This figure tells which are the most popular cars to keep

[Super7]

 

I don't think so. Take for example:

 

1. A Mercedes S-Class that is $460K with OMV of $100K. If you keep for 10 years, depreciation is about $38.8K per year (based on sgcarmart). But if you keep for 20 years, depreciation is $23K per year. Difference is $15.8K per year.

 

2. A Honda Accord that is $167K with OMV of $28K. If you keep for 10 years, depreciation is 15K a year. But if you keep for 20 years, depreciation is $8.5K. Difference is $6.5K per year.

 

In the above case, would you keep the Merc or Honda? You tend to lose much more with expensive cars if it is just driven for 10 years. This is even more obvious with super cars.

 

Then again… rich people won't want to be seen driving the same car for 20 years! So they'll likely sell off before COE is up, and then people who like a bargain like me will buy a 7~8 yr old S-Class to renew COE. :p

 

I guess for a budget-conscious buyer, as

 

(1) COE renewal has two cost components ie (A) Price of PQP, and (B) Loss of "scrap value" which is directly related to OMV value, and

(2) For any given same point in time (A) is the same regardless whether (B) is high or low

 

if he is looking for driving a car for another 10 years at the minimum outlay and he is presented with two cars to choose, one with a higher OMV than the other, then the car with the lower OMV (and hence lower B) will cost him a lower total outlay ie (A)+(B).

 

[rocknroll]

 

I guess for a budget-conscious buyer, as

 

(1) COE renewal has two cost components ie (A) Price of PQP, and (B) Loss of "scrap value" which is directly related to OMV value, and

(2) For any given same point in time (A) is the same regardless whether (B) is high or low

 

if he is looking for driving a car for another 10 years at the minimum outlay and he is presented with two cars to choose, one with a higher OMV than the other, then the car with the lower OMV (and hence lower B) will cost him a lower total outlay ie (A)+(B).

 

 

Yes, that is true… lower OMV car most likely lower price at the same age. Therefore better for budget buyer, and he will chose the lower OMV car due to budget constraint.

 

But your original question not this one mah . You asked which is more "attractive". I view from another angle, and not from budget buyer angle.

 

You can look at it the other way… a "value" buyer would buy the higher OMV car. "Value" buyer does not necessary look for cheapest to buy, but rather the car that he "gains" the most. Take my S-Class example, the value buyer would "gain" a Merc that was $460K, vs $167K Honda by just paying about $35K more.

 

I got your point though :).

Edited January 28, 2015 by rocknroll

[Ake109]

 

I guess for a budget-conscious buyer, as

 

(1) COE renewal has two cost components ie (A) Price of PQP, and (B) Loss of "scrap value" which is directly related to OMV value, and

(2) For any given same point in time (A) is the same regardless whether (B) is high or low

 

if he is looking for driving a car for another 10 years at the minimum outlay and he is presented with two cars to choose, one with a higher OMV than the other, then the car with the lower OMV (and hence lower B) will cost him a lower total outlay ie (A)+(B).

 

 

Not just that, in the example quoted. There are the other costs like road tax and maintenance to think about. An old S Klass and an old Accord, big diff in parts price.

[Super7]

 

Not just that, in the example quoted. There are the other costs like road tax and maintenance to think about. An old S Klass and an old Accord, big diff in parts price.

 

In my earlier post, parts avialablity (and prices also), reliability (and conditions also) are things to be considered.

 

Some owners are even 'emotionally' attached to the car, or certain models.

 

[Super7]

 

Yes, that is true… lower OMV car most likely lower price at the same age. Therefore better for budget buyer, and he will chose the lower OMV car due to budget constraint.

 

But your original question not this one mah . You asked which is more "attractive". I view from another angle, and not from budget buyer angle.

 

You can look at it the other way… a "value" buyer would buy the higher OMV car. "Value" buyer does not necessary look for cheapest to buy, but rather the car that he "gains" the most. Take my S-Class example, the value buyer would "gain" a Merc that was $460K, vs $167K Honda by just paying about $35K more.

 

I got your point though :).

 

I think you are right to say different buyers have different priorities when they consider COE renewals or getting an old car for the purpose of renewing its COE.

 

From the standpoint of utilisation, it's also good to spread the overall cost of the purchase of a car over the longest possible period (assuming the car is good for that period and does not kaput halfway, and parts are available at reasonable prices). Comparing spreading the original OMV of the car over 10 years vs 20 years, the depreciation of the latter will be cheaper even after we factor in the loss of LTA's scrap value when it's COE is renewed.

 

However, driving a new car every 10 years, or for the matter, every 3,4 years does mean something to some buyers though.

 

[Chong18]

 

I don't think so. Take for example:

 

1. A Mercedes S-Class that is $460K with OMV of $100K. If you keep for 10 years, depreciation is about $38.8K per year (based on sgcarmart). But if you keep for 20 years, depreciation is $23K per year. Difference is $15.8K per year.

 

2. A Honda Accord that is $167K with OMV of $28K. If you keep for 10 years, depreciation is 15K a year. But if you keep for 20 years, depreciation is $8.5K. Difference is $6.5K per year.

 

In the above case, would you keep the Merc or Honda? You tend to lose much more with expensive cars if it is just driven for 10 years. This is even more obvious with super cars.

 

Then again… rich people won't want to be seen driving the same car for 20 years! So they'll likely sell off before COE is up, and then people who like a bargain like me will buy a 7~8 yr old S-Class to renew COE. :p

 

I don't think it's fair to compare the depreciation between a Merc S class and Honda Accord. One is a luxury car, one is a saloon car.

One definitely have to pay more to enjoy the comfort :)

[Mllcg]

so few COE cars ar?

[Ake109]

 

In my earlier post, parts avialablity (and prices also), reliability (and conditions also) are things to be considered.

 

Some owners are even 'emotionally' attached to the car, or certain models.

 

 

I was also emotionally attached to all my cars.

 

But also emotionally attached to my money... so had to let all the old girls go.

 

As for parts and maintenance, I think that is a much bigger factor than things like PARF/OMV etc.

 

You can see in western countries like UK/Germany/US, many of the old high end cars like CL500, 840Csi, 750i, SL500, S6, A8, XJ etc etc, are VERY cheap. Can pick up for between SGD 10-20k easily. But they are not that popular because the long term maintenance cost of these elegant old ladies, will cost more than the purchase price unless you are a DIY person who knows how to visit a scrapyard.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Ake109

[Forte3737]

I am surprised that VW made it into this category

Was thinking of this just now and hence did a web search on sgcarmart.

 

at the moment:

 

total number of COE passenger cars on sale : 128

 

breakdown by make : benz 33, bmw 9, toyota 6, honda 8, volkwagen 10 etc

 

Seems benz still the most popular car to keep after 10 years as can be seen from the data.

 

 

 

 

[Forte3737]

Bettle i know got classic. But Golf got meh?

A lot of classic Beetle. Some Golf GTi.

 

 

 

[Ake109]

A lot of classic Beetle. Some Golf GTi.

 

 

 

Pity the classic 'Sell Roti' Volkswagen vans all gone from our roads.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Ake109

[Ake109]

Bettle i know got classic. But Golf got meh?

 

 

Golf Mk 1. The 8 valve 1.6. Regarded as the 1st hot hatch. I still see a couple of them. Got convertible one also.

 

For the original Type 2 van, still have meh? I have not spotted one.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Ake109

[F355]

Bettle i know got classic. But Golf got meh?

 

 

It did not set a new benchmark . It created a whole new yardstick.

 

.

 

 

[Ake109]

 

It did not set a new benchmark . It created a whole new yardstick.

 

.

 

Heh, brings back memories, that video.

 

 

I remember when I first started to look at cars in the 80s, all hot hatches had this red trimming. Until later that meaning got lost when some not so hot hatches also added the red trimming. Then by the 90s, fell out of favour and got replaced by 16v (for the Europeans) and DOHC (for the Japanese) badges and stickers.

[Renegade777]

Was thinking of this just now and hence did a web search on sgcarmart.

 

at the moment:

 

total number of COE passenger cars on sale : 128

 

breakdown by make : benz 33, bmw 9, toyota 6, honda 8, volkwagen 10 etc

 

Seems benz still the most popular car to keep after 10 years as can be seen from the data.

 

 

 

 

Don't make any sense at all how the numbers derive to prove which car is popular. It can also mean more cars remain unsale and not popular.

[Beehive3783]

I believe those old Volks do not have the god-damned 7 speed DSG box.

 

 

Volkswagen 10 ah. Brave souls. Hahaha.

 

My own car also COE renew. But Mitsubishi Lancer nia. Not common.

 

[Mavwong]

Lolz, this bring back the memories during my days in the US driving $500 VV golf. Yes, it's with manual trans.

 

 

 

 

 

It did not set a new benchmark . It created a whole new yardstick.

.