Lexus Leases Are A Huge Rip-Off
09-14-07, 08:37 PM
#31
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You got your answer and you don't want it. Much like the same anti lexus BS in this thread you make a thread saying you own a lexus so it must be all good that you prod and poke lexus from every angle you can to stir the pot.
When someone gives you a real answer which is the exact opposite of the one you are looking for, you are dissatisfied and come back with more bashing.
It's a tired old game........ You've had my 5 minutes of attention. If anyone else is bored enough to fall in and play the game, more power to them. I'll be quite surprised anyone falls into your agenda too much further.
When someone gives you a real answer which is the exact opposite of the one you are looking for, you are dissatisfied and come back with more bashing.
It's a tired old game........ You've had my 5 minutes of attention. If anyone else is bored enough to fall in and play the game, more power to them. I'll be quite surprised anyone falls into your agenda too much further.
Funny thing is, my points are very clear and (in spite of your protestations to the contrary) remain unanswered. All that was offered was jibberish and jargon.
I still contend that dollar for dollar of car value, Lexus leases are a huge rip-off.
Care to dispute that or do you just want to dismiss the issue out of hand?
Last edited by PsychDoc; 09-14-07 at 08:42 PM.
09-14-07, 11:58 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The major benefit of their plan that I could think of is increasing sales volume by making the BMW affordable to middle class people or people who could not afford the sticker price.
I don't see how the program could help BMW expand and be profitable in the long run. Especially in a very competitive luxury car market.
Last edited by MarkW2005; 09-15-07 at 12:00 AM. Reason: more ideas
09-15-07, 05:05 AM
#34
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Utterly illogical response!
You point is that leasing is a sound business decision because you write it off on your taxes and that is certainly true.
As to whether that particular lease of that particular vehicle is giving you as much "bang for your buck" is quite another question....and the one that I'm asking.
Try and follow along.
Last edited by PsychDoc; 09-15-07 at 05:32 AM.
09-15-07, 05:10 AM
#35
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand. If BMW subsidizes these leases, wouldn't that cut into their profit margin? In other words, for each car they sell, they might lose money? BMW's business decision doesn't make sense.
The major benefit of their plan that I could think of is increasing sales volume by making the BMW affordable to middle class people or people who could not afford the sticker price.
I don't see how the program could help BMW expand and be profitable in the long run. Especially in a very competitive luxury car market.
The major benefit of their plan that I could think of is increasing sales volume by making the BMW affordable to middle class people or people who could not afford the sticker price.
I don't see how the program could help BMW expand and be profitable in the long run. Especially in a very competitive luxury car market.
Which of course brings us back to the original premise. Is Lexus ripping off the leasing public (after all, isn't that the opposite of "making less")?
I contend that they are and that the main reason they get away with it is that the vast majority of the leasing public is simply unaware that they could be getting much better deals and more 'car for their money' by leasing a BMW or M-B.
But no one wants to seem to acknowledge that fact.
09-15-07, 06:08 AM
#36
Lead Lap
My suspicion is that BMW and M-B don't make as much per vehicle as Lexus on their leases. As I said earlier, it's simply preposterous to believe that they actually lose money on their leases.
Which of course brings us back to the original premise. Is Lexus ripping off the leasing public (after all, isn't that the opposite of "making less")?
I contend that they are and that the main reason they get away with it is that the vast majority of the leasing public is simply unaware that they could be getting much better deals and more 'car for their money' by leasing a BMW or M-B.
But no one wants to seem to acknowledge that fact.
Which of course brings us back to the original premise. Is Lexus ripping off the leasing public (after all, isn't that the opposite of "making less")?
I contend that they are and that the main reason they get away with it is that the vast majority of the leasing public is simply unaware that they could be getting much better deals and more 'car for their money' by leasing a BMW or M-B.
But no one wants to seem to acknowledge that fact.
I was an accounting major and my wife (licensed CPA) does an excellent job of keeping me in line. We're nearly 60 years old and have paid cash for new and used cars most of our lives.
I guess you can squabble about which leases are best all you want. But for most people, leasing a car amounts to a personal financial trainwreck. Gosh, guys, go to the library and check out some books on handling personal finances - this is not brain surgury.
Nothing is as sobering as writing a personal check for many tens of thousands of dollars when acquiring a car. Once you are able to do this, you will be in control of your financial present and future. All it takes to get there is patience and getting out of the "gotta have it now" mentality.
Never pay anyone for the use of their money. Always make others pay you to use your money.
09-15-07, 06:24 AM
#37
Lexus Champion
Here's the IS350's current rates on a 24 month lease:
Residual 58% of MSRP – .00175 Base Rate (15k miles a year)
So the money factor is the same, and the residual value is, assuming a 2% addition for a drop to 12k miles) is 13% worse. On a 24 month lease that means I'm paying 5200 dollars more to lease the IS350 than I would to lease the 335i. Or in other words, an additional $216 dollars a month.
So please, show me your 'factors of leasing mechanics'... the list of 'variables' that you posted to see if there's any way for you to get a comparably equipped and/or price IS350 to me for a comparable lease rate.
Somehow I don't think any of those factors will overcome that disadvantage. In fact some of them (like nav) will hurt the IS350 since Lexus deducts 2% residual, while BMW doesn't change the residual.
In fact, I'll take it a step further. If you can find a way to get me a new 45k dollar IS350 for 550/month, 12k miles a year, 24 months, zero down, including all taxes - and get it to me here in the Memphis area, I'll lease it instead of the 335i. You have my word. And if the only IS350 you can find is, say, 40k (sticker), then I'd be fine with the appropriate relative reduction lease payment.
09-15-07, 07:32 AM
#38
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course Lexus is not "ripping of the leasing public". It is called "supply and damand" or a "free market economy".
I was an accounting major and my wife (licensed CPA) does an excellent job of keeping me in line. We're nearly 60 years old and have paid cash for new and used cars most of our lives.
I guess you can squabble about which leases are best all you want. But for most people, leasing a car amounts to a personal financial trainwreck. Gosh, guys, go to the library and check out some books on handling personal finances - this is not brain surgury.
Nothing is as sobering as writing a personal check for many tens of thousands of dollars when acquiring a car. Once you are able to do this, you will be in control of your financial present and future. All it takes to get there is patience and getting out of the "gotta have it now" mentality.
Never pay anyone for the use of their money. Always make others pay you to use your money.
I was an accounting major and my wife (licensed CPA) does an excellent job of keeping me in line. We're nearly 60 years old and have paid cash for new and used cars most of our lives.
I guess you can squabble about which leases are best all you want. But for most people, leasing a car amounts to a personal financial trainwreck. Gosh, guys, go to the library and check out some books on handling personal finances - this is not brain surgury.
Nothing is as sobering as writing a personal check for many tens of thousands of dollars when acquiring a car. Once you are able to do this, you will be in control of your financial present and future. All it takes to get there is patience and getting out of the "gotta have it now" mentality.
Never pay anyone for the use of their money. Always make others pay you to use your money.
Leases make a great deal of sense if you:
(1) Want to deduct the use of the car for business and
(2) Want be never be out of warranty and have a relatively new car in you garage at all times.
The ultimate cost of ownership is often predicated on the assumption that you can sell your car at top price when you do finally get rid of it.
Fact is, most people who finally sell their owned car to buy or lease a new one trade it in to the dealership of where they're buying or leasing their new car, thus negating much of the presumed value of owning in the first place. Many (including myself), don't want the hastle of selling privately. Between the costs of advertising, to the vagaries of dealing with a stranger, etc, we trade cars in and take a $2-3k "loss" only partly made up for in the fact that the trade in price is deducted from the cost of the new car, resulting in a partial offset of loss from the tax saving.
That plus the ability to keep $45k 'in your pocket' earning interest, etc. is far from a bad thing. Assuming an 8% rate of return, $45k will have earned you $11,687 by the end of a three year lease. That would be $11,687 you would not have had if you had bought.
Last edited by PsychDoc; 09-15-07 at 07:54 AM.
09-15-07, 07:39 AM
#39
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK well here's the deal. I got quoted 550/month including taxes and no down payment on a 2007 335i with nav, premium package, sport package, and more - base sticker price was 46k dollars. I'm paying 500 over invoice. Residual is 73% on 12k miles a year for 2 years, and money factor is .000175.
Here's the IS350's current rates on a 24 month lease:
Residual 58% of MSRP – .00175 Base Rate (15k miles a year)
So the money factor is the same, and the residual value is, assuming a 2% addition for a drop to 12k miles) is 13% worse. On a 24 month lease that means I'm paying 5200 dollars more to lease the IS350 than I would to lease the 335i. Or in other words, an additional $216 dollars a month.
So please, show me your 'factors of leasing mechanics'... the list of 'variables' that you posted to see if there's any way for you to get a comparably equipped and/or price IS350 to me for a comparable lease rate.
Somehow I don't think any of those factors will overcome that disadvantage. In fact some of them (like nav) will hurt the IS350 since Lexus deducts 2% residual, while BMW doesn't change the residual.
In fact, I'll take it a step further. If you can find a way to get me a new 45k dollar IS350 for 550/month, 12k miles a year, 24 months, zero down, including all taxes - and get it to me here in the Memphis area, I'll lease it instead of the 335i. You have my word. And if the only IS350 you can find is, say, 40k (sticker), then I'd be fine with the appropriate relative reduction lease payment.
Here's the IS350's current rates on a 24 month lease:
Residual 58% of MSRP – .00175 Base Rate (15k miles a year)
So the money factor is the same, and the residual value is, assuming a 2% addition for a drop to 12k miles) is 13% worse. On a 24 month lease that means I'm paying 5200 dollars more to lease the IS350 than I would to lease the 335i. Or in other words, an additional $216 dollars a month.
So please, show me your 'factors of leasing mechanics'... the list of 'variables' that you posted to see if there's any way for you to get a comparably equipped and/or price IS350 to me for a comparable lease rate.
Somehow I don't think any of those factors will overcome that disadvantage. In fact some of them (like nav) will hurt the IS350 since Lexus deducts 2% residual, while BMW doesn't change the residual.
In fact, I'll take it a step further. If you can find a way to get me a new 45k dollar IS350 for 550/month, 12k miles a year, 24 months, zero down, including all taxes - and get it to me here in the Memphis area, I'll lease it instead of the 335i. You have my word. And if the only IS350 you can find is, say, 40k (sticker), then I'd be fine with the appropriate relative reduction lease payment.
BMW 335i vs. Lexus IS350.
Pay more for a car with a lower sticker price and less prestige.
Nah, that's not ripping off the leasing public.
Not at all.
It's just "the relentless pursuit of excellence."
The only "excellent" thing I see here is Lexus' corporate bank account.
09-15-07, 07:49 AM
#40
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
I think a part of this is different business model philosophies and 'comfort' between Lexus and BMW/MB.
Lexus likes to sell vehicles. They sell well because there's an argument to be made that they're better 'value' than a comparable BMW/MB. Frankly they don't need to lease many to do just fine. I've always considered Lexus as the company that goes after the 'affluent sensible' buyer. Selling cars means Lexus gets all the money now, the accounting is easier, and it's safer.
BMW/MB both STRONGLY sell an image (successfully) and go after the "gotta have it" buyer. Many here have talked about 'subsidizing' leases, but I don't see it that way at all - I look it at as a longer term approach. Attractive lease programs get that "gotta have it" buyer into the vehicle NOW (don't lose them to competition) and then also know you can make great money on the resale of the car when it comes off lease.
I recently spoke to a guy who just got out of selling cars. He basically complained that there no money it in any longer, but selling used cars he said was still great. Maybe BMW/MB see this too.
Another thing - cars continue to get MUCH more sophisticated and complicated. The R&D and certification costs are sky high. I wouldn't be surprised to see MORE leasing in the marketplace in the long run as new car purchases become out of the question for more people (a purchase requiring financing ALL the car's cost up front, vs. a lease which is only financing for the duration of the lease).
It would be interesting to see a poll on CL of who bought a Lexus NEW, vs. used. I'd bet 75% bought them used. But I digress...
So overall I just think BMW/MB are more comfortable with a lease model than Lexus and promote accordingly. They obviously both have successful business models. BMW is laughing all the way to the bank about the 'subsidised' leases.
Lexus likes to sell vehicles. They sell well because there's an argument to be made that they're better 'value' than a comparable BMW/MB. Frankly they don't need to lease many to do just fine. I've always considered Lexus as the company that goes after the 'affluent sensible' buyer. Selling cars means Lexus gets all the money now, the accounting is easier, and it's safer.
BMW/MB both STRONGLY sell an image (successfully) and go after the "gotta have it" buyer. Many here have talked about 'subsidizing' leases, but I don't see it that way at all - I look it at as a longer term approach. Attractive lease programs get that "gotta have it" buyer into the vehicle NOW (don't lose them to competition) and then also know you can make great money on the resale of the car when it comes off lease.
I recently spoke to a guy who just got out of selling cars. He basically complained that there no money it in any longer, but selling used cars he said was still great. Maybe BMW/MB see this too.
Another thing - cars continue to get MUCH more sophisticated and complicated. The R&D and certification costs are sky high. I wouldn't be surprised to see MORE leasing in the marketplace in the long run as new car purchases become out of the question for more people (a purchase requiring financing ALL the car's cost up front, vs. a lease which is only financing for the duration of the lease).
It would be interesting to see a poll on CL of who bought a Lexus NEW, vs. used. I'd bet 75% bought them used. But I digress...
So overall I just think BMW/MB are more comfortable with a lease model than Lexus and promote accordingly. They obviously both have successful business models. BMW is laughing all the way to the bank about the 'subsidised' leases.
09-15-07, 07:53 AM
#41
Super Moderator
Buy GM if you don't want rip-off, they LOSE money on the cars they sold 
I would look at the annual financial reports of all car manufacturers, pick the biggest losers & buy/lease cars from them
I would look at the annual financial reports of all car manufacturers, pick the biggest losers & buy/lease cars from them
09-15-07, 08:04 AM
#42
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that still doesn't explain the attractive lease prices from BMW and M-B relative to Lexus.
They are hardly "losing money" and have managed to maintain their sterling prestige and cache.
It still comes down to this.
Lexus is an excellent selection on a purchase but a horrible choice on a lease.
Both the German marques offer far more 'car' (whether one measures this by prestige or by MSRP of what you're getting for a given lease price point) than Lexus.
Frankly, I think Lexus is really missing the mark re: this business model decision. More and more people are leasing and for very good reason(s).
Perhaps the most compelling reason is that with the increasing complexity (and associated costs) of today's cars, it's essentially finacially suicidal to own a modern car out of warranty. And, as we all know, any presumed marginal benefits of owning vs. renting are predicated on owning the car long past when warranties expire.
I hope Lexus follows these boards and comes to realize that people are growing less and less tolerant of their exhorbitant lease prices and recognize that fair and attractive leases are the wave of the future.
I think the days of new car ownership beyond 3-4 years are numbered. And of course, everyone agrees that if you own a car for less than 5 years you'd have been much better off leasing.
Both BMW and M-B seem to have noted this.
Last edited by PsychDoc; 09-15-07 at 08:11 AM.
09-15-07, 08:42 AM
#43
Lead Lap
Au contraire, mon ami.
Leases make a great deal of sense if you:
(1) Want to deduct the use of the car for business and
(2) Want be never be out of warranty and have a relatively new car in you garage at all times.
The ultimate cost of ownership is often predicated on the assumption that you can sell your car at top price when you do finally get rid of it.
Fact is, most people who finally sell their owned car to buy or lease a new one trade it in to the dealership of where they're buying or leasing their new car, thus negating much of the presumed value of owning in the first place. Many (including myself), don't want the hastle of selling privately. Between the costs of advertising, to the vagaries of dealing with a stranger, etc, we trade cars in and take a $2-3k "loss" only partly made up for in the fact that the trade in price is deducted from the cost of the new car, resulting in a partial offset of loss from the tax saving.
That plus the ability to keep $45k 'in your pocket' earning interest, etc. is far from a bad thing. Assuming an 8% rate of return, $45k will have earned you $11,687 by the end of a three year lease. That would be $11,687 you would not have had if you had bought.
Leases make a great deal of sense if you:
(1) Want to deduct the use of the car for business and
(2) Want be never be out of warranty and have a relatively new car in you garage at all times.
The ultimate cost of ownership is often predicated on the assumption that you can sell your car at top price when you do finally get rid of it.
Fact is, most people who finally sell their owned car to buy or lease a new one trade it in to the dealership of where they're buying or leasing their new car, thus negating much of the presumed value of owning in the first place. Many (including myself), don't want the hastle of selling privately. Between the costs of advertising, to the vagaries of dealing with a stranger, etc, we trade cars in and take a $2-3k "loss" only partly made up for in the fact that the trade in price is deducted from the cost of the new car, resulting in a partial offset of loss from the tax saving.
That plus the ability to keep $45k 'in your pocket' earning interest, etc. is far from a bad thing. Assuming an 8% rate of return, $45k will have earned you $11,687 by the end of a three year lease. That would be $11,687 you would not have had if you had bought.
The vast majority of people who lease cars cannot deduct them as a business expense. And for businesses that are not "cash poor", leasing does not make accounting sense either. By the way, my opportunity cost is substantially higher than 8%.
I always sell our cars myself when I am done with them -- usually to friends or relatives. It is easy and quick to do since I maintain cars meticulously and keep them in like-new condition. I had lots of people clammering to buy the last Lexus LS I sold including a full price offer within three minutes of putting a sign in the car's window - the guy was painting my neighbor's house.
If you have to "have a relatively new car in you garage at all times", then, well, that is a psychological need for which you might need a PsychDoc.
Although it is perhaps overly filled with statistics, a good "starter book" on handling personal finances is "The Millionaire Next Door" by Stanley and Danko. Their book discusses the harm that churning through cars does to a person's ability to accumulate wealth.
The newspaper financial columist and author Humberto Cruz has discussed car leasing several times in his columns. Wonderful author and an easy read too. You can google his name and read his columns on line.
09-15-07, 08:45 AM
#44
Super Moderator
I think a part of this is different business model philosophies and 'comfort' between Lexus and BMW/MB.
Lexus likes to sell vehicles. They sell well because there's an argument to be made that they're better 'value' than a comparable BMW/MB. Frankly they don't need to lease many to do just fine. I've always considered Lexus as the company that goes after the 'affluent sensible' buyer. Selling cars means Lexus gets all the money now, the accounting is easier, and it's safer.
BMW/MB both STRONGLY sell an image (successfully) and go after the "gotta have it" buyer. Many here have talked about 'subsidizing' leases, but I don't see it that way at all - I look it at as a longer term approach. Attractive lease programs get that "gotta have it" buyer into the vehicle NOW (don't lose them to competition) and then also know you can make great money on the resale of the car when it comes off lease.
I recently spoke to a guy who just got out of selling cars. He basically complained that there no money it in any longer, but selling used cars he said was still great. Maybe BMW/MB see this too.
Another thing - cars continue to get MUCH more sophisticated and complicated. The R&D and certification costs are sky high. I wouldn't be surprised to see MORE leasing in the marketplace in the long run as new car purchases become out of the question for more people (a purchase requiring financing ALL the car's cost up front, vs. a lease which is only financing for the duration of the lease).
It would be interesting to see a poll on CL of who bought a Lexus NEW, vs. used. I'd bet 75% bought them used. But I digress...
Lexus likes to sell vehicles. They sell well because there's an argument to be made that they're better 'value' than a comparable BMW/MB. Frankly they don't need to lease many to do just fine. I've always considered Lexus as the company that goes after the 'affluent sensible' buyer. Selling cars means Lexus gets all the money now, the accounting is easier, and it's safer.
BMW/MB both STRONGLY sell an image (successfully) and go after the "gotta have it" buyer. Many here have talked about 'subsidizing' leases, but I don't see it that way at all - I look it at as a longer term approach. Attractive lease programs get that "gotta have it" buyer into the vehicle NOW (don't lose them to competition) and then also know you can make great money on the resale of the car when it comes off lease.
I recently spoke to a guy who just got out of selling cars. He basically complained that there no money it in any longer, but selling used cars he said was still great. Maybe BMW/MB see this too.
Another thing - cars continue to get MUCH more sophisticated and complicated. The R&D and certification costs are sky high. I wouldn't be surprised to see MORE leasing in the marketplace in the long run as new car purchases become out of the question for more people (a purchase requiring financing ALL the car's cost up front, vs. a lease which is only financing for the duration of the lease).
It would be interesting to see a poll on CL of who bought a Lexus NEW, vs. used. I'd bet 75% bought them used. But I digress...
Most of those who do are probably not the "typical" Lexus buyers anyway, especially the older ones who can afford to buy new ones, they are much less likely to use this site I think. I think Lexus themselves have their own research & probably have a better understanding of exactly what they're doing than you & I.
I think there is always the risk of leasing too many cars with bloated residuals & low interests(money factor). Yes you get many new cars out the door that way, but you also get a big supply(could possibly be too many?) of used ones coming back that may or may not be worth as much as the official "residual" they used, & that will affect the margins for both manufacturer & dealers. Of course that doesn't mean they can't make money this way, just much riskier. They are going for volume.
Last edited by Gojirra99; 09-15-07 at 08:52 AM.
09-15-07, 09:01 AM
#45
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh please, give me a break!
You think Lexus can hold a candle to BMW or M-B for cache or prestige?
Not a prayer.
Both still blow away Lexus in those departments, rightly or wrongly so let's not moralize over "what it means to be a luxury car maker."
Lexus is simply ripping off the public on its leases.
Pure and simple.
And for those of us who have leased our Lexus', I can tell you, it pisses us off.
You think Lexus can hold a candle to BMW or M-B for cache or prestige?
Not a prayer.
Both still blow away Lexus in those departments, rightly or wrongly so let's not moralize over "what it means to be a luxury car maker."
Lexus is simply ripping off the public on its leases.
Pure and simple.
And for those of us who have leased our Lexus', I can tell you, it pisses us off.
It has NOTHING to do with whether or not Lexus matches the image/prestige of Benz or BMW.
BMW and Benz have very high reps, and they're also very arrogant. They believe that nothing will change their reps. Benz had this arrogance for the last decade and when their quality took a nosedive only then did they start to notice it was affecting their reputation.
It is your opinion that Lexus is ripping off people with their leases. Pure and simple. What I can tell you is you're only one of a few people complaining about Lexus leases. Most Lexus buyers and owners don't seem to have a problem with Lexus leases.
Fact is, if Lexus offered attractive leases, they would be selling even MORE cars which would mean even LESS exclusivity.
So you're one of those people who wouldn't see anything wrong with going to some specialty shop and paying $450 for a pair of jeans and a shirt that are no better at all than ones that cost $100, simply because it costs more and you like the 'prestige' that comes with that. In other words you care more about impressing people with spending lots of money than you care about actually getting VALUE for your money?
Luxury to me is not about 'impressing' the Joneses next door by showing them that money is meaningless to you - because really the people who spend money like that are usually the ones who, in reality, are the poorest and in debt than the ones who are financially wise.
Luxury is about nice, well made, great to drive cars - and I want that, naturally, at the most competitive price I can find. I make good money, but that doesn't mean I want to give it away to impress people.
By the way the 1-series BMW still starts at a higher price than the IS250.
Luxury to me is not about 'impressing' the Joneses next door by showing them that money is meaningless to you - because really the people who spend money like that are usually the ones who, in reality, are the poorest and in debt than the ones who are financially wise.
Luxury is about nice, well made, great to drive cars - and I want that, naturally, at the most competitive price I can find. I make good money, but that doesn't mean I want to give it away to impress people.
By the way the 1-series BMW still starts at a higher price than the IS250.
The thing is, when I see a pair of $450 jeans, and I know those jeans are of a prestigious, expensive brand does NOT mean I will buy them but I DO understand WHY the jeans are priced the way they are. Besides, your analogy does not fit in this case. A $450 pair of jeans is like a Rolls Royce or Bugatti.
A more appropriate analogy would be seeing a pair of $200 jeans that you know are from a reputable brand, and are of very high quality. You then see a pair of $300 jeans from a more prestigious brand but made of a lesser quality, and you also happen to see that they are 50% off. So which pair do you buy? That is analogous to Lexus lease rates vs the lease rates of German brands.
You must also understand you're getting superior service from Lexus compared to BMW or Benz.
It's quite funny to believe that people who buy prestige luxury products are the poorest and the most in debt? Then how can they even AFFORD a prestige luxury item in the first place? Last time I checked, the poorest and most debt-ridden people in America are usually those that buy domestic vehicles from automakers like GM who offer leases and financing to anyone with a pulse. The German brands, with their sometimes crazy lease rates in fact attract MORE poor and/or debt-ridden people than Lexus does. A lot of people who can't actually afford a BMW or Benz lease them. Offering zero money down for instance is just plain silly for a luxury automaker to be offering that.
Again, that is merely your opinion of luxury. Everyone has an opinion, but it doesn't mean it's the right one. Toyota has their own opinion of what a luxury maker should be, and their opinion is different from yours. Part of luxury (in Toyota's opinion) includes prestige and exclusivity. Being value-priced contradicts the whole notion of exclusivity. Lexus still believes in selling high value vehicles, BUT they want the Lexus brand as a whole to hold exclusivity.
BTW, final 1-Series pricing has not been announced, by it will surely be under 30K (meaning cheaper than IS250). Besides, have you seen the 1 Series interior? That's a mockery of what a luxury car should be. Also FYI, the A3 starts at 26K.
Lexus definitely wants to increase worldwide sales, but NOT by offering incentives or crazy lease rates but by offering superior and competitive product and by building up their reputation.
It still comes down to this basic question. Why are Lexus leases, dollar for dollar of car value such poor deals when compared with their higher prestige German counterparts???
Please don't tell me M-B and BMW are actually losing money on each lease, because I think we all know that's preposterous. They lease most of their cars and that would mean that their entire USA operations are running in the red which is certainly NOT the case.
Why are Lexus leases such a rip-off ('cause that's exactly what they are when viewed against their competition)?
Please don't tell me M-B and BMW are actually losing money on each lease, because I think we all know that's preposterous. They lease most of their cars and that would mean that their entire USA operations are running in the red which is certainly NOT the case.
Why are Lexus leases such a rip-off ('cause that's exactly what they are when viewed against their competition)?
You got your answer and you don't want it. Much like the same anti lexus BS in this thread you make a thread saying you own a lexus so it must be all good that you prod and poke lexus from every angle you can to stir the pot.
When someone gives you a real answer which is the exact opposite of the one you are looking for, you are dissatisfied and come back with more bashing.
When someone gives you a real answer which is the exact opposite of the one you are looking for, you are dissatisfied and come back with more bashing.
PsychDoc, you HAVE gotten your answer as to why Lexus lease rates are NOT a rip off, and also why they're "poor" compared to the competition which is because the German brands offer crazy lease rates.
As O.L.T. has stated, you don't want to accept this answer and you seem determined to prove to everyone here that Lexus lease rates are a "rip off" no matter what arguments are given against that idea. If you have already made up your mind and refuse to listen to any responses or arguments then why even post this topic in the first place?
If another luxury maker offered LOWER lease rates than the German brands then would you all of a sudden call the German brands a "rip off" too with lease rates? Lexus leases are NOT a rip-off because the German brand lease rates are MUCH lower than what the market dictates and because Lexus lease rates are IN LINE with the what lease rates SHOULD be in the luxury market. Are you going to call Acura lease rates a "rip off" too just because they're not as attractive as the German brand lease rates?
Plus, you live in America and prices/lease rates there are MUCH better than here in Canada where I live. The Canadian and American dollars are almost in-line with each other in terms of currency rates, yet the prices and lease rates up here in Canada are MUCH more expensive than down there in the States. So don't complain and tell me that Lexus lease rates are a rip-off. You get what you pay for, and luxury cars are NOT for everyone.
What you're saying is just like saying Honda/Toyota lease rates are a rip off just because GM, Ford, or Chrysler lease rates are so low that they practically give the cars away.
I don't understand. If BMW subsidizes these leases, wouldn't that cut into their profit margin? In other words, for each car they sell, they might lose money? BMW's business decision doesn't make sense.
The major benefit of their plan that I could think of is increasing sales volume by making the BMW affordable to middle class people or people who could not afford the sticker price.
I don't see how the program could help BMW expand and be profitable in the long run. Especially in a very competitive luxury car market.
The major benefit of their plan that I could think of is increasing sales volume by making the BMW affordable to middle class people or people who could not afford the sticker price.
I don't see how the program could help BMW expand and be profitable in the long run. Especially in a very competitive luxury car market.
.BMW profit margins are dropping, and as mentioned already BMW Germany is very concerned about the lease rates that BMW USA is offering.
No, they're not losing money but their profit margins are dropping and their prestige WILL be affected soon enough.
NOBODY is forcing you to buy or lease Lexus. If you hate it that much, then quite simply don't buy/lease Lexus and go to a German brand. There are plenty of other customers who have no problem with Lexus leases and know that they will be getting a better built car and superior service than a German brand.
Last edited by TRDFantasy; 09-15-07 at 09:07 AM.