Re: As with our trolls, the...

SubjectRe: As with our trolls, the problem wasn't the Mac Pro itself... It's the problem with the m
Date02/21/2014 15:27 (02/21/2014 10:27)
FollowsLloyd E Parsons
Followups-hh (46m)

On 2014-02-20 5:31 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:

Lloyd E Parsons
On 2014-02-20 21:16:11 +0000, sms said:

On 2/20/2014 5:42 AM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:

Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat, Body Roll Works LLC
On 2014-02-20 13:31:06 +0000, Sandman said:

In article <>, -hh wrote:

Nashton: I'm just enjoying my awesome acquisition.

Sandman: You mean lease.

Well that certainly explains the vocabulary of "acquisition" instead of "purchase" or "buy".

Well, "acquire" means "buys or obtain (an asset or object) for oneself" so it really doesn't apply to a rented car. It's not his.

Yep, a lease is a special deal.

You get to use the car for a fixed fee, and unless you get a full service lease, you also get : 1. to pay for all maintenance services 2. to pay for the insurance, which is higher than for the same vehicle purchased. 3. In case of a total, how do you cover the gap between what the vehicle is worth and what the insurance company will pay the leasing company?

Buick has a 'special' lease program. Low mileage lease for 2 years with all maintenance included. Of course, if you buy a new Buick you also get 2 years of maintenance these days.

The funny part is that the cost of that maintenance if you just paid for it yourself would mostly be just some oil/filter changes. For GM's that's about $40 per event.

While I've never personally leased a vehicle, for some vehicle brands, for some situations, it can make sense, and Buick is one of those brands because of its poor resale value.

If you're buying a vehicle with poor resale value, and plan to keep it only 3-5 years, and there's a good lease deal, then leasing can be a better deal than buying.

Lloyd E Parsons
In general only low mileage lease deals are better than buying. If you drive a lot, leasing can be no better than buying and sometimes even worse.

And you know this, how exactly? Can you give us an example and break it down or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?

In my case, I wanted a car to see me through 5 years. Maximas are very reliable but I have a 5 year bumper to bumper, so anything that occurs, I'm covered.

If I had bought, my payments would have been close to $600 and with leasing, I'm paying $390/month with the same down payment.

Since I own 2 automobiles already, my mileage will be close to 20000 klms/year (hardly a low klm lease). At the end of the lease, residual value is $10000. My lease is for 24000 klm/year and I don't think I'll come even close to that by the end of the lease. I can turn around and buy the car and sell it for $13000, which will probably be in the ballpark of what it will be worth with only 85-90000 klms, if not more.

Let's do some math.

$200 savings month for 5 years.

$210 x 60 is $12600 in savings. If I get $13000 for the car at the end of the lease, I even make a profit of $3000.

Total savings: $15600 over 5 years, on a car that I would not have kept anyway beyond 5 years.

To boot, my company pays me 45 cents/klm, so it's at a minimum cost to me considering the tax savings, which would have not changed if I bought it outright.

Can you now explain why and how there is any truth in your tired platitudes about low resale values, low mileage and the rest, when I just proved that I''l be saving in excess of $15000 over the course of 5 years as opposed to buying?

I can go on 2 vacations a year on the money I'm saving, fer Christ's sake. Can any of you Mac advocates say anything of value, anything of consequence that holds any water?


-hh (46m)