Tercel was still running, but when it died, I refinanced my house and took cash out for a new car. At the time of the refinance, the house was appraised for $303K. I donated the old car to charity, and according to the receipt I got to fill out my taxes the next year, they got $100 for it, I assume as scrap metal. So, for the few months it took my new car to get to the dealership, the ratio was $100/$303,000, which is 0.033%. Even if the car before it died was worth several times as much, I'd still have had a ratio of under 1% with a driveable car.

At this point, I have a going-on-three-year-old car, which is worth much more than my decrepit old Tercel was, and the probable sale price of the house has declined quite a bit, so today my car/house ratio is probably somewhere around 8%.

NW-Bound · 03-23-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbbamI

Are we supposed to include motorcycles?

Sure! Anything that's on wheels. I was shocked learning that there are bicycles costing more than my 15-yr old car now. So, put it in!

crazy connie · 03-23-2009, 06:41 PM

06 Caddie (which was my retirement present to myself) worth about 20K vs 3600 sq ft McMansion which has dropped in value to $400K. I only paid $250K for the house about 10 years ago. Even with the drop in RE values the house has been a good investment but the car is nice for Vegas runs! Plan on keeping the car for 4 to 6 years yet, hope to downsize the house in 2010 or 2011.

toofrugalformycat · 03-23-2009, 09:02 PM

I tried to use Edmunds but one of the cars was too old. Combined age of the two cars: 36.
I estimate about 1%.
Darn, I hope this doesn't jinx my two old trusty rice rockets, bragging about their age!