Alfa Romeo Giulia Forum banner

What do you think an undriven 2023 QV would be worth in 2035?

  • < $85K

    Votes: 13 28.9%
  • $85K - $100K

    Votes: 11 24.4%
  • $100K - $150K

    Votes: 8 17.8%
  • $150k - $250K

    Votes: 7 15.6%
  • $250K +

    Votes: 6 13.3%
41 - 54 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Just inflation alone will make the car technically appreciate, but at the same time $17,000 invested in 1964 and riding the inflation wave would make the money $154,000 today. The car you bought for 17k in 1964 fetches only $30,000 from the above graphic. Therefore, your example proves the car will appreciate, but not at the rate of inflation to the degree the money would appreciate by itself in an investment account. Buy the car to drive it. It would be rare to "make money" not driving it, especially given the storage costs, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
I think very few modern cars now will be on the road in 15 years, too many critical electrical components will fail or be unable to be sourced or repaired. Only older simpler vehicles maybe, if not outlawed. Like my 1952 Army M37 Weapons Carrier. Prehistoric and not complicated. Just need a 3/4 inch wrench and socket set to keep on the road. NV
That is what people thought in the 80's when electronic fuel injection first became widespread. That has not proven to be the case for two reasons:

1 - The number of junked cars provided a steady stream of spares.
2 - More recently, new technology has allowed many electronic and other parts to be replicated or improved on.

That will probably be the case 30 years from now, but I don't see people in their 20's today being interested enough in cars 30 years from now to drive values upward.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,020 Posts
You're completely ignoring that the buying power of both is the same. You didn't actually gain any money, everything got more expensive and your money sitting in the car adjusted to compensate.
My assumption was that $4K in 1972 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $30.5K today, an increase of $26,543.92 over 52 years. So, Based on that assumption, I would have made in theory $7K, which may be or may be not wasted in repairs, spare parts, storage, etc. My other assumption is that the average inflation rate is 3.99% per year between 1970 and today. If that assumption is also incorrect and the inflation is 40% as some say, then my rationale is incorrect.
 

·
Registered
2020 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
551 Posts
My assumption was that $4K in 1972 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $30.5K today, an increase of $26,543.92 over 52 years. So, Based on that assumption, I would have made in theory $7K, which may be or may be not wasted in repairs, spare parts, storage, etc. My other assumption is that the average inflation rate is 3.99% per year between 1970 and today. If that assumption is also incorrect and the inflation is 40% as some say, then my rationale is incorrect.
So, you're saying you agree that unless you have your heart set on owning a car for 50 years and barely if ever driving it, you will at best break even.

As for inflation it's impossible to put an exact number beyond what the government has like many have done, but there are easy plenty of examples of where it's evident in everyday life. Take the Giulia itself, a base Giulia starts at $43,000 today, which is a net increase over the inflation adjusted 1964 Giulia of almost $13k. Now obviously a lot more goes into making a new Giulia, but a lot of efficiencies are there too, cars are in theory easier and cheaper and more efficient to make these days. But for arguments sake it's "the same car". Thats where that 40% theory comes from. Or to simplify, it costs you a higher percentage of your salary to get you into a compact luxury sedan today as it did 50 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Sometimes, i do wonder how long the SoCs/circuit-boards used in all the electronics in these new cars will last. The old cars don't have to worry about that. Replacing these boards in today's cars will be a nightmare when the time comes.
As a point of comparison my 1996 manufactured Miata has two computers (and engine controller and an abs module), about 35k miles, and they both still work.
 

·
Registered
2018 Q4 with Fiamenghi Ti exhaust, Race Mod, and Tecnico wheels.
Joined
·
9,071 Posts
My assumption was that $4K in 1972 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $30.5K today, an increase of $26,543.92 over 52 years. So, Based on that assumption, I would have made in theory $7K, which may be or may be not wasted in repairs, spare parts, storage, etc. My other assumption is that the average inflation rate is 3.99% per year between 1970 and today. If that assumption is also incorrect and the inflation is 40% as some say, then my rationale is incorrect.
Looking at the USA government website

Cumulative inflation from 1967 (the $4200 MSRP car) and last month was 800% (9x). This works out to about 9^(1/55) = 1.041 or 4.1% per year.
In terms of buying a new Giulia this says it should cost 9*4200 = $37800 for a base model. That is actually not too far off. The car sold (used) for about $31000, which is perhaps a little more than a modestly used base Giulia type 952 would fetch. Note that the cost of keeping the car in good condition, storing and paying property taxes on it* was overlooked and non-trivial.

Now was said 1967 Giulia a good investment? I think not. Just keeping up with inflation means your money did not erode, but you did not have any real (as compared to taxable) gain.

The stock market is entirely different though, as you have to pay taxes on trades and dividends made along the way (the list of stocks in stock indices change from time to time, forcing sales). Thus the yield each year is degraded by the tax you must pay. Since that amount varies considerably based on your situation it is difficult to make a direct comparison. However the idea behind investing is that (never mind the mixed units such that the math does not work as stated) yield - taxes paid - inflation degradation is greater than 0 and hopefully at least a few percent of the basis greater than 0.

* In California vehicle property taxes are rolled into the vehicle registration fee and constitute most of the fee for most cars. There is a built in assumption that the car will depreciate and never appreciate over time factored into the vehicle registration fee. You can file Non-op and avoid most of the fees but then you cannot legally drive the car on road until you undo the non-op status.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
What Alfa need to do is completely discontinue the 952 series Gulia completely before moving to an electrified version. That will ensure values of the last ICE Giulia QV appreciate nicely. In my opinion the 2017-19 will be the most sought after (besides never driven and GTA/M variants). The 2020+ updated QVs are not as raw, fast or light as the 2017-19 models, which were built the way they were intended before stupid consumer opinions and focus groups got involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
Putting that $85,000 in a US Treasury bond maturing in 13 years is a much safer and likely more profitable choice. I guess there’s a chance these things appreciate, but there’s not even a strong demand today while they’re making them. I’d bet on E63s and CT5 Blackwings on being a much better investment over time, but still a poor one relative to other things you can store your money in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I'd be more concerned about owning such a car (I own a 2019 QV) and not driving it would be a shame. Why would I want to forgo the joy of driving this car in the hope of making some extra cash. A sad proposition. My brother-in-law bought a new 1985 Porsche 911 Turbo. Kept it 30 years putting about 3,500 miles on it. He sold it for about $65k. Not much of a return on his money, and he never had the pleasure of driving a Porsche. Today, the Giulia QV is a rare car. With Alfa Romeo going all electric soon, all these Georgio platform Alfas will cease production. Remember, when FCA wanted to relaunch Alfa Romeo it took the team of engineers who had developed the Ferrari 488 and assigned them the task of building a great Alfa Romeo. The Giulia QV was the result. It is a close as you can get to a Ferrari Sedan. So the QVs will remain a rare example of one of the greatest Alfas of all time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
I'd be more concerned about owning such a car (I own a 2019 QV) and not driving it would be a shame. Why would I want to forgo the joy of driving this car in the hope of making some extra cash. A sad proposition. My brother-in-law bought a new 1985 Porsche 911 Turbo. Kept it 30 years putting about 3,500 miles on it. He sold it for about $65k. Not much of a return on his money, and he never had the pleasure of driving a Porsche. Today, the Giulia QV is a rare car. With Alfa Romeo going all electric soon, all these Georgio platform Alfas will cease production. Remember, when FCA wanted to relaunch Alfa Romeo it took the team of engineers who had developed the Ferrari 488 and assigned them the task of building a great Alfa Romeo. The Giulia QV was the result. It is a close as you can get to a Ferrari Sedan. So the QVs will remain a rare example of one of the greatest Alfas of all time.
He missed the boat. a low mileage 85 911T peaked at more than $200,000.
 

·
Registered
2020 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
551 Posts
The 2020+ updated QVs are not as raw, fast or light as the 2017-19 models,
People really need to cut it with this myth, and I'm not talking about just you, but in general. If you like your car thats great but bagging on newer ones with nothing more than hyperbole is lame. 17-19 are neither faster nor lighter. The only things that changed weight wise is the addition of fold down rear seats (that some pre-2020 cars have too) and thicker window glass. The engine creates the same power, gear ratios and all that are identical. That weight difference can be eliminated by eating a few less big macs and translates to 0.00000000001 second difference in track time. Yes the steering is different, it's nowhere near as different as anyone has claimed, having driven them side by side. 2020+ cars are louder outside (open exhaust in D and changes to engine tuning) while quieter inside due to the thicker glass. An updated nicer interior, significantly better infotainment system, and most importantly an improved fuel injection system that will prevent the need for carbon cleaning the intake every few years are hardly things that would negatively affect the value.

The only cars that some may avoid would be late 2021+ cars now that the painted carbon fiber roof has been eliminated, and the option for CCBs. Also 2021+ cars have less interior color options (like red stitching) that some may look for. Would any of these things make a notable difference in value in the future? Unlikely. Thats what Corvette guys do lol.
 

·
Registered
2020 Giulia Quattroformaggio, 2020 Stelvio TI Sport
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
People really need to cut it with this myth, and I'm not talking about just you, but in general. If you like your car thats great but bagging on newer ones with nothing more than hyperbole is lame. 17-19 are neither faster nor lighter. The only things that changed weight wise is the addition of fold down rear seats (that some pre-2020 cars have too) and thicker window glass. The engine creates the same power, gear ratios and all that are identical. That weight difference can be eliminated by eating a few less big macs and translates to 0.00000000001 second difference in track time. Yes the steering is different, it's nowhere near as different as anyone has claimed, having driven them side by side. 2020+ cars are louder outside (open exhaust in D and changes to engine tuning) while quieter inside due to the thicker glass. An updated nicer interior, significantly better infotainment system, and most importantly an improved fuel injection system that will prevent the need for carbon cleaning the intake every few years are hardly things that would negatively affect the value.

The only cars that some may avoid would be late 2021+ cars now that the painted carbon fiber roof has been eliminated, and the option for CCBs. Also 2021+ cars have less interior color options (like red stitching) that some may look for. Would any of these things make a notable difference in value in the future? Unlikely. Thats what Corvette guys do lol.
Having had a 2018 TI Sport and a 2018 QF and now drive a 2020 QF, I 100% agree. Oh, and I track my cars as well so I've driven them as hard as I can for as long as I can in every session. That's only to say that the difference between the 2018 and 2020 QF in terms of performance, engagement, and feel (steering or otherwise) is minuscule at most. I would have to drive them immediately one after the other and concentrate to tell you which one was the 2018 and which one was the 2020 in terms of steering feel. So yeah, I think hyperbole has taken over when their differences are discussed. I could immediately tell the difference in fit and finish as well as road noise isolation with the windows up. The 2020 is a step up and I like it. If I want more engine noise with the windows up, I open the rear seat trunk access. Works great and louder than my 2018 where I couldn't even do that...
 
41 - 54 of 54 Posts
Top