In this page, I, Rikutsu-Kone-Taro considered the cost-effectiveness of installing facttory(=manufacturer) options to increase resale value. Please note that the following opinions are based on the personal views of Rikutsu-Kone-Taro, and are subjective and biased.
Given that this is quite a logical and lengthy text, if you find reading such content tiresome, it’s advisable to take a break and navigate to the “GR Yaris-related pages” to explore other potentially interesting content.
Now, Rikutsu-Kone Taro’s GR Yaris doesn’t have any facttory(=manufacturer) options such as safety driving assistance devices or navigation systems installed.
The reason for this is primarily due to financial constraints, but there’s also the consideration that the cost-effectiveness of facttory(=manufacturer) options like safety driving assistance devices or navigation systems in terms of resale value seemed unfavorable. So, they deliberately chose not to install them, albeit somewhat begrudgingly.
Anyway, that’s just sour grapes.
What I want to convey here is that for cars like the GR Yaris, it’s the view of Rikutsu-Kone-Taro that it’s not worth investing in expensive safety driving assistance devices or navigation systems at the time of purchase to increase resale value. Considering resale value when purchasing a car is a recommended practice as it involves skillfully managing limited funds.
Funds are necessary not only for cars but also for other leisure activities and for improving quality of life. Moreover, money is needed for savings, investments, and purchasing insurance to prepare for future risks.
Therefore, it seems reasonable that installing facttory(=manufacturer) options that cannot be added later after delivery when purchasing a new car with the aim of increasing resale value could be justified.
But is that always the case?
To make the discussion easier to understand, let’s consider dividing the car price into two parts: the base price and the facttory(=manufacturer) options.
It’s typical for the price of a car to decrease from the moment of purchase. Unless it’s a historically significant car or owned by a historically famous person, which would command a premium, such cases are excluded.
Also, recently, there have been cases where cars from 30 to 40 years ago have become vintage and experienced price increases (click here for related pages), but not many people have the financial means to store a car for several decades, so here we’ll focus on considering the resale value of cars within approximately 7 to 8 years after purchase.
In short, we’re considering the resale value of used cars, excluding vintage cars.
So, to reiterate, the price of a car usually decreases after registration. What’s noteworthy is whether the rate of this price decrease is the same for the base car part and the facttory(=manufacturer) options part.
If the rate of price decrease for the facttory(=manufacturer) options part is significantly lower than that for the base car part, then it might make sense to invest heavily in facttory(=manufacturer) options at the time of purchase.
This means you can enjoy facttory(=manufacturer) options at a minimal cost due to their high resale value.
Let’s consider this more concretely.
Suppose the base car part price at the time of purchase is $7,143 (1 million yen) and the facttory(=manufacturer) options part price is $3,571 (500,000 yen), making a total of $10,714 (1.5 million yen) for a new car. Let’s examine several cases where the car is sold after a few years and receives a resale price of $6,429 (900,000 yen).
Case 1 If we break down the resale value, let’s say the base car part is $4,286 (600,000 yen) and the facttory(=manufacturer) options part is $2,143 (300,000 yen). In this case, both the base car part and the facttory(=manufacturer) options part have decreased by the same percentage, 60%. So, there’s a loss of $2,857 (400,000 yen) for the base car part and $1,429 (200,000 yen) for the facttory(=manufacturer) options part.
Case 2 Let’s say the breakdown of the resale value is $3,571 (500,000 yen) for the base car part and $2,857 (400,000 yen) for the facttory(=manufacturer) options part. This is a case where the base car part experiences a significant decrease in price. The base car part loses $3,571 (500,000 yen), while the facttory(=manufacturer) options part loses only $714 (100,000 yen).
Case 3 Considering the base car part to be $5,714 (800,000 yen) and the facttory(=manufacturer) options to be $714 (100,000 yen). In this scenario, the base car part experiences a minimal loss of only $714 (100,000 yen), while the options part suffers a loss of $2,857 (400,000 yen).
If facttory(=manufacturer) options weren’t installed, the resale value of the base car part would be $4,286 (600,000 yen) in Case 1, $3,571 (500,000 yen) in Case 2, and $5,714 (800,000 yen) in Case 3.
In all cases, the total resale value is $6,429 (900,000 yen). So, it seems like installing facttory(=manufacturer) options increases the resale value compared to just the base car value.
However, this phenomenon simply reflects the fact that there are no facttory(=manufacturer) options that decrease resale value because they are installed. If there were facttory(=manufacturer) options that decreased resale value by being installed, it would be an extremely rare case.
Let’s explain a bit more.
In Case 1, investing $3,571 (500,000 yen) at the time of purchase to increase resale value by $2,143 (300,000 yen) seems reasonable.
In Case 2, investing $3,571 (500,000 yen) to increase resale value by $2,857 (400,000 yen) is a good cost-benefit ratio.
In Case 3, investing $3,571 (500,000 yen) to increase resale value by only $714 (100,000 yen) seems less favorable in terms of cost-effectiveness.
In all three cases, investing $3,571 (500,000 yen) to increase resale value resulted in an increase, but there’s a clear difference in cost-effectiveness.
Case 2 has the highest cost-effectiveness, while Case 3 has the lowest.
Perhaps in Case 3, it might be more satisfying to spend the $3,571 (500,000 yen) on something else rather than on poorly cost-effective facttory(=manufacturer) options.
Like going on a 10-day trip to Europe or the East Coast of North America.
So, those were three extreme cases presented.
Now, which case is closest to the GR Yaris RZHP?
Rikutsu-Kone-Taro somewhat thinks it’s Case 3. In other words, they believe that the rate of decrease in the price of facttory(=manufacturer) options might be higher than that of the base car, reflecting the core appeal of this car, which is its excellent driving performance due to the powerful gasoline turbo engine, MT, and 4WD system combination.
Installing facttory(=manufacturer) options that are not directly related to this core appeal to increase resale value may not be cost-effective… perhaps.
This is a kind of gamble based on “Rikutsu-Kone Taro’s” speculation. The likelihood of Rikutsu-Kone-Taro being wrong isn’t low.
By the way, I think the new Note e-Power (FF) is like Case 2. The rate of decrease in the price of facttory(=manufacturer) options like ProPilot might be lower than that of the base car… or so I think.
The e-Power system itself is not a new system but inherited from the previous model. Therefore, Rikutsu-Kone-Taro doesn’t think it’s the core appeal of the new FF Note e-Power.
Since ProPilot still has a high degree of novelty and most people have no experience with it, it could become a core appeal of the new FF Note when combined with e-Power.
In such cases, it might be wise to equip ProPilot even if it’s a bit of a stretch at the time of purchase, enjoy comfortable driving, and sell it at a good time before ProPilot becomes outdated.
On the other hand, the 2-motor 4WD will likely be a core appeal of the new Note. So, it might seem like Case 3, but considering the excellent cost-effectiveness of equipping ProPilot for FF cars, it might be more like Case 2.
The new Note 4WD is a rare ordinary car with multiple core appeals. (Note: Purchased the Note 4WD in April 2022.)
But how about the GR Yaris?
Would someone looking to buy a used gasoline engine manual car in this day and age be concerned about the presence or absence of safety driving assistance devices or navigation?
Well, considering this, the RC might be the most cost-effective in terms of resale value in the GR Yaris lineup.
Even in the RC, the air conditioning option might be a worthwhile investment.
Hmm, but I’m not sure. How many of those buying used RCs are really looking for comfort? It’s a bit unclear.
After all, even the worst motorcycle in terms of comfort is still enjoyed year-round in some way or another…
Come to think of it, I think Rikutsu-Kone-Taro bought the 1st Edition just for the Morizo sign on the windshield.
By the way, even if the Morizo sign doesn’t add anything to the resale value, that’s totally fine. Rikutsu-Kone-Taro appreciates Morizo’s spirit.
So, that was “Rikutsu-Kone Taro’s” sour grapes due to financial constraints preventing them from buying safety driving assistance devices or navigation.
If you’ve enjoyed my style of sour grapes, there’s nothing better than that.
That’s all for now.
Thank You!