It’s always best to know how it’s calculated. So, yes, for some folks it does matter as they don’t want to part with more money than necessary even if it is returned. I’m a believer in the time-value of the dollar.
When i change the selling price in the calculator for that contract to the actual listed agreed on value, the payment amount pre mf savings bumps up to $358/mo, which would make for a $400 per msd cost. That gets you the $3600 total msd cost.
I had to go to battle with an audi dealer over this one once. They were convinced the msds were based on the pre-msd mf. Audi does it post-msd, but it seems to get done incorrectly quite often.
I dont know about others
I had 9 MSDs on my last Sienna lease and the pre/post payments were $560/$503. The contract had $4,200 in MSDs, which would be $467 each. I still don’t know how that was calculated. 
Most times it makes sense. As long as it gets funded.
I was looking at the actual contract (below) where the agreed upon value (sell price) and adjusted cap are already cemented at 41,622. So, that can’t be changed.
Again, you would need an mf of at least 0.00394 to get you to 3600. To wit…
0.00394 x (41622 + 41191.15) + (41622 - 41191.15) / 18 = 350.22
Rounding this base monthly payment up to 400, yields 9 MSD’s of
9 x 400 = 3600.
What did you use as an mf? It would have to have a lower bound of 0.00394. Seems rather remote to me but, I could be wrong.
That’s why it’s so important to know how it is calculated. So, it does matter. Thanks for the info.
I suspect that this is where the question lies and the weirdness with one pays.
What they seem to be doing when calculating the base payment amount for the msds is capitalizing all the fees rather than only using the depreciation and rent charge like youre doing.
hmmmmm… If that’s what NMAC is doing (capitalizing fees), it doesn’t make any sense as those fees are itemized separately and paid upfront. Furthermore, the adjusted cap would have to include those capped fees which it does not. I believe doing so would violate the Consumer Retail Leasing Act (Reg. M). However, perhaps there’s a way for them to circumnavigate around that storm (lol)
This whole issue could be resolved if we had the dealer’s lease worksheet assuming the mf used to compute those MSD’s is disclosed. Is it customary to disclose such a money factor in the WS? I would think so.
Ive never seen a breakdown that showed how the msd amount was calculated as part of a normal disclosure.
I also dont know of any other banks that allow msds on a one pay.
You very well could be right that this is wrong. This contract very well could’ve not been funded. No topic linked on contract to follow up on. Pretty much a moot point at this time pertaining to that contract.
The lease software that a lot of dealers use isn’t able to handle NMAC one pay + MSD calculations. Thus why a lot of Nissan dealers aren’t willing to offer one pay + MSD.
1 Like
I found this contract page from the “SIGNED” section of this forum. A member has uploaded the calculator and contract copy (one page).
I too didn’t find any discussion thread on this topic.
The calculators posted with these are often wrong.
In this case, the selling price on the contract doesn’t match the calculator, for example.
This is a good point regarding the maximum discount @Qbrozen !
Since pathfinder SV version has 94% residual value, dealer cant give more than 6% off the MSRP even if he wants to.
So, SL version though a little pricy …with 91% RV, it has more room to negotiate and it could end up cheaper to lease.
BMW does it post as well.
Asking for more miles will also drop the RV. Not sure what the percentages are on 18 mos.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.