Re: E36M3 Regression Analysis  Purchase Price Findings
Unless, I am missing something, the formula doesn't allow for "condition"?
I am 58 years old and I have looked at (maybe) hundreds of cars to buy in my lifetime. The addage "you get what you pay for" has been true more often than false. Value is simply what someone is willing to pay  in my case, what I am willing to pay.
Take the case of EAG cars  there are some that pay this price (or they wouldn't be in business) because of the miles and the "condition" and of course the confidence that EAG inspires as well.
I could have two cars where the formula indicates either are worth $10,000 (as an example), yet one is mint and obviously well cared for and sound and the other is running but is sketchy in almost every area. In this case the 1st car (to me) might be worth) up to 30% more, or $3,000 more and the 2nd car could be worth anywhere from 30% to 50% less (as an example), or anywhere from $5,000 to $7,000.
Am I missing something?
I guess the formula should state, "assuming the car is in "average" condition for the year and miles input into the formula. Let me make my point using simply miles.
Two identical cars where one could have 66,000 miles on the clock and the other 100,000 miles  the one with 66,000 miles could literally have been abused tremendously  we have all seen these cars. The other with 100,000 could be near perfect being pampered it's whole life  I've seen several cars like this in my life (just bought one). Clearly, to me, the 2nd car is worth much more, but the formula fails to take this into account.
I haven't read the entire thread, just the first few, and last few pages.
__________________
Current:
97 Cosmos M3 Coupe, 97 M3 Cosmos Coupe, 97 Artic Silver M34A, 16 Volvo XC90
Previous:
99 Estoril M3 Coupe, 99 Estoril M3 Coupe, 02 E39 M5 Imola, 99 Titanium Silver M3/2/5, 89 Zinnoberot 325IS, 89 tan 325 IS  Eurotuner magazine car, 92 DINAN 325 IS,, 86 325E, 86 Buick Gran National, 70 Buick GS Stage I, 56 Lincoln Premier
