Last post on Jan 05, 2013 at 8:30 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Legislation, Truck, Sedan, Wagon, SUV
#4260 of 4291 Re: You don't need a Master's in Finance ... [gagrice]
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
Feb 02, 2010 (5:00 pm)
Get on board early before the selection is gone
I think that was key last time. The buyers who jumped tended to get better deals. The dealers who jumped moved more metal.
(and yeah, some "Chinese" posts are missing).
#4263 of 4291 Re: C4C didn't work [steve_]
Oct 29, 2010 (10:24 am)
Here's our controversial statement, now give us $5 and you can read about it.
Dunno, sounds like a teaser to make $$$.
#4264 of 4291 Re: C4C didn't work [steve_]
Oct 29, 2010 (11:15 am)
Thanks to C4C, I bought about two to three years sooner than I otherwise would have. But it meant taking on a second car payment--and therefore I didn't feel like I could spend as much.
If I had waited those extra two to three years, not only would I have bought a bigger and more expensive car, but it would probably have been a Ford or Chevy or Buick rather than a Japan-built Honda Fit.
I doubt this was the intended outcome.
#4265 of 4291 Re: C4C didn't work [stephen987]
Oct 29, 2010 (4:57 pm)
C4C was a bone for car dealers. Unfortunately for buyers, the used car market pricing is still hosed up from it. But now the government has moved on to building up more Amtrak routes so they can run more empty trains, consume more fuel and tie the government into ongoing wasted expenses into the future. Spend a bunch on more train cars and new track today and then keep spending on operating the money losing routes down the road.
#4266 of 4291 Re: C4C didn't work [berri]
Oct 30, 2010 (3:41 am)
I don't think a significant portion of the used car market's higher prices is due to C4C. I think it's more likely due to the reduced new car sales. Here's my reasoning: When new cars are bought, some percent of the time they're bought as a replacement vehicle which means that the new car purchase also produces a used car to sell (dealer trade, private party sale, or some other transfer of ownership). I'm going to toss out a number and say 70% of new car sales create a used car. If the number isn't 70%, it's probably not too far off one way or another.
When the new car buy rate was 16 million a year, 70% of 16MM or 11.2MM used cars enter the market. But when new car sales fell to under 11MM units due to the bad economy, the used car supply was correspondingly reduced to under 7.7MM units.
C4C took around 700K cars off the market so less than 10% of a single year's supply. And it was a 1-time hit. The tanking of used car supply due to ongoing poor new car sales is a far, far larger contributor.
This is just my opinion, but to me it makes more sense than C4C having such far reaching effects.
#4267 of 4291 Re: C4C didn't work [fushigi]
Oct 30, 2010 (8:58 am)
I think you're correct. although I have no hard evidence to support this notion. The C4C program probably had an uneven effect across market segments, taking a disproportionate number of older SUVs and expensive-to-repair luxury cars off the road than, say, mass market compacts.