Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

davidbrady · (This post was last modified: 04-22-2015 09:49 by davidbrady.)

Markus, your post puzzles me, because if you don't get it then probably most of wog doesn't get it either. I thought I was pretty clear with Don last night. I think he gets it. Maybe he can explain it to you. If not, give me a moment to enjoy some coffee and I'll be more direct.

markusfmeyer · (04-22-2015)

David I get it just fine. You asked where the consensus was. While I wasn't consulted personally, I've read a lot more responses supporting removing BB from NADA then against, on both forums. Last I checked in a democratic society you go by the majority.

DonB · 04-22-2015, 11:05

OK, so something new to tilt at. Where oh where is the evidence that "Buyers flock to NADA to get some indication of the value of the vehicle they want to buy?"

Personally I doubt that very greatly. Late model owners might wish it were true, but the actual selling prices say it isn't.

The prime users of NADA are banks and insurance companies, and there is evidence that both have no problem establishing values when NADA doesn't exist. Does anyone think that all the Newells and Prevosts running around were bought for cash, and are operating without adequate insurance?

There is a very good post in the WOG thread from a recent '98 purchaser who previously (a year ago) tried to finance a '90 through USAA. He could not accomplish it due to the $17K NADA valuation. Part of the post "When we explained that was not what they were selling for we were told that if the NADA value was not listed they would do a market search. We provided three simialr units that had sold within a year or two and we were told if we could get the year model dropped from NADA they would be more than willing to loan up to the asking price."

There are other similar postings.

So again, I submit that NADA has done little good for sales, and has definitely done harm to potential buyers. Here I go, repeating stuff again Dodgy

davidbrady · (This post was last modified: 04-22-2015 12:35 by travelite.)

I think we'll just have to agree that we'll never come together on this. Fundamentally we have one side which looks at this issue with a bias towards the perceived merits or lack thereof of the NADA program with emphasis on case by case studies, while the other side (me at least) looks at it with a bias towards the philosophical underlying conflicts of a business run forum making unilateral choices designed to improve its bottom line at the expense of the wider community including not just wog or WaGu members but the greater public at large. I think that's it for me, unless we hear word that bbbb has made a choice to fix the issue by funneling real world transaction prices to NADA; it's within their power. Thanks guys.

GregOConnor · (04-22-2015)

One of the reasons I have a Wanderlodge is that they are so undervalued and easy to get into. Sell low, Buy Low works for me. I do agree with Don that there is more to this than what NADA ends up doing. download the DB and open it on a local machine and point a copy of vb to it,,, Hysterical.
The confusing and interesting part is everyone comes at this from a diff perspective and objective.

NADA and Randy have a commercial interest. He called them as a broker and not the web owner of a social network. But maybe he used their 800 number??

Don and Msap,,, 40 paragraphs and no price,,, I'm thinking 93K. Got to be a hard job for NADA to establish prices.

David and Goliath,,,, Dave is one of those guys that can say money isn't everything. The others work at a social network

DonB · 04-22-2015, 13:10

(04-22-2015 12:45)GregOConnor Wrote: Don and Msap,,, 40 paragraphs and no price,,, I'm thinking 93K. Got to be a hard job for NADA to establish prices.

A lot of people have a problem with posting what they paid/received, so it isn't all that common unless someone is crowing about the deal they got. I don't have a problem with saying what I paid, but only if Chuck OKs it first. I can say the $93K is not very close.

GregOConnor · 04-22-2015, 14:00

There you go. If NADA is close what is the harm with their posted numbers. A buyer asked me to finance my 94 my reply was if you don't have 60 k cash to get in to a bus, you will never have the resources to run one. Low loan values help keep these people out of trouble an keep rigs in the hands of owners who can afford to operate them. Some people are better served with a class B or a cool classic GMC. What I think you and I dont understand is some folks consider their bus to be part of their net worth.

My greatest net worth adjustment was when the vet said he needs to put my $30,000. Fox Trotter down and agreed to take my Boat as payment.

(04-22-2015 13:10)DonB Wrote:
(04-22-2015 12:45)GregOConnor Wrote: Don and Msap,,, 40 paragraphs and no price,,, I'm thinking 93K. Got to be a hard job for NADA to establish prices.
A lot of people have a problem with posting what they paid/received, so it isn't all that common unless someone is crowing about the deal they got. I don't have a problem with saying what I paid, but only if Chuck OKs it first. I can say the $93K is not very close.

DonB · 04-22-2015, 14:49

(04-22-2015 14:00)GregOConnor Wrote: A buyer asked me to finance my 94 my reply was if you don't have 60 k cash to get in to a bus, you will never have the resources to run one.

That's a variant of the old "If you have to ask, you can't afford it." Which ignores a lot of different realities.

Reality: I just financed the bulk of the price of a new Grand Cherokee even though I could have liquidated assets and paid cash - at 3% I would rather hang onto the funds.

GregOConnor · 04-22-2015, 15:38

did they say " 3% financing or...." ? Surprised you fell for that. I may ask Randy to advertise " The owners has 0% interest in financing" . Little reality in financing and value in a motorhome is in the utility.

DonB · (04-22-2015)

(04-22-2015 15:38)GregOConnor Wrote: did they say " 3% financing or...." ?

No. I went in pre-approved by the lender, and negotiated the best deal I could, then told them what the down payment would be and who it would be through (local CU that all the dealers around here regularly use anyway). As with most such purchases it is impossible to know if a better negotiator would have done better, but I got about 12% off sticker (They started about 9% off, probably because it was a special order where the sale failed for some reason).