Believe it or not for those who paid MSRP for there zl1's and financed it, it would have been cheaper to lease and then buy it out than it would have to just buy.
The money factor is almost always lower on a lease than buying. You would basically save 1-2% on the apr for the period you leased.
Leases now a days are really structured nicely.
The other point is that you aren't really building much enquiry in a car that is depreciating at a similar rate as what a long term (7 years) loan would be. You can also build equity in a lease, it's just not a simple concept. Find yourself a lease with a low residual like a range rover and at the end of your lease you could trade it in or buy it outright and sell for more than the buy out, that my friend is equity. They are bad leases if you don't plan to buy, but they do generate equity in a leased vehicle.
And the point about insurance in the article applies to a purchased vehicle just as much as a leased vehicle. That's what gap insurance is for.
You can also extend leases.
Typically the better leases are when the actual manufacturer finances the lease. Mercedes= mb financial lexus= lexus financial services! bmw= bmw financial services, Audi = chase (shitty lease), range rover (some big bank, shitty leases)
I can't believe people think it would be tough to find a dealer to lease a zl1. Every zl1 bought could have been leased, it's just like any other car/truck
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stig
See I didn't care about how long the average person keeps a car. I for one am keeping this car forever, so the idea of leasing and then buying is financially irresponsible in my book. But yes, if the OP only wants to keep his ZL1 (the fastest camaro in Chevy history) for 3 years then I can understand leasing one. That being said, good luck trying to find a dealer willing to lease you one.
|