The new rule is 1.5% or lower. 1% was pre-covid and market instanity
1 Like
It was more about the lease structure to compare 1% deals as apples to apples 
1 Like
I never understood why this article is still up in leasing 101 when we preach #1 and 2 on the list are BS. We tell new folks to read leasing 101 but then say ignore xyz. Makes it way more confusing.
100% agree. Leaving that drivel for people to read is doing anyone trying to learn a major disservice.
2 Likes
There should be an article pinned at the top debunking the 1% rule and explaining why its not a good metric. Easy to link to as soon as someone mentions it.
Can just link to my rant here:
1 Like
2024 Ford F-150 MSRP $59,000
How about if the 1% rule works in your favor, say a 2024 Ford F-150 $59,000 msrp $590 a month with zero down?
What about taxes and fees?
1st month only. fee’s and taxes rolled in to payment
Show me a real lease quote instead of a hypothetical.
1 Like
I have no clue if thats an amazing deal or a horrible deal. The fact that it is at 1% of the msrp doesnt inform that at all.
A broken clock is right twice a day. Doesnt make it any good for telling the time.
1 Like
I think it’s established that the 1% rule is bad. The problem is there doesn’t seem to be a substitute method to help someone learn a new rule of thumb or approach to start framing a “good” lease.
That net pricing approach I put above doesn’t seem to have traction either. Not sure what would be a new rule of thumb other than ‘look in the LH marketplace.’
As we know, rebates/incentives can vary by zip code. Everyone’s tax rate is also different, so focussing on that rule is a waste of time.
Not preaching to you, but just commenting.
1 Like
Yah, because it doesnt exist.
One can either take the time to figure out what something should cost or they can use useless rules of thumb that offers no value. Can’t have your cake and eat it too.
The most valuable thing someone can learn here is that there isn’t a rule of thumb that is of any use.
I feel like my my proposed rule actually addresses your two concerns.
My approach was a pre-tax approach (see two paragraphs before the TLDR). I agree with you, removing taxes from a calculation is necessary to compare deals across geographies.
And the goal of looking at net pricing for used cars is to remove rebates/incentives from the equation. I want new buyer/lessee to target incentives to peg their capitalized cost near what used cars are transacting by taking advantage of whatever rebates/discounts are available. There aren’t significant rebates/incentives on used cars since the income limit is so harsh on the IRA rebate for used… and the loophole can’t be applied since used cars cannot be leased.
I agree, some super-easy rule of thumb using MSRP is too “cake and eat it too.”
But my outlined approach takes all of 2 minutes to research. And I think starts a possible benchmark for a new rule of thumb around net pricing. It is a way to have the cake and eat it too, because anybody with an internet connection could replicate this approach as a starting point.
Of course, “go look at the LH marketplace” is a good rule of thumb too. But I wouldn’t want any of you all to think I was a schill.
As a bank FMCC usually offers really mediocre to crap leases.
You’re much better off looking at Marketplace instead of pushing this boulder uphill
Your outlined approach isnt a bad strategy for looking at used vehicles, but im not convinced it does anything to inform a good lease deal.
Yeah, I’d need to support/prove my assertion that low mileage used list pricing is highly correlated to “LH worthy” net-of-incentives pricing on new vehicles.
This is where we need @delta737h and his math powers.