Vehicles that hold their value

[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15608467/[/url]

No surprise at one brand mentioned...

[url]http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/01/forbeslife_vehicles_cx_dl_1102featslide.html?thisSpeed=12000[/url]

For of the top ten are Toyota products as well.

Natalie

--


"Wicked little doll, you are not human;
wicked little doll, you have no soul."
(David Byrne, 1997)

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:56:18 -0500, Wickeddoll® wrote:
[color=blue]
> [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15608467/[/url]
>
> No surprise at one brand mentioned...
>
> [url]http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/01/forbeslife_vehicles_cx_dl_1102featslide.html?thisSpeed=12000[/url]
>
> For of the top ten are Toyota products as well.
>
> Natalie[/color]

WOW! I guess Forbes don't like people that use free operating systems!
That site link for Forbes hosed my system down so bad, I got to see four
scenes of Cool Hand Luke before it closed with a "Not Responding" warning.

I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?

Vash The Stampede wrote:
[color=blue]
> I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]

LOFL!!! Yeah, right!

I am going to be selling my Toyota Corolla CE 2004. I need the money more
than the car now as I've fallen on hard times, and two dealers offered me
$11,500 for it. It has a/c, power locks, remote, cd player, 2 new rear
tires. It cost me $21,000 new. Now say I had bought a Hyundai or Chevy with
equivalent size and features, I suppose it would be worth even less? Because
losing half its value in 3 years is pretty grim. It has about 55,000 km on
it. I was planning to keep it for the rest of my life "since it's a Toyota",
but it's my only asset and I have to sell it. When I get money again I'll
just buy a used one.


"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958diespammersdie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ej81ov.sg.1@news.evilcabal.org...[color=blue]
> [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15608467/[/url]
>
> No surprise at one brand mentioned...
>
> [url]http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/01/forbeslife_vehicles_cx_dl_1102featslide.html?thisSpeed=12000[/url]
>
> For of the top ten are Toyota products as well.
>
> Natalie
>
> --
>
>
> "Wicked little doll, you are not human;
> wicked little doll, you have no soul."
> (David Byrne, 1997)
>[/color]

"aspidistra" <aspidistra@x82md.com> wrote in message
news:zqS5h.303492$R63.280817@pd7urf1no...[color=blue]
>I am going to be selling my Toyota Corolla CE 2004. I need the money more
>than the car now as I've fallen on hard times,[/color]

I'm sorry to hear that; I hope it's just temporary.
[color=blue]
> and two dealers offered me $11,500 for it. It has a/c, power locks,
> remote, cd player, 2 new rear tires. It cost me $21,000 new. Now say I had
> bought a Hyundai or Chevy with equivalent size and features, I suppose it
> would be worth even less? Because losing half its value in 3 years is
> pretty grim. It has about 55,000 km on it. I was planning to keep it for
> the rest of my life "since it's a Toyota", but it's my only asset and I
> have to sell it. When I get money again I'll just buy a used one.
>[/color]

Why are you selling it to a dealer? Find an end-customer yourself and sell
it for more.
[color=blue]
> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958diespammersdie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ej81ov.sg.1@news.evilcabal.org...[color=green]
>> [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15608467/[/url]
>>
>> No surprise at one brand mentioned...
>>
>> [url]http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/01/forbeslife_vehicles_cx_dl_1102featslide.html?thisSpeed=12000[/url]
>>
>> For of the top ten are Toyota products as well.
>>
>> Natalie
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> "Wicked little doll, you are not human;
>> wicked little doll, you have no soul."
>> (David Byrne, 1997)
>>[/color]
>[/color]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

You are correct, NADA says a four year old Camry is worth $3,000 more than
then the average domestic. Apples to oranges, however. What is more
noteworthy is the four year old Camry cost $4,500 MORE to purchase when new.
Obviously the domestics on average return more of ones original investment
than does then Camry. ;)


mike hunt


"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958diespammersdie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ej81ov.sg.1@news.evilcabal.org...[color=blue]
> [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15608467/[/url]
>
> No surprise at one brand mentioned...
>
> For of the top ten are Toyota products as well.
>
> Natalie
>
> --
>
>
> "Wicked little doll, you are not human;
> wicked little doll, you have no soul."
> (David Byrne, 1997)
>[/color]

Vash The Stampede <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]
Perhaps but it is equally fucked in Win2K. Whatever were they
thinking....
--
HTH,
Derald

"Derald" <derald@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:Qx86h.6711$ig4.2296@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...[color=blue]
> Vash The Stampede <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]
> Perhaps but it is equally fucked in Win2K. Whatever were they
> thinking....
> --
> HTH,
> Derald[/color]

Yeah, that Forbes slideshow froze my browser at first, but worked when I
stopped it and changed the slides manually. I thought it was just my puter,
but I guess not.

Natalie

Wickeddoll® wrote:[color=blue]
>
> Yeah, that Forbes slideshow froze my browser at first, but worked when I
> stopped it and changed the slides manually. I thought it was just my puter,
> but I guess not.[/color]
======

Wow, Natalie, I lucked out! That slide show worked perfectly well
in the Firefox browser on Xubuntu Linux 6.06. That's a great
site. Thanks for mentioning it.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:59:28 +0000, Derald wrote:
[color=blue]
> Vash The Stampede <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]
> Perhaps but it is equally fucked in Win2K. Whatever were they
> thinking....[/color]

LOL! I have put up with a LOT of incompatabilities running my Linux
systems, but it's pretty bad when it knocks down the 'leader'!

Guess I'll try it with Firefox and see what happens!

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:29:11 -0600, Built_Well wrote:
[color=blue]
> Wickeddoll® wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> Yeah, that Forbes slideshow froze my browser at first, but worked when I
>> stopped it and changed the slides manually. I thought it was just my puter,
>> but I guess not.[/color]
> ======
>
> Wow, Natalie, I lucked out! That slide show worked perfectly well
> in the Firefox browser on Xubuntu Linux 6.06. That's a great
> site. Thanks for mentioning it.[/color]

I have Firefox on SuSE 10.0 64-Bit. I'll have to try it with that.


As far as Vista, I was only kidding. I get Vista to see my DSL router once
every 4 or 5 times it boots!

This is the 'future' of computing? Not only that, but it takes longer than
Linux to load. By comparison, XP is a Speed Demon!

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:22:17 -0500, High Tech Misfit wrote:
[color=blue]
> Vash The Stampede wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]
>
> LOFL!!! Yeah, right![/color]

See my response to B-W. If Vista sees my freakin' DSL router, it seems
quick.

It only sees the damn thing every 4-5 boots!!

Hachiroku / Vash The Stampede wrote:[color=blue]
>
> Built_Well wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Wickeddoll® wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Yeah, that Forbes slideshow froze my browser at first, but worked when I
>>> stopped it and changed the slides manually. I thought it was just my puter,
>>> but I guess not.[/color]
>> ======
>>
>> Wow, Natalie, I lucked out! That slide show worked perfectly well
>> in the Firefox browser on Xubuntu Linux 6.06. That's a great
>> site. Thanks for mentioning it.
>> ======[/color]
>
>
> I have Firefox on SuSE 10.0 64-Bit. I'll have to try it with that.
>
> As far as Vista, I was only kidding. I get Vista to see my DSL router once
> every 4 or 5 times it boots!
>
> This is the 'future' of computing? Not only that, but it takes longer than
> Linux to load. By comparison, XP is a Speed Demon![/color]
==========


Hi Hachi. That site even worked in the Epiphany browser!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

"Vash The Stampede" <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote in message
news:b896h.2114$%U.494@trndny07...[color=blue]
> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:22:17 -0500, High Tech Misfit wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Vash The Stampede wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?[/color]
>>
>> LOFL!!! Yeah, right![/color]
>
> See my response to B-W. If Vista sees my freakin' DSL router, it seems
> quick.[/color]

My son (who sells computers at Best Buy), decided to decline an offer from
M$ for computer business people to get it really cheap. He's just not
interested in beta-testing the thing! Despite being a big-time gamer.[color=blue]
>
> It only sees the damn thing every 4-5 boots!![/color]

Did you check the router itself? I had a terrible time with one of mine,
back when I still had Damned Slow Loading.

Cable is the best way around here, but in some areas, DSL is actually
faster. My mom's DSL was only a tiny bit slower than my cable connection,
and she only pays $15 a month for it. I'm so jealous LOL

Natalie

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958diespammersdie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ejam3s.3k8.1@news.evilcabal.org...[color=blue]
>
> "Vash The Stampede" <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote in message
> news:b896h.2114$%U.494@trndny07...[color=green]
>> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:22:17 -0500, High Tech Misfit wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Vash The Stampede wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wonder if I used Vista if it would work properly?
>>>
>>> LOFL!!! Yeah, right![/color]
>>
>> See my response to B-W. If Vista sees my freakin' DSL router, it seems
>> quick.[/color]
>
> My son (who sells computers at Best Buy), decided to decline an offer from
> M$ for computer business people to get it really cheap. He's just not
> interested in beta-testing the thing! Despite being a big-time gamer.[color=green]
>>
>> It only sees the damn thing every 4-5 boots!![/color]
>
> Did you check the router itself? I had a terrible time with one of mine,
> back when I still had Damned Slow Loading.
>
> Cable is the best way around here, but in some areas, DSL is actually
> faster. My mom's DSL was only a tiny bit slower than my cable connection,
> and she only pays $15 a month for it. I'm so jealous LOL
>
> Natalie[/color]

In my area, Verizon is the phone service, and though our little cowtown now
has over 100,000 residents, Verizon is dragging its corporate feet about
DSL, so (sniff!) I'm still on dial-up, and even with an accelerator, it's
slow as molasses. With cable, (if it's even available here) the cost is
well over $50 a month, and I'm just not THAT interested in the net.