New pick ups.

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
Emmet's truck v. CKNs.

I can make the case for Emmet's truck.

In addition to the low purchase price lower depreciation and overall bang-for-the-buck, there's another, more subtle advantage to a basic truck.

As it ages, the Emmet truck can gracefully segue from primary vehicle, to second vehicle, to third vehicle to hand-me down, all within the same family. The purchaser of a basic truck saves considerably in transaction costs, compared to the purchaser of a passenger car. I'm not talking about depreciation, which is also an advantage of a more basic truck. I'm talking about the high cost of selling wholesale, buying retail, and the other taxes, expenses that come from replacing one vehicle with another.

The CKN truck on the other hand, is more like a Cadillac. It has difficulty making the same transition. In most cases, it almost has to be traded in after several years, rather than soldiering on for 15 years in the same family. That's a hidden cost of ownership for the fancy-pants trucks that I don't think many people recognize.



The stereotypes on BITOG always hold true. I will have you know that I purchased this vehicle used about 1 year ago. It's fully loaded-everything but NAV. It had 24,000 miles on it (actually the trucks a tad over five years old-it's a 2012 GMC Sierra SLT). I put 10,000 miles on it. I Blue/Black-booked it over the weekend-and it's actually worth MORE than I paid for it on trade in.

So try again on the depreciation.

 

[jimbrewer]

You can save a bunch of depreciation by buying used, but then, so can the work truck purchaser. Not many people buy a non-collectible used car that goes up in value over any length of time. It happens, I know, just not common.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
You can save a bunch of depreciation by buying used, but then, so can the work truck purchaser. Not many people buy a non-collectible used car that goes up in value over any length of time. It happens, I know, just not common.



It's common when the new one's are-as stated very expensive. I am seeing 200,000 mile trucks at unbelievable asking prices.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
The CKN truck on the other hand, is more like a Cadillac. It has difficulty making the same transition. In most cases, it almost has to be traded in after several years, rather than soldiering on for 15 years in the same family. That's a hidden cost of ownership for the fancy-pants trucks that I don't think many people recognize.


Why would it need to be traded rather than handed down? The bones are basically the same as the work truck and most things can be fixed or let go, just like the beater truck. As things break they will either get fixed or not just like the work truck.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
You can save a bunch of depreciation by buying used, but then, so can the work truck purchaser. Not many people buy a non-collectible used car that goes up in value over any length of time. It happens, I know, just not common.


Of course people can save money by buying used. Not everyone wants to buy a used vehicle. I think everyone also likely understands that vehicles are usually depreciating assets.

 

[MNgopher]

Originally Posted By: spasm3


Is that a fleet price? or can someone buying one get it at that price? If so, I'll be looking for that whenever i replace the avalanche. I would want crew cab and 4wd. but i like everything else you listed. Is the superduty XL at 1/2 ton or 3/4?


Price listed is the MSRP. You can go on the Ford website, and build one yourself and see the MSRP. The superduty is a 3/4 ton truck. Going up to a Crew Cab adds about 3k, and adding 4wd also adds 3k, meaning the MSRP on what you are looking for is more like 39k. Incentives will be low typically - these are not the super high margin trucks.

We buy under a state bid contract - meaning we get a "bulk" discount on our equipment. The 33k MSRP truck I mentioned in my original post we can acquire, delivered to our location, for $22.5k. A Crew Cab 4x4 8 foot bed XL 3/4 ton superduty we can get for $27.5k (39k msrp)

The reality is these trucks are made, but they typically are no what you find on a dealer lot. They are ordered by specific users and never see retail. There are retailers who specialize in these An example is Boyer Ford in Minneapolis. Here is a truck with literally one option checked: snowplow prep package (and note it is a 4x4, thus the higher price at $36,225 from the dealer (so 3k for 4x4):

http://www.boyerfordtrucks.com/new/Ford/...bb5aa011bdd.htm

 

[spasm3]

Thanks MNgopher!

 

[DoubleWasp]

My fancy pants truck just turned 11. Pretty sure it'll still be here in 4 years.

Power lift gate? Not exactly sold on that one, but I can see the appeal of being able to remove some heavy stuff from the bed without having to make a second trip back just to close the gate. Won't work too well for the camper top and tonneau cover crowd, however.

Algae soaked boat ramps and muddy fields have made 4WD a necessity for me.

I'm not sold on this "drive a box with no features or you're a poser" methodology. Having greater amounts of features in my truck has done nothing to reduce my workload.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: MNgopher
For all the griping in this thread about how much the high end trucks cost, and then stating I only want the bare bones version - you do realize that those trucks are made, right? I can go price out a bare bones 2 wheel drive Superduty XL with a regular cab, vinyl seats, carpet delete, and an 8 foot bed for an MSRP of under $33,000. Our fleet buys them all the time, and with a large discount from the MSRP.

Enough with the griping about what the cost is - folks just want something to complain about.

The work truck still exists (though it won't have 16" wheels - they won't clear the brakes.)


Good luck finding those.

Those are low volume trucks for dealers unless they get an order from a fleet, so many of them do not have those just sitting on the lot. My uncle was originally looking for an F250 XL regular cab with 4x4. He went to many dealers and the only one he could find was states away and not really that good of a price. He ended up getting a better deal on an XLT extended cab which had some options.

Dealers know that most buyers want a truck that has comfort features.

 

[emmett442]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
Emmet's truck v. CKNs.

I can make the case for Emmet's truck.

In addition to the low purchase price lower depreciation and overall bang-for-the-buck, there's another, more subtle advantage to a basic truck.

As it ages, the Emmet truck can gracefully segue from primary vehicle, to second vehicle, to third vehicle to hand-me down, all within the same family. The purchaser of a basic truck saves considerably in transaction costs, compared to the purchaser of a passenger car. I'm not talking about depreciation, which is also an advantage of a more basic truck. I'm talking about the high cost of selling wholesale, buying retail, and the other taxes, expenses that come from replacing one vehicle with another.

The CKN truck on the other hand, is more like a Cadillac. It has difficulty making the same transition. In most cases, it almost has to be traded in after several years, rather than soldiering on for 15 years in the same family. That's a hidden cost of ownership for the fancy-pants trucks that I don't think many people recognize.



The stereotypes on BITOG always hold true. I will have you know that I purchased this vehicle used about 1 year ago. It's fully loaded-everything but NAV. It had 24,000 miles on it (actually the trucks a tad over five years old-it's a 2012 GMC Sierra SLT). I put 10,000 miles on it. I Blue/Black-booked it over the weekend-and it's actually worth MORE than I paid for it on trade in.

So try again on the depreciation.


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: emmett442


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.


Depreciation is not an issue as long as you are an owner. It only comes into play when you try to sell. And even your 74 still has "depreciation" - at some point it will become worth scrap value. Statistically it will be sooner than CKN's 2012.

If you're the type to keep things until the wheels fall off, depreciation should never enter into the equation as you'll be driving it from cradle to grave.

Everyone should buy what they want - some of us like the creature comforts. Others would rather have the base model.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: emmett442


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.


Depreciation is not an issue as long as you are an owner. It only comes into play when you try to sell. And even your 74 still has "depreciation" - at some point it will become worth scrap value. Statistically it will be sooner than CKN's 2012.

If you're the type to keep things until the wheels fall off, depreciation should never enter into the equation as you'll be driving it from cradle to grave.

Everyone should buy what they want - some of us like the creature comforts. Others would rather have the base model.


It's also important to factor what the truck will be doing and if it is necessary for a business. A truck that works everyday and is necessary to make income is totally different than something that gets driven to the grocery store a few times a week. While a new truck will depreciate, if it's earning money and is necessary to ensure the continuity of a business than it will pay for itself.

 

[emmett442]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: emmett442


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.


Depreciation is not an issue as long as you are an owner. It only comes into play when you try to sell. And even your 74 still has "depreciation" - at some point it will become worth scrap value. Statistically it will be sooner than CKN's 2012.

If you're the type to keep things until the wheels fall off, depreciation should never enter into the equation as you'll be driving it from cradle to grave.

Everyone should buy what they want - some of us like the creature comforts. Others would rather have the base model.



Using your depreciation argument, just because you were the single owner didn't make you immune to the effects. Over time, both a $30k and $60k truck will lose nearly their full value and need replacement.

In the scope of this topic, the only way you can tell me depreciation doesn't affect you is if you can buy a brand new $60k pickup, use it all up, and still have a pickup worth $60k. Whether or not you were the single owner has nothing to do with it. It's still a consumable and thus has become worth less than it's purchase price whether or not you bought it new, 1 year old, or 5 years old.

Moving beyond the "new pickup" topic, you can avoid depreciation by purchasing a vehicle that's already been used up. For example, a $1000 beater Corolla provides basic transportation. Since basic transportation always commands at least $1000, it can't depreciate. The value of the vehicle never changes. THAT's when depreciation doesn't matter.

No one buying a new pickup is immune to depreciation no matter how long they keep it.


Now, total cost of operation (which includes depreciation) per mile can be improved by keeping your vehicle longer. BUT, the reason that works is that your vehicle is providing the same service during it's low depreciation years as it was during it's high depreciation years. So, you are spreading those large early losses over more time and miles. $/mile improves.

Full depreciation still occurs, however. no way around that.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: emmett442

Using your depreciation argument, just because you were the single owner didn't make you immune to the effects. Over time, both a $30k and $60k truck will lose nearly their full value and need replacement.


Sure. At the end of the day, say 20 years later both are valueless and worth scrap value. At that point, it's not depreciation but cost per mile/year/whatever. As the owner I don't care what it's worth because I know when I'm done with it, it will be worth scrap. So, at year 10 the fact that 1 is worth $15k and the other $30k is meaningless to the owner. Especially since you and I can't play the depreciation write down game (like a business can).

Quote:
Moving beyond the "new pickup" topic, you can avoid depreciation by purchasing a vehicle that's already been used up. For example, a $1000 beater Corolla provides basic transportation. Since basic transportation always commands at least $1000, it can't depreciate. The value of the vehicle never changes. THAT's when depreciation doesn't matter.


At some point that Corolla will be less than $1k. Blow an engine or trans and it's bye bye to any value. And with a cheap car with lots of miles, that is more likely to happen. You do reach a point where the value loss levels off but it's always on a decline.

Quote:
Full depreciation still occurs, however. no way around that.


Full depreciation (and IMHO all depreciation) is a scam. Say you get 5 years to depreciate that asset to $0. Problem is you can either get more than 5 years use out of it (keep using) or sell it for significantly more than $0. So it really doesn't have $0 value, it has the value of what you can sell it for. It was a scam 20 years ago in my accounting class and it is still a scam today. But it really makes no difference to individuals as we cannot write off depreciation to offset assets like a business.

 

[emmett442]

So then I'm confused as to what you're arguing when it comes these trucks. I can safely assume that if I wanted to, I could sell my $3800 for $3800 5 years from now. If I had purchased a '12 model, I wouldn't be as confident that I could sell for as much as I paid.


Accounting class teaches in absolutes. Your argument works the same. But that's not always real world.

Claiming that depreciation isn't real because you aren't selling is like telling me that my net worth is only the change I have in my pocket because my other asset's values (account balances, asset values, etc) are merely on paper. That's totally incorrect.

You can protect yourself by recognizing and controlling your exposure to depreciation. It's very real, not a scam. Driving two different vehicles 60k miles over 5 years, I WILL lose different amounts of value on each, depending on the prices the market sets for them.

But we are getting off track here. I disagree with your ignorance on depreciation, but I also don't agree with allowing it to prevent the purchase of something you want.

If one wants to (and can afford) a $60k pickup, he should!

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: emmett442
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
Emmet's truck v. CKNs.

I can make the case for Emmet's truck.

In addition to the low purchase price lower depreciation and overall bang-for-the-buck, there's another, more subtle advantage to a basic truck.

As it ages, the Emmet truck can gracefully segue from primary vehicle, to second vehicle, to third vehicle to hand-me down, all within the same family. The purchaser of a basic truck saves considerably in transaction costs, compared to the purchaser of a passenger car. I'm not talking about depreciation, which is also an advantage of a more basic truck. I'm talking about the high cost of selling wholesale, buying retail, and the other taxes, expenses that come from replacing one vehicle with another.

The CKN truck on the other hand, is more like a Cadillac. It has difficulty making the same transition. In most cases, it almost has to be traded in after several years, rather than soldiering on for 15 years in the same family. That's a hidden cost of ownership for the fancy-pants trucks that I don't think many people recognize.



The stereotypes on BITOG always hold true. I will have you know that I purchased this vehicle used about 1 year ago. It's fully loaded-everything but NAV. It had 24,000 miles on it (actually the trucks a tad over five years old-it's a 2012 GMC Sierra SLT). I put 10,000 miles on it. I Blue/Black-booked it over the weekend-and it's actually worth MORE than I paid for it on trade in.

So try again on the depreciation.


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.


While I think your old Dodge is cool, it simply doesn't have the necessary capabilities to meet my needs. There are no old pickups from that era that have the necessary capability. So if I wanted the necessary capability for my needs, it had to be a new pickup, or one just a few years old. With resale on pickups what it is, when all factors were considered, the new truck was the best option for me.

 

[emmett442]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: emmett442
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
Emmet's truck v. CKNs.

I can make the case for Emmet's truck.

In addition to the low purchase price lower depreciation and overall bang-for-the-buck, there's another, more subtle advantage to a basic truck.

As it ages, the Emmet truck can gracefully segue from primary vehicle, to second vehicle, to third vehicle to hand-me down, all within the same family. The purchaser of a basic truck saves considerably in transaction costs, compared to the purchaser of a passenger car. I'm not talking about depreciation, which is also an advantage of a more basic truck. I'm talking about the high cost of selling wholesale, buying retail, and the other taxes, expenses that come from replacing one vehicle with another.

The CKN truck on the other hand, is more like a Cadillac. It has difficulty making the same transition. In most cases, it almost has to be traded in after several years, rather than soldiering on for 15 years in the same family. That's a hidden cost of ownership for the fancy-pants trucks that I don't think many people recognize.



The stereotypes on BITOG always hold true. I will have you know that I purchased this vehicle used about 1 year ago. It's fully loaded-everything but NAV. It had 24,000 miles on it (actually the trucks a tad over five years old-it's a 2012 GMC Sierra SLT). I put 10,000 miles on it. I Blue/Black-booked it over the weekend-and it's actually worth MORE than I paid for it on trade in.

So try again on the depreciation.


While I don't necessarily agree with his reasoning that you shouldn't buy what you want because it would depreciate (as long as you are living within your means), he's right between the two trucks:

I paid $3800 for my '74. At it's age, it's all done depreciating. Next year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years from now, I'll be able to sell if for at least that amount.

Same won't be true for your 2012, which will eventually be a $3800 truck itself.


While I think your old Dodge is cool, it simply doesn't have the necessary capabilities to meet my needs. There are no old pickups from that era that have the necessary capability. So if I wanted the necessary capability for my needs, it had to be a new pickup, or one just a few years old. With resale on pickups what it is, when all factors were considered, the new truck was the best option for me.


I know, I know, my comment was more of an anecdote. I wasn't advocating that there's only one type of truck that's 'correct' nor that my truck can do it all. It can't.
I can appreciate the new stuff as much as the old. They're all nifty in their own way.

Don't confuse me with Jim. I don't fully agree with his statement. I simply thought the disregard for depreciation that followed was silly.