Sittin' on the lot

chicagobimmerboy · 10-09-2007, 12:55 PM

I used to work the service department of a local BMW dealer, I saw several M6's and M5's get stocked in and nearly a year later were still sitting on the lot. Then their is the depreciation on those cars, I've seen them as low as 60K. What is the problem ? why is it that those cars a so hard to get rid of and why do they depreciate so much? does M-B AMG and Audi have the same issues? Lastly do you think the new M3 will suffer in the same way?

JEllis · 10-09-2007, 01:35 PM

Its because BMW is making cars, including M's, in increasing numbers. The same is true for Porsche's. Porsche made more 996's than other generation. Thus you have 996TT's that are cheaper than 993TT or even 993 C2S's. Its a simple supply and demand scenerio.

the_stranger · 10-09-2007, 01:36 PM

According to me, the reason for those M5s and M6s sitting in the lots forever is that, the people who are willing to pay about 100k for a car would prefer to build it strictly according to their taste. so, rather than buying it off the floor from the dealer, they would wait for the car that was built for and by them.

I dont think M3s will have that problem, as they have a bigger market and are comparatively cheaper.

JerezBlue! · 10-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEllis

Its because BMW is making cars, including M's, in increasing numbers. The same is true for Porsche's. Porsche made more 996's than other generation. Thus you have 996TT's that are cheaper than 993TT or even 993 C2S's. Its a simple supply and demand scenerio.

That's all it is, economics! I agree, BMW have been and are likely to continue strong supply; in virtually all models - including the Ms.

mkoesel · 10-10-2007, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_stranger

According to me, the reason for those M5s and M6s sitting in the lots forever is that, the people who are willing to pay about 100k for a car would prefer to build it strictly according to their taste. so, rather than buying it off the floor from the dealer, they would wait for the car that was built for and by them.

Good point. This is especially true if the car has any post delivery miles on it whatsoever.

rvacha · 10-10-2007, 11:25 AM

Other possible issues:

1. No 6MT (although the M5 got a crappy one way late)
2. Not track cars, so these are primarily autobahn burners. Only problem with that is horrible fuel economy coupled with small tanks means no range. This was a big negative for me personally
3. Perception that gas is only going to get more expensive
4. Polarizing styling turns off some potential buyers

wrickem · 10-10-2007, 11:44 AM

Neither of them are really the best rounded daily drivers in all climates so most have to have other cars to use. When you have another car to use, you might as well get something like a Porsche or something a little more fun or exotic for that price. I had an X-3 for daily driving and an M3 and a Porsche. When it came time to downsize, the M3 was the first one to go. To me, it wasn't quite a "real sports car" to me because it held 4 comfortably so it wasn't totally frivilous and indulgent like the Porsche is. I find that on REALLY nice days now I drive my Boxster 10 to 1 over the M6.

bambam · 10-10-2007, 12:54 PM

let's be honest. the M6 is a ugly car. Who wants to pay 100+k for an ugly car?

I love the M5, but a big turnoff is that it has handicapped Launch control and if you go for manual, it is just not as fast.

JerezBlue! · 10-10-2007, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bambam

let's be honest. the M6 is a ugly car. Who wants to pay 100+k for an ugly car?

I love the M5, but a big turnoff is that it has handicapped Launch control and if you go for manual, it is just not as fast.

IMO, the M6 is ugly at the back, the way the boot (trunk) lid goes up. Without that, in profile, it's very 911ish. Otherwise, looks ok but big.

GregW / Oregon · 10-10-2007, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvacha

Other possible issues:

1. No 6MT (although the M5 got a crappy one way late)
2. Not track cars, so these are primarily autobahn burners. Only problem with that is horrible fuel economy coupled with small tanks means no range. This was a big negative for me personally
3. Perception that gas is only going to get more expensive
4. Polarizing styling turns off some potential buyers

Agree with all your points. The mileage thing makes me almost on the verge of opting out on the M3. It's not the money--it's just many are getting more aware of the impact of the hydrocarbons we burn. If the M3 does return a similar mileage in "normal" driving the the E46 version, I'm fine with it. I don't drive balls out for that great a percentage of my mileage.

Davo2003 · 10-12-2007, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerezBlue!

IMO, the M6 is ugly at the back, the way the boot (trunk) lid goes up. Without that, in profile, it's very 911ish. Otherwise, looks ok but big.

I think BMW needs a "tad" more "bling" and better styling. Nothing BMW has to offer over 60K is very interesting to me. Getting close to 70K means getting a Porsche as the M3 won't be my DD anyway. Maybe the Z9 coming soon will cure some of these problems, who knows?

sdiver68 · 10-12-2007, 07:28 AM

BTW, yes AMG's historically do depreciate very fast.

the_stranger · 10-12-2007, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerezBlue!

IMO, the M6 is ugly at the back, the way the boot (trunk) lid goes up. Without that, in profile, it's very 911ish. Otherwise, looks ok but big.

I dont know why but I am liking the M6 from the back because of the way the trunk looks. Before, I used to hate it.

JEllis · 10-12-2007, 10:12 AM

The M6 is not an ugly car IMO.

Its funny how some people post subjective opinions like everyone else agrees. The M5 and M6 look better to me than 90% of the cars I see on the roads these days.

Jason

Filthy Monkey · 10-12-2007, 10:14 AM

I agree, I think the M6 is a very good looking car. I think more could have been done with the back end, but that is an unfortunate case of form over function...

rvacha · 10-12-2007, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEllis

The M6 is not an ugly car IMO.

Its funny how some people post subjective opinions like everyone else agrees. The M5 and M6 look better to me than 90% of the cars I see on the roads these days.

Unfortunately many people have this opinion, and more importantly a lot of BMW fans - the most likely buyers - have this opinion. Even if you disagree it still impacts sales. 90% of the cars on the road are cheap, and you get what you paid for. At $100K many customers like myself feel you should get styling you like as well. The polarizing styling DOES impact sales of the M5/M6 IMHO.

rvacha · 10-12-2007, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davo2003

I think BMW needs a "tad" more "bling" and better styling. Nothing BMW has to offer over 60K is very interesting to me. Getting close to 70K means getting a Porsche as the M3 won't be my DD anyway. Maybe the Z9 coming soon will cure some of these problems, who knows?

Do you think the Concept CS is the right "bling"? Personally I like that direction.

Davo2003 · 10-13-2007, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvacha

Do you think the Concept CS is the right "bling"? Personally I like that direction.

Yes exactly...a bit more aggressiveness on the exterior and flash on the interior while maintaining their reputation as a driver's car.

10-09-2007, 12:55 PM	#1
chicagobimmerboy First Lieutenant 77 Rep 363 Posts Drives: Un esotico Italiano ;) Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Chicago suburbs iTrader: (0)	Sittin' on the lot I used to work the service department of a local BMW dealer, I saw several M6's and M5's get stocked in and nearly a year later were still sitting on the lot. Then their is the depreciation on those cars, I've seen them as low as 60K. What is the problem ? why is it that those cars a so hard to get rid of and why do they depreciate so much? does M-B AMG and Audi have the same issues? Lastly do you think the new M3 will suffer in the same way?
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

10-09-2007, 01:35 PM	#2
JEllis Major General 532 Rep 5,498 Posts Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth iTrader: (4)	Its because BMW is making cars, including M's, in increasing numbers. The same is true for Porsche's. Porsche made more 996's than other generation. Thus you have 996TT's that are cheaper than 993TT or even 993 C2S's. Its a simple supply and demand scenerio. __________________ Instagram: jellismotorwerks
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-09-2007, 01:36 PM	#3
the_stranger Captain 37 Rep 926 Posts Drives: e92 M3 6MT Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: India iTrader: (1) Garage List 2009 BMW M3 Coupe [0.00]	According to me, the reason for those M5s and M6s sitting in the lots forever is that, the people who are willing to pay about 100k for a car would prefer to build it strictly according to their taste. so, rather than buying it off the floor from the dealer, they would wait for the car that was built for and by them. I dont think M3s will have that problem, as they have a bigger market and are comparatively cheaper. __________________ 2008 e92 M3 6MT AW/BLACK (SOLD) 2009 e92 M3 6MT AW/FR
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-10-2007, 11:25 AM	#6
rvacha Captain 62 Rep 800 Posts Drives: '08 E92 M3 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Cleveland, OH iTrader: (0) Garage List 2008 E92 M3 [0.00]	Other possible issues: 1. No 6MT (although the M5 got a crappy one way late) 2. Not track cars, so these are primarily autobahn burners. Only problem with that is horrible fuel economy coupled with small tanks means no range. This was a big negative for me personally 3. Perception that gas is only going to get more expensive 4. Polarizing styling turns off some potential buyers __________________ '16 F30 340i xDrive 6MT Melbourne/Black '08 E92 M3 6MT Jerez/Speed Cloth '18 F80 M3 6MT SO/CSAT
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-10-2007, 11:44 AM	#7
wrickem Big Beaver Smile 2101 Rep 3,791 Posts Drives: What he wants to Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: lambertville nj iTrader: (0)	Neither of them are really the best rounded daily drivers in all climates so most have to have other cars to use. When you have another car to use, you might as well get something like a Porsche or something a little more fun or exotic for that price. I had an X-3 for daily driving and an M3 and a Porsche. When it came time to downsize, the M3 was the first one to go. To me, it wasn't quite a "real sports car" to me because it held 4 comfortably so it wasn't totally frivilous and indulgent like the Porsche is. I find that on REALLY nice days now I drive my Boxster 10 to 1 over the M6. __________________ ______________________________________________ Current- '21 430 , '19 911, 07 M6 ,'17 Jeep Wrangler, "23 Bronco OBXluxsquatch
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-10-2007, 12:54 PM	#8
bambam Enlisted Member 0 Rep 39 Posts Drives: M3 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: VA iTrader: (0)	let's be honest. the M6 is a ugly car. Who wants to pay 100+k for an ugly car? I love the M5, but a big turnoff is that it has handicapped Launch control and if you go for manual, it is just not as fast.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-12-2007, 07:28 AM	#12
sdiver68 Expert Road Racer 59 Rep 1,329 Posts Drives: 07 335i e90, 09 335i e93 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: St. Louis, MO iTrader: (3)	BTW, yes AMG's historically do depreciate very fast.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-12-2007, 10:12 AM	#14
JEllis Major General 532 Rep 5,498 Posts Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth iTrader: (4)	The M6 is not an ugly car IMO. Its funny how some people post subjective opinions like everyone else agrees. The M5 and M6 look better to me than 90% of the cars I see on the roads these days. Jason __________________ Instagram: jellismotorwerks
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-12-2007, 10:14 AM	#15
Filthy Monkey Private First Class 27 Rep 193 Posts Drives: M3 Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: UK iTrader: (0)	I agree, I think the M6 is a very good looking car. I think more could have been done with the back end, but that is an unfortunate case of form over function...
	Appreciate 0 Quote