|
Pryor on Fire posted:It's become such a big thing that when you walk into a car dealership and just ask for the price (like is it going for retail? below retail?) you can tell the dealer hasn't really used that part of his brain in a long time and it trips him up a bit. They are also usually barely able to conceal their annoyance and disappointment that they got stuck with one of those customers who actually wants to know the price. Yes this includes whatever lovely "no haggle" haggle dealer you have in your neighborhood. I haven't bought a car in ten years but I didn't have a problem finding the actual price. Heck you can go to the automaker's website and calculate it out most of the time, and if you use an auto buyers service like Costco has, it's all about the price. Monthly payments are pushed because most people don't pay cash and think "how much can I afford per month." So really you should be blaming BWM people. The few cars I remember that really pushed the total price in ads were cheap cars like Hyundai when they first started appearing.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:49 |
|
|
With some exceptions I don't think the problem with buying cars in the US is one of obfuscation, but rather willful ignorance and a warped sense of what affordability means combined with entitlement. And a network of dealers, banks and car manufacturers willing and able to take full advantage of that, of course. Shady dealers, banks, etc. do exist but for the most case it boils down to the buyer making a major purchase combined with a long term financial commitment without bothering to calculate what the actual out of pocket cost will be. I've personally known people who will dicker more over the price of a used gas grill at a yard sale, even walk if it was $10 more than they wanted to pay (I am thinking of a specific example here) yet have a pickup truck they bought based solely on how affordable the monthly payment was. That's the mentality that leads to, "well I can get a new car and "get out" of my old one and my payments don't really change! I'll be making a car payment all the time anyway what's the big deal?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:This is amazing. If you asked 100 people on the street if you can lose more than you invest in the market, 99 of them would say 'no' so I can completely understand why this guy ended up getting screwed. He should lawyer up, though I'm not sure if it will make a lick of difference. There's the long shot they can try to play the "your broker didn't gather the basic KYC information for his new client" and see if they can get wiggle room from the actual firm. Doubt it though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
Ixian posted:I've personally known people who will dicker more over the price of a used gas grill at a yard sale, even walk if it was $10 more than they wanted to pay (I am thinking of a specific example here) yet have a pickup truck they bought based solely on how affordable the monthly payment was. That's the mentality that leads to, "well I can get a new car and "get out" of my old one and my payments don't really change! I'll be making a car payment all the time anyway what's the big deal?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality Solice Kirsk posted:There's the long shot they can try to play the "your broker didn't gather the basic KYC information for his new client" and see if they can get wiggle room from the actual firm. Doubt it though. That's what I was thinking. Is this not a thing for transfer on death accounts? Seems like the borker (edit, I'm leaving this typo in) would at least be getting a nastygram from the SEC. Don't know if that wipes out the debt, and I seriously dobt any money reappears.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Motronic posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality Doesn't a client at a brokerage normally fill out risk profile info or is that only in Canada and for adviser products?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
I really don't understand how even with a TOD they can make him responsible for a contract his dad signed. The broker had a fiduciary responsibility to explain that poo poo when enrolling a new client. Even if the brokerage house had him sign something there are regulations in most of the financial industry to prevent this sort of thing. For instance a bank can be held responsible for taking advantage of customers witj practices that are deemed unfair even if there is no law against them. I am not sure if they extend to securities becauase I don't work with them, but he needs a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
If he did a transfer on death process like he said he likely didn't pay attention to what he was signing. Understandably enough. A decent tax attorney could probably get him out of this situation but it's going to take at least that much effort, the broker isn't going to drop it and if the transfer was done correctly they are, at face value, in the right. It's entirely possible there's a breach of fiduciary duty somewhere in this but that is what the lawyer is for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
If it's for real a "broker" and not an "investment advisor" and the account isn't a retirement account then the broker doesn't have any "fiduciary" responsibilities to it outside of getting the KYC info. He said he's in Nevada, so unless they have a state law I'm not familiar with, I don't know if fiduciary responsibilities are going to come up at all. poo poo like this still pisses me off though. That broker should have let the kid know what investments were in that account because he's a professional and thats some basic client care.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:If it's for real a "broker" and not an "investment advisor" and the account isn't a retirement account then the broker doesn't have any "fiduciary" responsibilities to it outside of getting the KYC info. He said he's in Nevada, so unless they have a state law I'm not familiar with, I don't know if fiduciary responsibilities are going to come up at all. poo poo like this still pisses me off though. That broker should have let the kid know what investments were in that account because he's a professional and thats some basic client care. Someone else in the estate planning/disposition may have had said duties. And if there was no estate process to speak of, or even a will, due to the suddenness of the death, that in itself may help him get out of this with a good attorney.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
I hope it works out for him. That's a really poo poo blow to be dealt along with losing your dad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
People lease smartphones now. The industry wants leasing a phone to be the standard. Sometimes I think about all the money that goes into the finance vacuum instead of buying more stuff that actually exists and get really sad. But a paradigm shift where people stopped financing dumb stuff would require a complete overhaul of humanity so that's not happening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Blinkman987 posted:People lease smartphones now. The industry wants leasing a phone to be the standard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:They're doing this because phone loans are being securitized. It's a whole new sector that the financial market is actively salivating over. The phone companies - who get to sell off the risk associated with the loans to third parties - partner up with the banks - who would love nothing more than to get a slice of a market they previously had no connection with - and you get a beautiful alien baby. Is there anything that can't be securitized? Next thing you know, Comcast is gonna start selling securities based on my cable contract.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
A lease is just interest + depreciation + service costs. There are circumstances where the assurances (including less exposure to the underlying price of whatever you're leasing) of a lease outweigh the additional costs over purchasing something outright. Blanket statements that leasing or financing things aren't helpful. But yeah, you probably should not lease your personal cell phone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
BigDave posted:Is there anything that can't be securitized? Next thing you know, Comcast is gonna start selling securities based on my cable contract.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:They absolutely will. There are also securities for natural catastrophe insurance (http://www.casact.org/community/affiliates/CANE/0912/Cat-Bond.pdf) and life insurance. I can't find the link on the second one, unfortunately, but yep, there is literally a way to Check out slide twelve in that PDF for a taste of what it must feel like to be a sociopath with access to Powerpoint.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:They absolutely will. We're already close if it hasn't happened yet. Business loans based on receivables has been a thing for a really long time. All you need to do is turn the back end of that into a security.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Before they got bailed out by the government, US car companies made all their money on leases and loans. If you walked into the dealership and paid for a new car up front, they probably lost money on the deal. yeah that's not really true
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:yeah that's not really true Yeah 0% car loans were a thing for a while, that's not a money maker unless you are making money on the car.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Every "0%" loan I ever saw always had monthly financing charges on the order of $15/month per $1000 financed. Sure sounds like interest for all practical purposes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:A lease is just interest + depreciation + service costs. There are circumstances where the assurances (including less exposure to the underlying price of whatever you're leasing) of a lease outweigh the additional costs over purchasing something outright. Blanket statements that leasing or financing things aren't helpful. I lease my cell phone, collecting some kind of pre order bonus and paying linear depreciation on a handset you intend to own for about 6 months is the least expensive way to always have the newest cell phone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
C.H.O.M.E posted:Yeah 0% car loans were a thing for a while, that's not a money maker unless you are making money on the car. I mean car companies were (and are) making a poo poo ton of money off of captive finance but it's not like the full range was loss making at transaction prices. Some of it was, but there were a lot of other issues that weren't just "lol selling cars at a loss!!!" ohgodwhat posted:Every "0%" loan I ever saw always had monthly financing charges on the order of $15/month per $1000 financed. Sure sounds like interest for all practical purposes. This is true. Even if there's no interest rate there's usually a financing charge, but even relatively low risk auto loans at 1.39% are at best a breakeven prop for the financial arm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:I lease my cell phone, collecting some kind of pre order bonus and paying linear depreciation on a handset you intend to own for about 6 months is the least expensive way to always have the newest cell phone. Leasing under these circumstances may be GWM. Getting a new phone every 6 months on the other hand.....
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
I mean he's technically correct in that if you always have to have the newest phone regardless of practicality it's the cheapest way to do it. Swapping phones that often is super BWM though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Let's have another round of "I don't think there's enough value" vs "person can afford it and wants to"!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
0% APR is inclusive of finance charges. They are not allowed to state an interest rate other than APR unless they also state the APR along with it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
I'm not sure phone leases are meaningfully different from 'free' phones with service contracts - the price was already built into the monthly bill, it just wasn't as obvious. Aside from the part where you'd 'only' get a new phone every year or two instead of every 6 months, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Is there that much risk they want to unload when someone's paying their monthly bill with the built-in phone subsidy? Or I guess they just want all that cash up-front? They realize they're in this for the long haul, right? Seems better to just have the revenue, especially if they still have to process the payments and manage the customers. I guess the devil's in the details and I'm too ignorant (and practical) on the subject to figure out how their wall street math works.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:I'm not sure phone leases are meaningfully different from 'free' phones with service contracts - the price was already built into the monthly bill, it just wasn't as obvious. Exactly, my phone bill is not appreciably different than it was ten years ago when I got a Google G1 just now $50 of my bill is called a line charge and $30 is called a phone lease. It is much better for the phone companies to let customers rapidly go through phones because there is a lot of resale value for refurbished and remanufactured high end smart phones even one or more product cycles down the line. BEHOLD: MY CAPE fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Jun 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
wow i can't believe people want [thing i don't want], and without knowing their income or budget, let me just say, how bwm!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
I didn't mean to suggest getting a phone every 6 months was BWM. That was just bad wording on my part. If you want to switch phones that often then yes, good for you, who gives a poo poo, etc. What I can't wrap my head around is the leasing model. I get how it works, at least as far as T-Mobile does it anyway, but you're paying a price for that flexibility. Not through straight up interest charges but the fact that you never own the device (unless you lease it for a really long time with T-Mobile, which no one on that plan would do) and you're always paying essentially full price for a phone with no end. Is it BWM? Maybe not. I don't want to start that debate again either so I'll drop it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Ixian posted:I didn't mean to suggest getting a phone every 6 months was BWM. That was just bad wording on my part. If you want to switch phones that often then yes, good for you, who gives a poo poo, etc. I know people who spend $500/month renting furniture from Rent-A-Center Living paycheck to paycheck + a desire to have nice things = SURE I CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THOSE NICE THINGS AT A LOW MONTHLY FEE, SIR
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:I know people who spend $500/month renting furniture from Rent-A-Center Renting furniture is (normally) true BWM because it doesn't matter if you are living paycheck to paycheck or like a king, it's just a bad use of a dollar no matter how many you having laying around. The leasing phone thing might be different, I don't know. There are, no question, people using it simply as a way to get phones they otherwise couldn't afford, or get them at a pace they couldn't, anyway. However all things being equal it comes down to more "this is how I choose to spend my dollars" and not "this is a bad use of dollars no matter what the circumstances". A debate this thread tends to slip in to more often than not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
It's interesting what gets normalized as something you're expected to buy outright vs something most people won't bat an eye at you renting/leasing(even if it's BWM in your situation). Furniture that should last years? Buy. Car that should last years? Go on and lease it. Computer/tablet that shouldn't be outdated for ~5 years? Buy it. Phone that shouldn't be outdated for ~2-3 years? Let's see about leasing it/getting it free with your plan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Sundae posted:There are also securities for natural catastrophe insurance (http://www.casact.org/community/affiliates/CANE/0912/Cat-Bond.pdf)
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Sundae posted:There are also securities for natural catastrophe insurance (http://www.casact.org/community/affiliates/CANE/0912/Cat-Bond.pdf) and life insurance. I can't find the link on the second one, unfortunately, but yep, there is literally a way to The life insurance part is called a viatical settlement. Basically you buy a chunk or all of the death benefit from a policy for less than the actual death benefit is worth and when they die you pocket the difference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:The life insurance part is called a viatical settlement. Basically you buy a chunk or all of the death benefit from a policy for less than the actual death benefit is worth and when they die you pocket the difference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:It's interesting what gets normalized as something you're expected to buy outright vs something most people won't bat an eye at you renting/leasing(even if it's BWM in your situation). Furniture shouldn't cost tens of thousands of dollars like a car would. Your point about the phone thing is spot on though, it's a little silly people pay something that only costs $600 on installments. That said, everyone needs a phone nowadays and many people can't really put down $600 right there and then every two years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Shipon posted:Furniture shouldn't cost tens of thousands of dollars like a car would. Your point about the phone thing is spot on though, it's a little silly people pay something that only costs $600 on installments. My co-worker pays $70/month on a T-Mobile plan plus like $10/month for the Jump Plan (every 6 months you can trade in your leased phone for a newer leased phone) and $10/month for AppleCare $1080/year for a phone 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:49 |
|
|
EugeneJ posted:My co-worker pays $70/month on a T-Mobile plan plus like $10/month for the Jump Plan (every 6 months you can trade in your leased phone for a newer leased phone) and $10/month for AppleCare ... and the service to go along with it too. The phone part of it is $120/yr which sounds pretty reasonable?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:01
|
|
