Originally Posted by sherman9800
To give another perspective. Since he lives his day to day rather frugally, even though price doesn't matter in this instance. Would he perhaps have buyers remorse when spending possibly $70,000 more on a 458 compared to a Turbo S which is actually faster, even if the older styling.
One thing I've learned with high end stereos is that everyone has different tastes. He has to test them out thoroughly himself in order to know which he truly wants. Personally if I had the money, I would pick the 911 before the 458 if I lived modestly.
liquid net worth of this class of people who who can afford >$200,000 supercars is $25M (which I'll assume applies to the person in question if we can take the OP's claims about his frugality at face value). There's really no such thing as "buyer's remorse" at this level.
Cars aren't seen as investments. Whether or not a car will hold its value after X years and Y miles isn't of chief concern (this is only of concern insomuch as the individual wishes to satiate his own need for extreme and often unwarranted frugality despite being an ultra high net worth individual).
P.S. There's a non-linear relationship between price and liquid net worth. $200k represents ~1% of $25M. However, it isn't
the case that an upper middle class person with a liquid net worth of $2M can only afford 1%($2M) = $20,000 on a car.
$2M (not including primary residence) is usually the cutoff to be able to afford a $100,000 car, outright, although age and income play into this as well, obviously.
By the way these numbers are all from forbes (I believe they specifically said that $2M and $350k/year pre-tax non-investment income is sufficient to afford a $100k car, especially if you're younger), although I don't have the exact article on hand.
The $25M median net worth for owners of > $200,000 exotic supercars is independent of non-investment income.