Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
<font color="red">
Blue book - what a joke. . . </font>
What else would you use to get a national average? I'd suggest there is no other source than the blue book. I am not picking on any brand here, or suggesting one has higher resale than another, or one has higher trade-in than other. I'm just asking a question.
I'd also suggest that the numbers published are nothing more than a range and I'd totally agree that the condition dictates a lot of the value. But realize a couple things, the blue book for compact equipment gives a "trade in value, low and high" so what it is worth on trade in is NOT what it is worth at auction where it is being retailed. There is a big difference between "trade in" and "retail" and the Blue Books I have seen give "trade in" values.
So for those of you who don't believe in either Ebay or Blue Book, then I have one quesiton for you: What do you suggest be used to provide national average ranges?
It is easy to criticize . . . but how about some suggestions on a legitimate way to come up with values?
<font color="red">
I hope this isn't another threrad headed for the dumper....... </font>
If it does go into the dumper it is because Neil is getting attacked, he didn't do anything other than state he is working off of the Blue Book values and all I see after that is criticizm, but no suggestions on alternatives. Bluechip and Gamble77 are both dealers, do they use Blue Book to give indications of anything? DonnyJ has Blue Book information as well and stated he would like to see Neil's information (and I suspect he will keep Neil honest at the same time).
So here is my CONSTRUCTIVE suggestion: Use the Blue Book values. Pick tractors that are roughly 4 to 6 years old, but still are currently in production, and post the "LOW" trade in value, and post the the % below Original MSRP the tractor is worth.
Why pick the LOW trade in value? Simple, we know it is not going to be any lower than that! So if ALL brands are compared at their LOW trade in value, then we have a simple reference point that we can all agree on as being low. Sort of like using the 'pivot points' to measure a FEL /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
But at least it gives us a reference we can start from. We all know that a polished tractor is worth more than one covered with rust. But at least we'd have some indication of what the 'industry' thinks the tractors are worth (and that may be different than what consumer think?).
Blue book - what a joke. . . </font>
What else would you use to get a national average? I'd suggest there is no other source than the blue book. I am not picking on any brand here, or suggesting one has higher resale than another, or one has higher trade-in than other. I'm just asking a question.
I'd also suggest that the numbers published are nothing more than a range and I'd totally agree that the condition dictates a lot of the value. But realize a couple things, the blue book for compact equipment gives a "trade in value, low and high" so what it is worth on trade in is NOT what it is worth at auction where it is being retailed. There is a big difference between "trade in" and "retail" and the Blue Books I have seen give "trade in" values.
So for those of you who don't believe in either Ebay or Blue Book, then I have one quesiton for you: What do you suggest be used to provide national average ranges?
It is easy to criticize . . . but how about some suggestions on a legitimate way to come up with values?
<font color="red">
I hope this isn't another threrad headed for the dumper....... </font>
If it does go into the dumper it is because Neil is getting attacked, he didn't do anything other than state he is working off of the Blue Book values and all I see after that is criticizm, but no suggestions on alternatives. Bluechip and Gamble77 are both dealers, do they use Blue Book to give indications of anything? DonnyJ has Blue Book information as well and stated he would like to see Neil's information (and I suspect he will keep Neil honest at the same time).
So here is my CONSTRUCTIVE suggestion: Use the Blue Book values. Pick tractors that are roughly 4 to 6 years old, but still are currently in production, and post the "LOW" trade in value, and post the the % below Original MSRP the tractor is worth.
Why pick the LOW trade in value? Simple, we know it is not going to be any lower than that! So if ALL brands are compared at their LOW trade in value, then we have a simple reference point that we can all agree on as being low. Sort of like using the 'pivot points' to measure a FEL /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
But at least it gives us a reference we can start from. We all know that a polished tractor is worth more than one covered with rust. But at least we'd have some indication of what the 'industry' thinks the tractors are worth (and that may be different than what consumer think?).