PFORPAUL said:
Is that an anti-Semitic slur? It sounds like one...
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
how low will the NSX depreciate till? when will it stop?
- Thread starter BostonNSX
- Start date
Is that an anti-Semitic slur? It sounds like one...
I do not know the meaningof "Gentile" but via google...
"Gentiles (Heb. Gôyîm; Gr. ethne, ethnikoi, Hellenes; Vulg. Gentes, Gentiles, Graeci).
A word of Latin origin and usually employed in the plural. In the English versions of both Testaments it collectively designates the nations distinct from the Jewish people. The basis of this distinction is that, as descendants of Abraham, the Jews considered themselves, and were in fact, before the coming of Christ, the chosen people of God. As the non-Jewish nations did not worship the true God and generally indulged in immoral practices, the term Gôyîm "Gentiles" has often times in the Sacred Writings, in the Talmud, etc., a disparaging meaning. Since the spread of Christianity, the word Gentiles designates, in theological parlance, those who are neither Jews nor Christians. In the United States, the Mormons use it of persons not belonging to their sect."
Translated from PFORPAUL:
"Just remember why GOD created non-Christian and non-Jews --so someone could pay LIST PRICE. SHALOM!"
It does not look offensive at all... not?
"Gentiles (Heb. Gôyîm; Gr. ethne, ethnikoi, Hellenes; Vulg. Gentes, Gentiles, Graeci).
A word of Latin origin and usually employed in the plural. In the English versions of both Testaments it collectively designates the nations distinct from the Jewish people. The basis of this distinction is that, as descendants of Abraham, the Jews considered themselves, and were in fact, before the coming of Christ, the chosen people of God. As the non-Jewish nations did not worship the true God and generally indulged in immoral practices, the term Gôyîm "Gentiles" has often times in the Sacred Writings, in the Talmud, etc., a disparaging meaning. Since the spread of Christianity, the word Gentiles designates, in theological parlance, those who are neither Jews nor Christians. In the United States, the Mormons use it of persons not belonging to their sect."
Translated from PFORPAUL:
"Just remember why GOD created non-Christian and non-Jews --so someone could pay LIST PRICE. SHALOM!"
It does not look offensive at all... not?
As there are less NSXs available to the consumer, I think the prices will slowly creep up. In 10 years, try looking for an A+ grade NSX. It will probably be pretty expensive.
Sadly, many will be totalled or just too beat up for collectors to even consider. Just trying to find a stock NSX is rare. A late model coupe is almost impossible to find.
Considering that the 91 NSXs started at 60-65k they still retained 50% of their value at 30k or more 10+ years later.
William
Sadly, many will be totalled or just too beat up for collectors to even consider. Just trying to find a stock NSX is rare. A late model coupe is almost impossible to find.
Considering that the 91 NSXs started at 60-65k they still retained 50% of their value at 30k or more 10+ years later.
William
Last edited:
I disagree on this point. NSX's are expensive cars to begin with, and the people who buy them are generally well-off people, older, with no desire to thrash their cars. I think the pool of NSX's for sale will always be in a higher grade condition than most other car groups.
gheba_nsx said:It does not look offensive at all... not?
It sounds to me like a perpetuation of the stereotype by anti-Semitic bigots of Jews by associating them with financial dealings. It is sometimes claimed as a positive trait, sometimes negative, but always a stereotype, and often a slur - similar to the reprehensible use of the word "Jew" as a verb meaning to haggle in price, which I have heard used by an NSXprime member in person and which I find extremely offensive.
I strongly doubt that PFORPAUL intended his statement as a stereotype or slur, but it sounded like one nonetheless.
Getting back to the point about availability and pricing of used NSXs, I think that some of them have already been trashed - and many others are accumulating very high mileage, which doesn't necessarily mean the same thing, of course. I think that, as time goes on, lower-mileage well-maintained examples will become less common - they will still be out there, but not as common, and will continue to fetch strong prices. The higher-mileage and/or abused ones will obviously sell for less, but their prices may have flattened out (in the upper twenties) as well.
Now my new question is: will there be a collector market for the NSX? I am not sure it will get the same interest as '60s and '70s Alfas, Astons, Jaguars, Lotus, Porsches and others.
I also do not think there will be a market (collectors) for 991-993 or 911-996 and maybe even newer Ferrari (but Ferrari remains a special case, due to his very valuable and world recognised name.
I know the comic collector world quite well and before '80s comics got a lot of ineterst and value. Late '80s and newer did not get any interest (or very few). And many people kept '80s comics in perfect shape, in vacuum container, thinking about the money they would have done in 20 years.
Well it did not happen. Now they are still worth cover price or very few more (so hey basically gained nothing), taking inflation in the calculation.
It seems that "collector stuff" is mainly related to periods where people did not think about the side-effect of increased value for something. Any opinion?
I also do not think there will be a market (collectors) for 991-993 or 911-996 and maybe even newer Ferrari (but Ferrari remains a special case, due to his very valuable and world recognised name.
I know the comic collector world quite well and before '80s comics got a lot of ineterst and value. Late '80s and newer did not get any interest (or very few). And many people kept '80s comics in perfect shape, in vacuum container, thinking about the money they would have done in 20 years.
Well it did not happen. Now they are still worth cover price or very few more (so hey basically gained nothing), taking inflation in the calculation.
It seems that "collector stuff" is mainly related to periods where people did not think about the side-effect of increased value for something. Any opinion?
What do you mean when you ask whether the NSX will achieve "collector status"?
Does this mean that some people will buy the car and store it, to speculate that the market value will go up?
Does this mean that the market value actually DOES go up?
Does this mean that the car tends to be owned by a relatively small number of enthusiasts?
What other characteristics do you associate with a "collector market"?
I'm not trying to challenge you, just trying to understand how you define what you're asking about.
Does this mean that some people will buy the car and store it, to speculate that the market value will go up?
Does this mean that the market value actually DOES go up?
Does this mean that the car tends to be owned by a relatively small number of enthusiasts?
What other characteristics do you associate with a "collector market"?
I'm not trying to challenge you, just trying to understand how you define what you're asking about.
Something with collector status is usually something that has a value higher than the value that it actually offers, only by the fact that many people wants to have it but the offer is not enough. Basic economic: the price will go up.
Why people are ready to pay more for it? It is normally an irrational behaviour. A need to possess it. Several '60s cars got that status. Even if the offered values is the same as other '60s and probably less than many '70s, '80s and of course '90s cars.
Value? For a car it could be speed, handling, confort, reliability, ...
A Lancia Fulvia coupe: it was a middle/upper class sporty auto with nothing special. It costed the same as many others and was produced in a decent number (10'000? 20'000?) but it still is paid about 20'000$ when in good shape (NOT showroom condition). That is the equivalent of what costed in the '70s! 0% loss including inflation, for a mass produced car!
Nobody in 1970 thought that it would became a collector car. And a 1986 Civic would drive circles around it. It is more reliable. It is more confortable. It is everything a car should be better. But it costs 10x less...
Will the NSX ever get this status? I mean, the 911-993/6, the 348, the Viper, the Esprit and the NSX offer basically the same for the same price (10% plus/10% less). Some more speed, some more reliability but you get the point.
Which of these cars will have more value in 20 years for now? I think that probably they would have the same price. Just my guess...
Ken, is it clear now? You are very rational, I would like to hear what you think.
Why people are ready to pay more for it? It is normally an irrational behaviour. A need to possess it. Several '60s cars got that status. Even if the offered values is the same as other '60s and probably less than many '70s, '80s and of course '90s cars.
Value? For a car it could be speed, handling, confort, reliability, ...
A Lancia Fulvia coupe: it was a middle/upper class sporty auto with nothing special. It costed the same as many others and was produced in a decent number (10'000? 20'000?) but it still is paid about 20'000$ when in good shape (NOT showroom condition). That is the equivalent of what costed in the '70s! 0% loss including inflation, for a mass produced car!
Nobody in 1970 thought that it would became a collector car. And a 1986 Civic would drive circles around it. It is more reliable. It is more confortable. It is everything a car should be better. But it costs 10x less...
Will the NSX ever get this status? I mean, the 911-993/6, the 348, the Viper, the Esprit and the NSX offer basically the same for the same price (10% plus/10% less). Some more speed, some more reliability but you get the point.
Which of these cars will have more value in 20 years for now? I think that probably they would have the same price. Just my guess...
Ken, is it clear now? You are very rational, I would like to hear what you think.
I see I did not address all your questions
>Does this mean that some people will buy the car and store it, to speculate that the market value will go up?
Some people will probably do, but it is difficult to understand which cars will do that. Just like stocks. Probably the BMWs Z1 of '89-'93 and Z8 of '00-'03 will behave like that, due to several factors.
Some other people, ehthusiast, actually drive them on weekend!
>Does this mean that the market value actually DOES go up?
...or remain stable over the year. Very rarely a collector car on the long run has less value than what it was paid for (or close to it).
>Does this mean that the car tends to be owned by a relatively small number of enthusiasts?
Not necessarely. Of course collector cars are not produced and available in wide numbers.
>Does this mean that some people will buy the car and store it, to speculate that the market value will go up?
Some people will probably do, but it is difficult to understand which cars will do that. Just like stocks. Probably the BMWs Z1 of '89-'93 and Z8 of '00-'03 will behave like that, due to several factors.
Some other people, ehthusiast, actually drive them on weekend!
>Does this mean that the market value actually DOES go up?
...or remain stable over the year. Very rarely a collector car on the long run has less value than what it was paid for (or close to it).
>Does this mean that the car tends to be owned by a relatively small number of enthusiasts?
Not necessarely. Of course collector cars are not produced and available in wide numbers.
Thanks for the explanation.
It sounds like your criterion for collector status is whether prices continue to remain high as they age. So one way of measuring that would be to look at resale value as a percentage of original purchase price, after a fairly long period (10+ years).
My recollection from having looked into this not all that long ago is that, as a percentage of original purchase price, NSX market values are similar to that of the Porsche 911, somewhat higher than the Corvette C4, and substantially higher than the Lotus Esprit (which is fairly rare in the States and does not hold its market value well at all). I'm not familiar with Viper prices but I know that their owner body has a lot of enthusiasm for, and dedication to, their marque, so it would not surprise me if their market value is quite strong.
With the overall NSX sales numbers since its introduction at a relatively low level, I believe the market value will continue to be strong, and comparable to the best of these cars in that respect. In other words...
Yes.
It sounds like your criterion for collector status is whether prices continue to remain high as they age. So one way of measuring that would be to look at resale value as a percentage of original purchase price, after a fairly long period (10+ years).
My recollection from having looked into this not all that long ago is that, as a percentage of original purchase price, NSX market values are similar to that of the Porsche 911, somewhat higher than the Corvette C4, and substantially higher than the Lotus Esprit (which is fairly rare in the States and does not hold its market value well at all). I'm not familiar with Viper prices but I know that their owner body has a lot of enthusiasm for, and dedication to, their marque, so it would not surprise me if their market value is quite strong.
With the overall NSX sales numbers since its introduction at a relatively low level, I believe the market value will continue to be strong, and comparable to the best of these cars in that respect. In other words...
gheba_nsx said:
Yes.
That's interesting... I wonder if there will be certain vintages that might be more attractive than others ??nsxtasy said:
91 - first NSX
94 - last of 3.0L coupes (?)
95 - first NSX-T
97 - first 3.2L
97+ coupes - rare ?
99 Zanardi FRC
02 - first new body style
etc...
Then there's color rarity... not as big a deal yet, but hopefully it might develop over time.
nsxtasy said:
Not exactely. I consider more the price remaining high a side effect of the fact that this car are looked after.
But your analysis seems to lead to the conclusion that the NSX may be a collector car. This would make the '91 price go up, probably of a 50% for very well maintained car (if the behaviour of the older cars will repeat itself).
However I am still a bit skeptical that a NSX in 10 years from now could be so looked after, but as said it is an irrational process...
nsx1164 said:That's interesting... I wonder if there will be certain vintages that might be more attractive than others ??
91 - first NSX
94 - last of 3.0L coupes (?)
95 - first NSX-T
97 - first 3.2L
97+ coupes - rare ?
99 Zanardi FRC
02 - first new body style
etc...
Then there's color rarity... not as big a deal yet, but hopefully it might develop over time.
The best indication regarding which cars will be the most sought after is the current market values.
There is little distinction in market values between identical/similar years, with no big difference between, say, anything from '91 through '94, and I expect that to continue to be true. Same thing for other identical or similar years - '95 vs '96, '97 vs '01 (current differences due to age will diminish with time), etc. There is a "bump" in price for the '95 (over the '91-94) due to the removable-roof feature, and another for the '97 (over the '96) due to the extra performance. The '97+ coupes and Zanardis do not currently seem to have a huge premium over similar NSX-Ts. It's too early to tell about the '02.
I doubt that color rarity will be worth much of a premium, since Acura seems to have matched production to demand pretty well.
Currently, condition and mileage seem to account for a far, far greater difference in prices than any differences from one year or model to another (with the possible exception of slightly lower prices for an automatic).
nsxtasy said:
Ken, since we both agree that the NSX and the corresponding 911, specifically the 993 for models older than 1997 and the 996 for '97 and newer behave similarly (purchase price, used price).
Is it not possible that in 10 years from now the newer 911 (and maybe the NSX) will behave like the precedent versions of the same car? We do not have reference data for the NSX but we could cross reference for similarity on the Porsche case.
If that would be true, a 1994 911-993 would have the same value (inflation adjusted?) of the 1994 911 Carrera. That currently ranges at 12k-14k$. The Porsche has more autos around in the market... but it seems that Porsche has matched production to demand pretty well.
Could this not be the trend for the NSX too?
nsxtasy said:
Huh? If that was the case, the pricing grid in the FAQ would be identical horizontally! Maybe I just misunderstood you, but I wish a new NSX in excellent condition could be had for the price of a 1991 NSX in excellent condition!!
Two things thatmayhelp if the NSX is to become collectible and/or maintain a stable value for those that seek a well maintained & cared for car is a registry and of course a better economy.
I remember a while back Lud was working on a registry, any results yet ???
I also remember awhile back when Cisco & Microsoft would go along way for retirement and that new sports car too!
I remember a while back Lud was working on a registry, any results yet ???
I also remember awhile back when Cisco & Microsoft would go along way for retirement and that new sports car too!
gheba_nsx said:If that would be true, a 1994 911-993 would have the same value (inflation adjusted?) of the 1994 911 Carrera. That currently ranges at 12k-14k$. The Porsche has more autos around in the market... but it seems that Porsche has matched production to demand pretty well.
Could this not be the trend for the NSX too?
I had trouble understanding this part, until I realized that you probably meant that sentence to read, "If that would be true, a 1994 911-993 would have the same value (inflation adjusted?) of the 1984 911 Carrera. That currently ranges at 12k-14k$."
And you raise a good point. Will the NSX continue to depreciate like the Porsche 911, so that ten years from now you can buy one for the equivalent of today's $12-14K? Only time will tell for sure, but I suspect the answer is, probably not that low. Which means that the NSX will have more collector status than the 911.
nsxtasy[/i] [B]Currently said:Huh? If that was the case, the pricing grid in the FAQ would be identical horizontally! Maybe I just misunderstood you, but I wish a new NSX in excellent condition could be had for the price of a 1991 NSX in excellent condition!!
Yes, you misunderstand me, because you have to take it within the context of the rest of the post. Here's what I meant by that comment.
After a while, the depreciation curve on any year NSX flattens out. It might lose $8,000 in value the first year after it was new, $5,000 the second year, $4,000 the third year, and so forth. NSXs that are over 8-10 years old are hardly depreciating at all (at least in price - ignoring changes due to inflation or due to the "opportunity cost" of using the money that's tied up in the car).
What I am saying is, once a car's depreciation curve has leveled out, it doesn't matter whether it's a 10-year-old car or a 12-year-old car - and here comes the part that was in the rest of that post - as long as it's basically the same car. There will still be a difference in value of an NSX-T over an earlier coupe, and a difference of a 3.2-liter NSX over a 3.0-liter NSX - but this is because of differences in equipment, features, and capabilities, not differences from year to year.
Refer to the Pricing section of the FAQ to see what I mean. You'll see that there is hardly any difference at all between the prices for a '91 and a '93, and even the '94 is quite similar (perhaps due to the larger wheels). There is then a big jump between the '94 and the '95, due to the removable roof, but no difference between the '95 and the '96. There's a big jump between the '96 and '97 due to the bigger engine and other enhancements, but no difference between '97 and '98. Newer than that, and you start getting into differences because the cars are new enough that they are still depreciating significantly.
However, even though the differences in price between, say, a '91 and a '94 in the same condition (same letter grade) are quite small, the differences even within a given year between one letter grade and another can be much larger.
Hope that makes sense.
I think you are all forgetting one thing. The release of the 2F&2F will cause the value of the NSX to increase (i.e. the Supra in F&F). Of course, the paint job doesn't do it justice... but hey, the paintjob on the F&F Supra did not exactly scream "classic" sportscar.
-Tony
-Tony
Having just bought an NSX, after some careful research, I'd say that there are several value tiers: All assuming clean title, no wrecks, average condition, From Lowest to Highest:
These are average SELLING prices, usually a few thousand below initial asking price.
Snap Ring '91s and '92s ~ mid $20Ks
Out of Range or fixed Snap Ring '91s & '92s ~upper $20Ks
Avg mileage '93s and '94s ~low-mid $30Ks
'95 and 96 Targas, low mi earlier Non S.R.R. ~ upper $30Ks
above avg Mileage '97-98, low mileage '95-96 ~low-mid $40ks
Avg Mileage '97-99, low mileage '97-98 ~upper $40Ks
low mileage '97-99, avg mileage 2000-01 ~low-mid $50Ks
pristine low mi '97-2000, avg. Zanardis ~upper 50s-60K
Pristine low mi Zanardis, 2001s and beyond ~60Ks up to 70K
Personally, I feel very pleased to have gotten a sweet condition '95 Targa for the price I should have paid for a '93 or 94 in similar condition ($34.5) I actually expected to have to pay upper $30Ks for a car of this condition.
These are average SELLING prices, usually a few thousand below initial asking price.
Snap Ring '91s and '92s ~ mid $20Ks
Out of Range or fixed Snap Ring '91s & '92s ~upper $20Ks
Avg mileage '93s and '94s ~low-mid $30Ks
'95 and 96 Targas, low mi earlier Non S.R.R. ~ upper $30Ks
above avg Mileage '97-98, low mileage '95-96 ~low-mid $40ks
Avg Mileage '97-99, low mileage '97-98 ~upper $40Ks
low mileage '97-99, avg mileage 2000-01 ~low-mid $50Ks
pristine low mi '97-2000, avg. Zanardis ~upper 50s-60K
Pristine low mi Zanardis, 2001s and beyond ~60Ks up to 70K
Personally, I feel very pleased to have gotten a sweet condition '95 Targa for the price I should have paid for a '93 or 94 in similar condition ($34.5) I actually expected to have to pay upper $30Ks for a car of this condition.
In OZ I'm entering a market where there are only 131 NSX's to look at in the last 12 years.
in OZ the NSX's have remained steady once they drop pass the US65K barrier A$100K. after that there isn't much drop.
also, NSX's here dont hold their value as well as in the US.. I think the Acura has somthing to do with that.
in OZ the NSX's have remained steady once they drop pass the US65K barrier A$100K. after that there isn't much drop.
also, NSX's here dont hold their value as well as in the US.. I think the Acura has somthing to do with that.
dougjgreen said:
Unless the market has changed materially in the last 90 days, I must respectfully disagree with the ranges up to the 95 model year. After that, I'm out of my price range. It sounds like you got a great deal on the 95! Congratulations. However, my search indicated (again, 90 days ago) and still indicates that a clean "A" 91-94 is very hard to find for under $30K outside of snap ring range. I didn't see a material difference in price from 93-94 (no more than a few thousand). However, the snap ring issue is typically a $1,500 deduct off the price if it hasn't been fixed. If it has been fixed right (new case, not just new ring), typically there is little to no adjustment. Maybe I'm sensitive to this since I purchased what I would call an "A-B" 92 in snap ring range w/o the fix for much higher than the range you suggest. However, I did negotiate a $1,500 deduct for the snap ring issue which is about the cost for the repair. Since there are no symptoms, no need to do anything according to my conversation with Mark Basch. I did refer to the pricing guide, talked to Mark, Ken, and may other NSX owners for valuable input and found that the $30K floor to be there for a clean A-B early model NSX (under 50K, all books and records, 9+ on the paint, no dents, scratches, clean leather with no rips, tears, or worn spots, new tires, service up to date, etc.). Just my $0.02.
A couple of points: I never said that an A-class '91-92 would sell for under $30K. I said that an AVERAGE condition, average mileage one would surely sell for under $30K. AVERAGE MILEAGE meaning 70-100K miles for a '91-92 car. An A-class car is definitely NOT an average car, and would sell in the $30Ks.
2nd: This definitely is dependent on local market conditions. In Southern California, for example, there are literally DOZENS of cars being offerred for sale. I see several AVERAGE '91-92 cars being offerred around $30-33K, but they are not selling. What ARE selling, are cars from 93-99, at prices ranging from the low $30Ks, to the low $50Ks. The '91s and '92s that ARE selling in California are selling from $25-28K right now.
I have concluded that I got a good deal. But ONLY to the tune of a couple of thousand dollars below market. The car I bought for $34.5K would not have sold for $40K. It might well have sold for $36-37K, but really not much higher, relative to what else is out there right now. There are CLEARLY more sellers than buyers at the prices being asked. And there's no reason to pay over $30K for a '91-92, when clean '93 and '94 cars, and even possibly '95 cars can clearly be gotten in that range, unless that '91-92 is in very much above average condition.
For $45K, Agent just bought a clean '97 with 34K miles and still has 6 months left on their Acura Certified extended warranty. IMHO, agent's car IS worth at least $10K more than mine, based on lower mileage, the bigger engine, and still being under warranty. So, the last 2 sales in California that I'm aware of both conform to this new market reality.
If your car is better than average, it can sell in this market. But if it is just average, then the prices will be lower than they have been in prior years.
2nd: This definitely is dependent on local market conditions. In Southern California, for example, there are literally DOZENS of cars being offerred for sale. I see several AVERAGE '91-92 cars being offerred around $30-33K, but they are not selling. What ARE selling, are cars from 93-99, at prices ranging from the low $30Ks, to the low $50Ks. The '91s and '92s that ARE selling in California are selling from $25-28K right now.
I have concluded that I got a good deal. But ONLY to the tune of a couple of thousand dollars below market. The car I bought for $34.5K would not have sold for $40K. It might well have sold for $36-37K, but really not much higher, relative to what else is out there right now. There are CLEARLY more sellers than buyers at the prices being asked. And there's no reason to pay over $30K for a '91-92, when clean '93 and '94 cars, and even possibly '95 cars can clearly be gotten in that range, unless that '91-92 is in very much above average condition.
For $45K, Agent just bought a clean '97 with 34K miles and still has 6 months left on their Acura Certified extended warranty. IMHO, agent's car IS worth at least $10K more than mine, based on lower mileage, the bigger engine, and still being under warranty. So, the last 2 sales in California that I'm aware of both conform to this new market reality.
If your car is better than average, it can sell in this market. But if it is just average, then the prices will be lower than they have been in prior years.
I agree that location will affect market pricing. Simple supply and demand. Not alot of supply in the midwest relative to Southern California. I think we simply have a different opinion of what "average" is defined as. If we are talking about 70K-100K mile cars, then I would tend more to agree than disagree with you. However, I tend to look at exotic cars like the NSX as second or third cars and expect the mileage to be low. I've been told by several people (usually people I hire to do work for me) that my standards are often unrealisticly high so this is probably a personal perceptional difference. I'm just envious that I didn't find that 95 for $34.5K before you.
Similar threads
- Locked