Jaguar depreciation question

Strider590

tberry6686 wrote: »

It's because Audi's (and to a lesser degree BMW's) are a fashion choice at the moment with certain groups keeping the prices up. Jaguar's have no bigger maintenance bills than the other 2 at that age but are not as sought after so lower price.

This ^^ is pretty much your answer

BMW and Audi are "new money" cars, people who aspire to be middle class and manage to scrape together enough credit cards to buy a status symbol. The difficult/stressful financial position they put themselves in JUST to own that car is I believe one factor in why they driver like utter !!!!!s.

Jaguar on the other hand, are the choice of the more sensible buyer, someone not trying to make a fashion statement, but wanting a luxury car with a bit of heritage.

Strangely enough though, Jaguar Landrover are one company, but the Range Rovers very much fall into the BMW/Audi category.

neilmcl

Strider590 wrote: »

This ^^ is pretty much your answer

BMW and Audi are "new money" cars, people who aspire to be middle class and manage to scrape together enough credit cards to buy a status symbol. The difficult/stressful financial position they put themselves in JUST to own that car is I believe one factor in why they driver like utter !!!!!s.

Jaguar on the other hand, are the choice of the more sensible buyer, someone not trying to make a fashion statement, but wanting a luxury car with a bit of heritage.

Strangely enough though, Jaguar Landrover are one company, but the Range Rovers very much fall into the BMW/Audi category.

I'm surprised how you ever manage to leave the house given how heavy that chip on your shoulder seems to be.

Car_54

paddyandstumpy wrote: »

Hi guys,

Why do Jags depreciate so hard? Do they have big maintenance bills after 4/5 years?

I can remember in the mid-1980s my company was doing business with Jaguar.

Their senior management believed they had got past the historic reliability problems, and their number one priority was to get residual values up, by putting across the quality/reliability message and getting rid of the "Arfur Daley" image.

It's sad if they haven't managed that, 30 years later.

Strider590

Car_54 wrote: »

I can remember in the mid-1980s my company was doing business with Jaguar.

Their senior management believed they had got past the historic reliability problems, and their number one priority was to get residual values up, by putting across the quality/reliability message and getting rid of the "Arfur Daley" image.

It's sad if they haven't managed that, 30 years later.

That really goes for all (or at least most) "luxury" car brands, they only care about the reliability during the warranty period for the first owner, the used owner is just a cash cow for them, BUT I think most people know it won't be cheap going in.

motorguy

Strider590 wrote: »

BMW and Audi are "new money" cars, people who aspire to be middle class and manage to scrape together enough credit cards to buy a status symbol. The difficult/stressful financial position they put themselves in JUST to own that car is I believe one factor in why they driver like utter !!!!!s.

Its a long time since Audis and BMWs were status symbols. Sures its a cheap to PCP / lease one of those as it is to lease a Mondeo.

Loving the way that in your world "everyone" who runs a BMW or an Audi clearly cant afford to and is only doing so to impress people. Maybe they like the cars, and maybe you shouldnt project your financial position on to others? Maybe some other people are doing quite well for themselves?

Strider590 wrote: »

Jaguar on the other hand, are the choice of the more sensible buyer, someone not trying to make a fashion statement, but wanting a luxury car with a bit of heritage.

Buying any new car is hardly sensible, least of all one that depreciates heavier than its competitors.

Heritage?? Sure they're owned by TATA, an Indian company.

Strider590 wrote: »

Strangely enough though, Jaguar Landrover are one company, but the Range Rovers very much fall into the BMW/Audi category.

"Strangely enough"? Gee, its almost like your view holds no water at all, isnt it?

:rotfl:

vansboy

My Jaguar owning days were when the started to deal with reliability issues, or so we are led to believe, when the XJ40 appeared.

http://www.classiccars4sale.net/images/made/images/uploads/c2c/jag_xj40-000_420_280_84_int_s_c1.jpg

I had two back in early 90's and they were both nice cars. My 1990, 4.0 Sovereign was similar to this foto and I did thought was a nice car.

Always had good experience with dealer, if it was needing anything doing, that we couldn't, in my workshop - it was when I had my van sales business and mechanics were able to maintain and repair cars, rather than technicians who had laptops to diagnose faults - prices were ok, too.

I paid around £10k for it, at the same time, the fella who ran an MoT business nearby, bought a 1973 Porsche somethingorother, similar cost. I kept mine for about 5 years and sold £3k. He did same, selling his for £10k.

So maybe buying 'classic' would make more sense, regarding depreciation?

However, if anyone has seen my previous posts, my midlife crisis continues and I keep lusting after Audi A5 cabrios.... not quite bought one yet!

As for Tata owning Jaguar. At least my Jaguar was made with British Steel, supplying the metal. Or Tata Steel, as the company is now known!!

VB

parking_question_chap

Strider590 wrote: »

This ^^ is pretty much your answer

BMW and Audi are "new money" cars, people who aspire to be middle class and manage to scrape together enough credit cards to buy a status symbol. The difficult/stressful financial position they put themselves in JUST to own that car is I believe one factor in why they driver like utter !!!!!s.

Not to agree or disagree with the statement, but those "type" of people seem to be in Audis and Mercs, not Audis and BMWs.

Strider590

motorguy wrote: »

Its a long time since Audis and BMWs were status symbols. Sures its a cheap to PCP / lease one of those as it is to lease a Mondeo.

Loving the way that in your world "everyone" who runs a BMW or an Audi clearly cant afford to and is only doing so to impress people. Maybe they like the cars, and maybe you shouldnt project your financial position on to others? Maybe some other people are doing quite well for themselves?

Or maybe they just fall for all the "drivers car" marketing BS.

If you "like cars", you don't set out to put a badge on your drive.

You could ask a BMW/Audi driver if they've ever seen a (for example) De Tomaso Pantera and the vast majority would just look at you with a blank expression.

motorguy wrote: »

Maybe some other people are doing quite well for themselves?

So again the story of my friend who spent decades arranging personal loans whilst working for one of the large banks, 95% + of people he saw, who had these "luxury" cars, were in no position to actually be able to afford them. We're not talking hundreds of people, we're talking tens of thousands.

motorguy

Strider590 wrote: »

Or maybe they just fall for all the "drivers car" marketing BS.

If you "like cars", you don't set out to put a badge on your drive.

Maybe they do maybe they dont. Maybe they know they can get a decent deal on a decent car with a (fairly) decent residual.

Absolutely agree. Any cars me and my wife have bought have been because they have impressed us, not because they might impress other people. If they happen to !!!! people like you off then its just an added bonus.

Strider590 wrote: »

You could ask a BMW/Audi driver if they've ever seen a (for example) De Tomaso Pantera and the vast majority would just look at you with a blank expression.

True, though then you're adding in the "car enthusiast" factor. You could ask an Adele fan if they've ever heard a Beatles album and get the same blank response, but it doesnt mean they dont appreciate the quality of Adeles music.

Strider590 wrote: »

So again the story of my friend who spent decades arranging personal loans whilst working for one of the large banks, 95% + of people he saw, who had these "luxury" cars, were in no position to actually be able to afford them. We're not talking hundreds of people, we're talking tens of thousands.

No doubt an over exaggeration to try to justify your point - apart from anything if people couldnt afford them, why was he happy to sign off lending them money?

motorguy

parking_question_chap wrote: »

Not to agree or disagree with the statement, but those "type" of people seem to be in Audis and Mercs, not Audis and BMWs.

Those "type" of people drive all sorts of cars - it just depends on their own environment and their own aspirations.

I remember many moons ago selling a couple from a rough local council estate a £300 Montego and the guys wife saying "oh the neighbours will think we've won the lottery!"

If someone driving a Merc / Audi / BMW is done to impress their neighbours, then they must live in a fairly !!!!!! neighbourhood.