Did anyone else read Bruce Anderson's response to a reader's question about how he calculates used car values in the NOV. issue of Excellence (p.48). I was hoping that his answer would enlighten us to his methods, but ultimately I don't think that he explained his method very well at all. I felt that what he jokingly told his editor seemed most likely: "... I usually use a ouija board..."

 

I read it too. I was wondering which one of us wrote the letter.

 

I figured the same thing given a few recent threads.

 

Stuff like that, coupled with far too much wasserboxer coverage, explains why I'm no longer an Excellence subscriber.

 

I didn't read Mr Anderson's comments regarding calculating used car values; however, for what it's worth, here's some interesting data that I collected:

I bought my 1997 993 in September, 2006. At that time I checked Kelly Blue Book web site (http://cars.kbb.com) for prices and mileage of similar cars (2006 data, below). Just for kicks, I repeated the process last month (2007 data). [The high and low priced cars were elimanted from the data, except 1995's in 2007 data.] This is certainly not a scientific study. I'm sure it's full of statistical errors as well as representing advertised price, not actual selling price. However, the results are interesting. Looks like the 1996 model year increased by 9.4% while the 2007's increased by 19.6% over the last 12 months. Since there were only three 1995 cars on the market in 2007, even I wouldn't attempt to draw any conclusion from that data.

Data for Porsche C2 Coupe (transmission unspecified)
*** See attached image ***

Notes:
- # Cars is the number of cars listed on Kelly Blue Book's web site.
- Price % is the relative average price compared to the average price of 1997 model.
- Price Chg is in both percent and dollars.

 

If he's using actual reported sales values, he's getting his numbers from the auctions and from people who write in to tell him what a great deal they got. I'm sure he averages in the book values as well. I doubt many people who buy their 993 from Ray Joseph are sending him emails about spending $60k on a 97 C2S, but the guy who buys the same car for $30k from an unwitting seller almost certainly does.

I did talk to him personally a while back; the consensus was, a Porsche is worth whatever two consenting adults agree it's worth ... market reports and book values be damned.

The thing about Bruce is - and if you've read his writings in Panorama or Upfixing over the years that he was the 911 technical advisor for PCA, or his book, the 911 Performance Handbook, which was pretty much the bible in the days predating the Internet you know this - he's a big fan of cut and paste, giving largely the same answers to those questions which he culls from his past writings. He used one of my email questions to him years ago about an 88 Carrera, and I found almost exactly the same answer digging through an older Upfixing.

I think he's very knowledgable about older 911s, and certainly has the credentials from working as a mechanic on a 935 race team back in the day, but it's probably unrealistic to think he's really staying on top of the technology to get a more realistic idea of market trends.

 

I read this too. What I found interesting was that he seemed to be indicating that E-Bay sales are inflating the value of older Porsches, forcing him to adjust his values downward. I would submit it is just the reverse--most E-bay cars are far from pristine, and some are downright sketchy, and a fair market value estimator would adjust upward.

What was very clear is that he had no accurate data-collection system of any type.

 

Mr. Anderson as earned respect, but he is not Neo or the ONE. I didn't buy my car for HIS market values, KBB or NADA. As a mater of fact about 5k or more over all of them.
After reading all the comments on here and his market updates and sells examples, it sure does seem as if he is reading all the comments on the forum.
And the Cut and Paste thing is spot on!

 

I liked his comment "Sometimes the high prices that appear online make me think that every single car sold on the internet is "Beyond Excellent". . ." WTF? I think that it is just because he is out of touch with the market. Besides, even if he disagrees about the whether or not it is a good way to buy a car or about value of the purchase price, it is still probably more valid data than disregarding it and then filling in the gaps as best he can.

He definitely needs a better way to get his data than such a hodge-podge of sources. Can sales data be purchased from the DMV? If not,maybe John should make the purchase info part of the Rennlist enrollment and then sell the data to Mr. Anderson. It would seem to be a mutually beneficial arrangement.

 

There's hope yet: "Reader's Sales Reports" 993 section in May 2008 issue has comments like "though this price just did exceed our top estimate...", "this price was well above our estimates..." and last but not least "are we witnessing the emergence of a new trend?"

 

I read Bruce's articles. To me, his information is one of several data sources for me in determining value. I will never rely upon his numbers exclusively.

 

All things being equal, I would love to buy 993 coupes for whay Bruce says they are worth and sell them for what the market demands.

 

Wouldn't we all . . . especially the 'S' models !



I also noticed in this months Excellence, that BA shows 3 examples of cars sold that were beyond his "excellent" range, and suggests that we might be witnessing the emergence of a new trend, especially for the 'S' bodied cars. Is he finally starting to come around ???

 

Have any of you notice that very little ever changes (contents) in any of these price/value guides from year to year? They might move Steve Anderson's car renderings around and add one of a different color but it seems like the numbers are manipulated and it aways concludes with the cliche' "Buy the Newest Best Condition..." Geez, what a way to collect a paycheck.

 

If you read the may issue Tech note pg. 42,44,46, you'll see that he is basically throwing in the towel on predicting 993 C2S and C4S values...