My thoughts on the Electronics Package
8/18/12, 09:10 PM
#21
GT Member
Join Date: July 31, 2012
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the sort of financial reasoning that has people wind up broke. People who are smart with money always consider things like resale, and some of those people have the resources to buy far more expensive cars than a Mustang (and some of them could buy and sell you and me).
There are exceptions of course - ones that are niche marketed, and you buy for purposes of enhancing and reselling; often very old ones / rare ones / etc. But those aren't daily drivers.
Sure, specific options can be considered to depreciate at different rates, but you just take the vehicle as a whole when valuing it out if you must. But, that's already flawed thinking - the value is what you get out of using it for the money you paid while driving it, not how much money you get back compared to how much you paid originally. Sure it's totally okay to project the future financial turnout, but only that it's appropriate to help you decide what options today you can comfortably live with paying to use.
It's far more important to look into longevity than depreciation. While paying to use a vehicle, you don't want to take unanticipated financial hits due to repairs, etc. THAT would directly affect the financial outcome outside of your control.
Last edited by JoesCat; 8/18/12 at 09:16 PM. Reason: typos
8/18/12, 09:16 PM
#22
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: August 12, 2012
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Daily driver type vehicles are a depreciation item. Typically at best, it can be sold off very used for enough money to start into a new one, and the depreciation cycle repeats again. You pay to USE a car, not to treat it as a valued commodity.
There are exceptions of course - ones that are niche marketed, and you buy for purposes of enhancing and reselling; often very old ones / rare ones / etc. But those are daily drivers.
Sure, specific options can be considered to depreciate at different rates, but you just take the vehicle as a whole when valuing it out if you must. But, that's already flawed thinking - the value is what you get out of using it for the money you paid while driving it, not how much money you get back compared to how much you paid originally.
There are exceptions of course - ones that are niche marketed, and you buy for purposes of enhancing and reselling; often very old ones / rare ones / etc. But those are daily drivers.
Sure, specific options can be considered to depreciate at different rates, but you just take the vehicle as a whole when valuing it out if you must. But, that's already flawed thinking - the value is what you get out of using it for the money you paid while driving it, not how much money you get back compared to how much you paid originally.
Like I said, when you have an overpriced option like this one, 7% of the base MSRP of the car for something that's worth almost nothing in trade, then when it's time to trade it in, you run the risk of it not being worth any more than the one that doesn't have it and cost 2K less. Ford isn't stupid, they know they can make money off of the relative ignorance of typical Mustang buyers. Now if they charge $2000 for a performance option, you can be **** sure they'd give you $2000 worth of performance, and all of us would expect a REALLY solid performance boost for us to even consider a 2K performance option like the one I describe. This is a tech thing so it's a completely different ballgame. They assume most people with this niche know less about smartphones and technology and that they can sell a whiz bang large LCD screen with a GPS and a TINY hard drive with component costs of around maybe $500 for $2000. And they can, to some people. $2000 is more than the Brembo brake option, or the Recaro leather seats for god sakes. Are you telling me a $99 GPS chip, a 8" LCD screen and a cheap hard drive are worth 4 times the cost of an iPad? They are selling to the ignorant for this option. I have no problem with the option, I like it. I'm making the point that it's overpriced and that it does affect resale.
Last edited by SeattleStang; 8/18/12 at 09:29 PM.
8/18/12, 09:19 PM
#23
Originally Posted by SeattleStang
Is that going to be your retort to every person? That they're "poor"? 8,000 posts and a complete and utter moron. Not everybody who disagrees with your assessment that resale value is important is poor, in the sense that if you trade frequently, it is nice not to be upside down by large margins so you don;t have to pay for that extra depreciation in cash in 2 years before you can trade up. I certainly don't have to "count pennies" and I realize that. You can always tell the people who got the money later in life. They have the attitude but none of the class. Enjoy it now, with your personality, it'll be gone eventually.
8/18/12, 09:19 PM
#24
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: June 20, 2012
Location: Central Coast California
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Because I normally keep a vehicle for a long time, I don't normally consider depreciation as a purchasing factor. The depreciation ia averaged out over the number of years I keep the vehicle, so it no big deal for me. I just go out of my way to get the most car or truck for my buck.
But there are people that know that they will probably trade in the car in a year or two, and too these people depreciation is a major factor in their purchase decision. So I feel their pain.
I have never leased a vehicle so I can't contribute much to that discussion, but would it be worth considering in a situation like this one?
But there are people that know that they will probably trade in the car in a year or two, and too these people depreciation is a major factor in their purchase decision. So I feel their pain.
I have never leased a vehicle so I can't contribute much to that discussion, but would it be worth considering in a situation like this one?
8/18/12, 10:04 PM
#26
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 5, 2012
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're awfully concerned with depreciation for someone that is buying 2 new GTs at the same time. Surely those two cars will depreciate far more than a Boss or Shelby will in 2 years.
If your question is "is the EP a good investment for the money" then of course the answer is no. But neither are 2 cars. Just pointing out that trade-in value is not normally the deciding factor when picking cars/options, even for you.
If your question is "is the EP a good investment for the money" then of course the answer is no. But neither are 2 cars. Just pointing out that trade-in value is not normally the deciding factor when picking cars/options, even for you.
8/18/12, 10:27 PM
#27
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: June 20, 2012
Location: Central Coast California
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I don't see how you can be anything but upside down when you trade in a car after only one or two years of use, especially considering a 72 month loan. No matter what options you choose.
When it comes to options, I always tend to go with the ones I need rather than the ones I want. When I ordered my car I decided to skip the NAV, glass roof and Recaros. I skipped the Nav because I considered it a distraction and the GPS updates were very expensive, I passed on the glass roof because I never use the sunroof on present vehicle and my butt didn't fit the Recaros.
If you can rationalize an option, get it, if not, forget about it and move on.
When it comes to options, I always tend to go with the ones I need rather than the ones I want. When I ordered my car I decided to skip the NAV, glass roof and Recaros. I skipped the Nav because I considered it a distraction and the GPS updates were very expensive, I passed on the glass roof because I never use the sunroof on present vehicle and my butt didn't fit the Recaros.
If you can rationalize an option, get it, if not, forget about it and move on.
8/19/12, 05:08 AM
#28
GT Member
Join Date: April 13, 2008
Location: Bear Gap, PA
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trying to be psuedo scientific, I checked KBB.com for a 2011 Mustang GT Premium trade in value. Guessing 25k miles and excellent condition, the two options I compared were the "premium sound" vs the "navigation system".
Basically the navigation system came out 300 more across all conditions. Is that exactly what you'll see? Who knows. I do know it is more than just a navigation screen. I specifically ordered it because of the dual climate control, gps navigation and the large screen of course.
Basically the navigation system came out 300 more across all conditions. Is that exactly what you'll see? Who knows. I do know it is more than just a navigation screen. I specifically ordered it because of the dual climate control, gps navigation and the large screen of course.
8/19/12, 09:46 AM
#29
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 13, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
completely 100% agree. Even the times that I have to use Google maps on my phone to 'augment' the navigation process, the HDD and touch screen climate are worth the entry cost alone.
8/19/12, 09:55 AM
#30
V6 Member
Join Date: July 17, 2012
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My problem is what it does to trade-in value. It costs so **** much, let's say I buy a GT this year for 38K with the Electronics Package or 36K without, and I'm not putting a lot down. What happens when I decide next year I want the next coolest Mustang and I go to trade it in. I'm not going to get much of a higher quote for having the Electronics Package than not having it, that's just reality. The value in this car comes from the V8, the power aspects etc. That's just the bottom line. I think the Electronics Package would put one more upside down than they would be. It's better to lower the final price of the car, and thus the amount financed if you think you remotely might trade it in. And Especially because I'm getting the Shaker Pro (sound and subs are infinitely more important to me than a large GPS screen and even that only costs $1000), I'm seriously considering dropping my Electronics Package from my order. Thoughts?
8/19/12, 09:59 AM
#31
V6 Member
Join Date: July 17, 2012
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are very concerned with the depreciation, why not just buy a 2010 or 2011? Saves you the big loss right off the bat. Then you can trade it in in a couple years and you do not have to worry about the big depreciation hit.
8/19/12, 10:14 AM
#32
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 13, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the sort of financial reasoning that has people wind up broke. People who are smart with money always consider things like resale, and some of those people have the resources to buy far more expensive cars than a Mustang (and some of them could buy and sell you and me).
At what point does it become what you need vs what you want? Kinda hard to say in a society built upon consuming AND producing, but that's another discussion.
8/19/12, 10:27 AM
#33
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Appreciate your point, but then again we are on a forum dedicated to a car really with fake back seats and no trunk and 26 MPG when gas prices are approaching $5.00/per.
At what point does it become what you need vs what you want? Kinda hard to say in a society built upon consuming AND producing, but that's another discussion.
At what point does it become what you need vs what you want? Kinda hard to say in a society built upon consuming AND producing, but that's another discussion.
8/19/12, 02:25 PM
#34
GT Member
Join Date: April 29, 2012
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fwiw I ordered the car with the nav, minus the shaker pro, had a very reputable sales guy on this forum say it is not worth the cash, and that the money saved could put a much nicer aftermarket amp and subs in the car. I don't think you could go wrong with the nav, the younger gen likes gadgets, and it would be something they would want.
8/19/12, 03:43 PM
#35
Legacy TMS Member
Is this electronic package the MyFordTouch? Is so, based on our 6 weeks in the new Escape, I wouldn't pay 5 cents more for it. Cool as hell when it works... but it has a mind of it's own. We never know whether it's going to work or not, and then it may or not do the same thing the way it did yesterday. Drives me batty... and I'm thankful everytime I get in the Mustang and all I have to wonder about is what media mode SYNC thinks I need to be in at startup (doesn't remember the last, and just seems to pick at random). Dealer has been waiting fully five business days for a response from Ford on what to do with the Escape MFT and cruise control, which doesn't work most of the time.
8/19/12, 04:05 PM
#36
GT Member
Join Date: July 31, 2012
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course it's a depreciating asset and those who point that out aren't shedding some light to us others. Nobody thinks they are going to appreciate in value. What we are saying is that when you pick worthless options (or ones that are more worthless than others, or more dramatically overpriced like this one), then you stand a higher chance of not only not getting anything back for the investment (nobody expects that), but not even being able to trade it in 2 years because you owe more than what it's worth. Now an option like THIS causes something like THAT. Especially on a 72 month loan. It's the difference between being able to walk away selling what you owe, or having to pay cash to even be able to trade.
Like I said, when you have an overpriced option like this one, 7% of the base MSRP of the car for something that's worth almost nothing in trade, then when it's time to trade it in, you run the risk of it not being worth any more than the one that doesn't have it and cost 2K less. Ford isn't stupid, they know they can make money off of the relative ignorance of typical Mustang buyers. Now if they charge $2000 for a performance option, you can be **** sure they'd give you $2000 worth of performance, and all of us would expect a REALLY solid performance boost for us to even consider a 2K performance option like the one I describe. This is a tech thing so it's a completely different ballgame. They assume most people with this niche know less about smartphones and technology and that they can sell a whiz bang large LCD screen with a GPS and a TINY hard drive with component costs of around maybe $500 for $2000. And they can, to some people. $2000 is more than the Brembo brake option, or the Recaro leather seats for god sakes. Are you telling me a $99 GPS chip, a 8" LCD screen and a cheap hard drive are worth 4 times the cost of an iPad? They are selling to the ignorant for this option. I have no problem with the option, I like it. I'm making the point that it's overpriced and that it does affect resale.
Like I said, when you have an overpriced option like this one, 7% of the base MSRP of the car for something that's worth almost nothing in trade, then when it's time to trade it in, you run the risk of it not being worth any more than the one that doesn't have it and cost 2K less. Ford isn't stupid, they know they can make money off of the relative ignorance of typical Mustang buyers. Now if they charge $2000 for a performance option, you can be **** sure they'd give you $2000 worth of performance, and all of us would expect a REALLY solid performance boost for us to even consider a 2K performance option like the one I describe. This is a tech thing so it's a completely different ballgame. They assume most people with this niche know less about smartphones and technology and that they can sell a whiz bang large LCD screen with a GPS and a TINY hard drive with component costs of around maybe $500 for $2000. And they can, to some people. $2000 is more than the Brembo brake option, or the Recaro leather seats for god sakes. Are you telling me a $99 GPS chip, a 8" LCD screen and a cheap hard drive are worth 4 times the cost of an iPad? They are selling to the ignorant for this option. I have no problem with the option, I like it. I'm making the point that it's overpriced and that it does affect resale.
You neatly avoided my main, underlined point: you pay to use, not pay to trade it for $xxx value. But, as others have already pointed out, if that's your critical complaint, than you may want to rethink the whole trade in value thing. You simply declare such options "worthless". You simply cannot win with that argument - value is in the opinion of the purchaser - what's "worthless" to you has much more value to someone else, for various reasons.
You attempt to justify that by the alleged trade in value - that's simply another metric, one that clearly is much more important to you than someone else.
"Overpriced"? Yeah, maybe. Put as you say, by the measure of the parts involved only ("$99 GPS chip, 8" LCD screen and a cheap hard drive . . ."). So go ahead, you're free to make the exact electronics package all on your own for few hundred bucks in parts. But, YOU'RE not telling us anything WE don't already know - electronics always has a higher markup then other hardware, in a car or otherwise.
Brembo brakes, Recaro seats . . . appear in other vehicles, and not just Ford's. The Ford electronics package doesn't get sold as widespread - so of course the relative cost compared to the parts is higher. More R&D per unit sold needs to be done, and that R&D lasts a lot less time over the life of the option. We'll just have to get over it.
They're not "selling to the ignorant", they're selling to the willing. Everyone makes their own choice; generalizing them collectively as "ignorant" because the don't have the same choices as you is just . . . .
I wasn't trying to be Captain Obvious by pointing out depreciation - but to resurface it again as a fact we all have to live with - I was basically agreeing with you, and that different components depreciate differently - but when combined in a car, the entire car's value depreciates together.
So yeah, I'd feel comfortable believing that just about everyone here knows these options aren't going to preserve trade in value down the road, we all pretty much agree that some options are priced comparatively higher than others when considering the actual manufacturing costs (calculating R&D is a lot tougher for us to do from our viewpoint), and we buy what we decide we want. There little point in pointing out how wrong people are in what they decide about it.
8/19/12, 09:13 PM
#38
GT Member
Join Date: April 18, 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's no way in hell you're gonna put together an in car infotainment system with DVD playback, voice activated nav, sat radio with traffic, HD radio, bluetooth, Apps, HVAC integration, etc for a couple hundred bucks. Any aftermarket nav with these capabilities minus the HVAC is at least $1000 with another $400 in bezels and adapters you have to buy to install it. Let's not even mention how the dual zone climate keeps the wife from nagging about it being too cold. LOL The aftermarket ones don't look nearly as nice stuck at the bottom below the shifter, either. Yes, I'm sure there's a big markup, but it's not that expensive when you're talking 40k cars in the first place.
I can tell you I passed up hundreds of cars before I finally found mine with the electronics package, and I'm a total tech geek. I have every other tech device including Android pads, Galaxy SIII, at least 7 computers including an i7 gaming laptop I have nearly 3 grand in, etc. Even with all these things that will do everything the nav does better than it does it, I prefer the seamless integration and looks of the factory nav. It really classes up the car in an intangible way. That's worth the money to me even if I don't get any of it back when I sell the car.
I can tell you I passed up hundreds of cars before I finally found mine with the electronics package, and I'm a total tech geek. I have every other tech device including Android pads, Galaxy SIII, at least 7 computers including an i7 gaming laptop I have nearly 3 grand in, etc. Even with all these things that will do everything the nav does better than it does it, I prefer the seamless integration and looks of the factory nav. It really classes up the car in an intangible way. That's worth the money to me even if I don't get any of it back when I sell the car.
8/19/12, 10:15 PM
#39
GT Member
Join Date: December 3, 2011
Location: Orlando
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My EP is awesome, so much more than I ever expected. If you think it's just a GPS then you don't fully understand what this package offers. Maybe it's not for you, but I love it and it has made my Mustang feel like a James Bond car. It is the single feature i most show off when showing my car to friends. It has a high sizzle factor. If all you want is a big engine on a chassis, then don't get the EP. But if you want a truly state-of-the-art vehicle it is a must have. It transforms Mustang from just another muscle car to a high tech machine. Ford is leading the world in technology in cars and the EP is the ultimate expression. It may not be for everybody, and it may not be for you, but it has added so much to my driving experience, beyond my expectations. Even something as simple as seeing my wife and children's pictures io the screeen while I'm driving is worth the price of the package. It's like having an iPad on the dash.
8/20/12, 02:58 AM
#40
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: March 3, 2004
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would get the EP with Nav before I would get the Shaker 1000 not to mention the Shaker 1000 sounds like crap. Its easier to add nice aftermarket subs and amps for bass than to add an aftermarket Nav unit and have it look and fit like factory. For everything the Ford Nav unit does and includes its not that bad. And aftermarket units will not have all the Sync functions either. Have you priced a high end aftermarket Nav unit that will perform all the functions the EP will? If your only concern is the trade in value, then don't get any options. Just get a base GT and call it a day. There isnt much difference in trade value.