Soulteacher

You are criticizing Alan's statements for their simplicity and then you are doing the same mistake: since when does three equal many, why would n=3 be representative, and how does a listed price point determine impeccability?

oalvarez

please....i said i quickly referenced 3 examples by doing a simple search....would you like me to post links to every advertised sale on every board and ebay as well?

small sample, yes, but telling nonetheless.

n=don't care

criticizing? i was merely saying that i had found instances/examples of the contrary. can i not do that? can no one disagree? it's only one way in this place? c'mon....

Alan Smithee

To those that have jumped on the "it's a mass produced car that will depreciate without any collectible value" bandwagon...no kidding. Nobody here has claimed the 997 is so special that it will for some reason be an exception to the depreciation rule.

However, some cars (and some Porsches) depreciate faster than others. The post is 996 vs. 997, and I still assert that, all other things being equal, the 997 will hold its value better than the 996. It is a better car overall (sorry 996 guys), and in 2015...when value is no longer a factor of age...when a buyer is faced with the decision of a pristine 2004 996 or pristine 2005 997, I'm pretty sure the 997 will cost a bit more money. If I'm wrong, call me on it then.

oalvarez

i agree. the 997 will maintain its value better than the 996 in the long run. i will support that one all day long. what i'm surprised about is how much they've come down in price (used) in only one calendar year.

OCBen

Excellent Alan.

I was going to make the same identical point, but was going to use a projection of 5 yrs into the future - i.e. 2010. But yours is probably a better basis for making the comparison, as depreciation after ten years will pretty much flattened out by then, and age is effectively taken out of the equation, as you rightly point out in making your excellent point.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of putting that argument together. Whew!

Soulteacher

Uh, I see. So, if I find three examples of used 997 that are still freaking expensive, would that convince you of the opposite? No? SEE!!!

Soulteacher

Alan, but - strictly spoken - that still does not help us to determine relative value, because the 997 was more expensive than the 996 to begin with. We would have to see if the NPV of that price differential is higher than the difference in actual price paid at purchase, respectively.

Alan Smithee

If you want to continue to pick nits, yes, the base 997 was a bit more expensive than the outgoing 996...but it also had more standard equipment, so it was effectively the same price. Although I admittedly haven't checked USD inflation from 2004-2005.

Next you or somebody will bring up that we're discussing MSRP and not actual transaction prices; that nobody would have paid MSRP for an outgoing 2004, and 2005s were not yet discounted. To that I say you guys should find something better to do with your time...I'm going out for some drinks.

oalvarez

sure, if that makes you happy. all that matters is where they traded at, not where they're offered.

good evening

Soulteacher

I wish I could, but you guys are two hours behind us. Everything's closed over here! By the way, if you look at my comments, you would have seen that I basically agreed with you. But the whole discussion is completely flawed. Invalid generalizations concerning a topic that - I agree - is not even worth to argue about. Value simply has too many dimensions, and even if I take a $50,000 hit next year if I sell my car, it was still worth it because of the emotional/hedonic ROI.

I agree with that, good point. Good evening to you, too!

rountreed

Heck, I drive a 996 and could care less which car does better over time! Here is just hoping that in 2015 we are all healthy and enjoy our new Hybrid/ Hydrogen Porsche 1000+?? Numbered 911.

Mike Murphy

I would agree with this. But I'm just wondering if there will be much more than a few thousand dollars difference between a 15-year-old 996 and a 15-year-old 997. When your car originally costs $70k, what's a $3k difference in 15 years?

Just look at the values of the SC vs the 3.2 and 964. All are within a few thousand dollars of each other, all else being equal.

OCBen

Well, not to nit-pick, but the '04 996 will always be a year older than the '05 997.

It really depends on the options. If an '04 996 was fully loaded up and had an MSRP $3k higher than the '05 997, the depreciation difference will be pronounced as options always take a bigger hit on resale value, according to KBB.

blk on blk

If the 996 was so undesireable how come it sold the most units? Seems to be slightly contradictory. That said I prefer the 997 appearance wise, but there is not denying the 996 was highly desireable. It may not be the best looking 911 ever built, but there is no denying the success that car was/is.

Mike Murphy

That's exactly the point, we have to nit-pick for this comparison, which indicates that the differences are going to be small enough to be insignificant.

By the way, I don't know if KBB is an accurate source when talking about Porches. There numbers seem to be a little on the low side.