Guys, I’ve been told this forum is making me crazy. Is it true?
I just leased a stripper 330i loaner 3 weeks ago. I went with a stripped down model because I had $3600 in negative equity and that’s the best I could do at the time while being around the payment I want.
Now I found that my new lease is only $1600 (based on an offer from Vroom) in the hole, and I have this deal lined up on M-sport loaner (what I really wanted before):
With the $1600 negative and a true zero drive off, my payment would be a little less than it is now. No brainer to do this right?
Generally a car will not GAIN $2000 of value over 3 weeks. Who told you it was $1600 negative? Does that include the $3600 of negative equity? I would tend to believe it is $5200 owed (1600+3600). I can’t imagine a situation where a cars price increased in 3 weeks!
If your numbers are correct it’s a total no brainer. I’m totally shocked at the number but maybe G20’s are holding their value because they’re so new. Being a stripper base model definitely helps.
I just got offered $22k off a brand new $60k 2018 440i from a sales guy who seems rather desperate to make a sale this month. Checked Carvana, excluding tax and fees it would still be $5k negative thats typical BMW but like I said maybe a stripper G20 is different right now.
Yeah I was shocked when I got the vroom offer as well. The offer from Carvana was $1500 lower due to a “market adjustment” but this has been typical for me. I’m putting my chances of the dealer matching vroom at 50/50 (and maybe that’s optimistic even), which is the only thing that has made me hesitate since I have to drive a couple hours to get to the dealer.
I don’t want to actually sell it to Vroom because I don’t want to pay the $1600 out of pocket.
, fair point. Although I paid $1200 at signing of the stripper 330i, so my total out of pocket to get out from the original $3600 negative would be $1200+$1600=$2800. A return of $800 on $3600 is still not bad but not quite as convincing.
About to head to the dealer and we will see if I have some luck on my side.
The biggest issue I think I’m going to have here is that I’m getting 18% off on this M-sport. 18% off the original MSRP of my stripper 330i is only $750 more than vrooms offer… I’m starting to think the odds of the dealer matching that are lower than 50/50.
If you were to trade your current car in to the dealer (vs selling it to vroom and paying $1,600 out of pocket), wouldn’t you just be rolling in ANOTHER $1,600 of negative equity into the new lease?
You are justifying the new lease as the payment not changing, but the payment is already higher than it should be since it incorporates $3,600 in negative equity. In your new situation, you would be paying for a lease with the equivalent of $5,200 in negative equity.
He is already overpaying on the stripper 330 because he rolled in $3,600 in negative equity (for argument’s sake it is $100 more per month on a 36 month lease). OP’s justification for getting into this new lease is that the 330 msport is that he can get a new deal that is approximately the same price with having to either eat $1,600 in negative equity on his current car, or rolling another $1,600 into the new lease.
The way the OP wrote this up, it seems like he hasn’t discussed rolling the $1,600 into the new lease (another $44ish per month), and he is hoping that the dealer matches Vroom’s offer at only $1,600 negative – for all we know, the dealer will say that they can’t come close to Vroom’s number and they offer to roll in another $3,600.
The whole post seems to be based on a pure hypothetical, with the actual negative equity portion and $0 down never having been presented to the dealer.
Rolling in $3,600 of negative on the first lease and at a minimum $1,600 of negative on the current lease (if the dealer matches Vroom’s offer), would be $5,200 of negative equity that has been rolled in over 2 leases that OP would now be paying interest on.
EDIT: To sum up, he is justifying that it is the same payment (which is already $100 too high because of the original negative equity), so it seems like he will be paying the equivalent of $5,200 negative. That is how it looks to me, but I am clearly not an expert.
I don’t think this is correct. The asset I had was $3600 negative. The asset I have now is $1600 negative. You can’t add up the negative I put into the my current lease and the new negative because the $3600 is gone. It’s just the $1600 I am negative now.
If his trade-in offer is $1600 more than his current BMWFS buyout, that’s all there is to it. Again it doesn’t matter what he rolled in or put down, all that matters is his current payoff which is derived from his original cap cost (including the $3600) and the principal payments he’s made.
Regardless of what the new vehicle is, I’d much rather pay tax and rent charge on $1600 than $3600.
But the asset you have now is already costing you $100/month more than it should because of the original negative equity.
If you started from scratch, your payment would be $100/month lower when only rolling in the new $44/month of negative equity.
This is all premised on you saying the payment would be roughly the same. That original payment takes into account the negative equity. You aren’t washing that out of the equation.
Let’s say I didn’t have any negative equity. The deal I have posted on the new M-sport has a payment of $389/mo.
Now I have $1600 negative to roll in currently. My payment will go up to $442/mo ($1600/36+interest). Therefore I am paying $53/mo more than I should be. Not $100/mo + $53/mo.
thats typical BMW but like I said maybe a stripper G20 is different right now.
, fair point. Although I paid $1200 at signing of the stripper 330i, so my total out of pocket to get out from the original $3600 negative would be $1200+$1600=$2800. A return of $800 on $3600 is still not bad but not quite as convincing.