For those of us hoping to cross-shop Bolt-Leaf-Tesla3

[Anonymous]

I know that.

In 2008 GMAC was shuttered...

You need a primer in corporate finance?

So you're saying that GM Financial is not a "wholly owned captive finance subsidiary of General Motors", and as such it's losses aren't eventually reflected upon GM (through loss of value of the subsidiary)?

What does that have to do with how a "leasing company" is managed, financed and its future income/losses projected and protected?

 

[Schnort]

At the end of three years, the outmoded Bolt then becomes GM's problem.

Not the way leases work!

The Lease Company/Bank buys the Bolt EV at the inception of the lease. GM is paid in full.

The problem, if any, after 3 years accrues to the lease company.

Except most of these leases are being offered by GM Financing

In other words, it's still "GM's problem" if the residual is "wrong".

 

[dandrewk]

At the end of three years, the outmoded Bolt then becomes GM's problem.

Not the way leases work!

The Lease Company/Bank buys the Bolt EV at the inception of the lease. GM is paid in full.

The problem, if any, after 3 years accrues to the lease company.

Except most of these leases are being offered by GM Financing

In other words, it's still "GM's problem" if the residual is "wrong".

That's correct. GM is still GM, whether it's the Chevrolet division or their finance arm. The fact is that GM loses if their residual is wrong.

re: that last point - as I posted, there are many factors that could make that residual (as high as it is) be "wrong". A sudden battery breakthrough, an influx of cheaper EVs with the same/ better range or perhaps some (as yet) undiscovered major issue with Bolts (really hope I'm wrong here).

Some pedantic postings notwithstanding, the advise is pretty much universal - If you can live with the mileage constraints, you should lease new EVs.

 

[Anonymous]

The ad hominem attack notwithstanding, neither of you still understand the leasing business...

You guys can debate leasing/residuals all you want...

That being said, the advice is sound! Not for the reason given, but for the fact that these are technological automobiles!

That is why I, being a techno geek, leased my Bolt EV, and for the maximum miles available to me: 45,000. I want to see what is available in January 2020; and not caring what my 2017 Bolt EV is worth then!

 

[boltage]

After generations of it's "x86" architecture as seen in microprocessors such as the 80286, 80386 and 80486 (which became known as the "286", "386" and "486"), Microsoft tried to patent "586" to prevent rival AMD from using it. When told that they couldn't patent a number, Microsoft came up with the name "Pentium" for their next generation of processors instead.

Intel, not Microsoft. Trademark, not patent.

 

[Anonymous]

The patent copyright and trademark laws in this country are a disgrace if someone can actually control the use a a letter of the alphabet

Unlike patent and copyright, which are government sponsored limited time monopolies that are granted in the United States Constitution, trademark law is a function of both common law and the federal Lanham Act and are rooted in consumer protection.

When you buy something with the name "Chevy" on it or it's stylized logo, you expect the same level of quality as you would expect from any Chevy product.

Sometimes a "mark" that is originally not protectable acquires a "secondary meaning" after a period of time of usage in the consumer market.

A chain of Yummy Ice Cream stores, has a mark that is too descriptive for a federal trademark. But after five years, one could apply for a secondary meaning federal registration.

Notwithstanding the registration for Yummy as a protected mark on ice cream, Tesla could release the Tesla Yummy at some future date!

No one would ever be so foolish to ever try to sell an i-PHONE! :lol:

 

[SeanNelson]

After generations of it's "x86" architecture as seen in microprocessors such as the 80286, 80386 and 80486 (which became known as the "286", "386" and "486"), Microsoft tried to patent "586" to prevent rival AMD from using it. When told that they couldn't patent a number, Microsoft came up with the name "Pentium" for their next generation of processors instead.

Intel, not Microsoft. Trademark, not patent.

Duh! Right you are, of course!