SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Auto manufacturers today are scratching their heads, trying to figure out why the millennial generation has little-to-no interest in owning a car. What car makers are failing to see is that this generation's interests and priorities have been redefined in the last two decades, pushing cars to the side while must-have personal technology products take up the fast lane.
It's no secret the percentage of new vehicles sold to 18- to 34-year-olds has significantly dropped over the past few years. Many argue this is the result of a weak economy, that the idea of making a large car investment and getting into more debt on top of college loans is too daunting for them. But that's not the "driving" factor, especially considering that owning a smartphone or other mobile device, with its monthly fees of network access, data plan, insurance, and app services, is almost comparable to the monthly payments required when leasing a Honda Civic.
...
With recent studies showing a huge decline in auto sales among the millennial marketplace, it's no wonder auto manufacturers are in a mild state of panic, realizing they're missing out on a generation that wields $200 billion in purchasing power. Numbers don't lie, and over the last few years statistics have shown a significant drop in young people who own cars, as well as those with driver's licenses—and that decline continues among the youngest millennials, meaning this is not a trend that's going away anytime soon. From 2007 to 2011, the number of cars purchased by people aged 18 to 34, fell almost 30%, and according to a study from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, only 44% of teens obtain a driver's license within the first year of becoming eligible and just half, 54% are licensed before turning 18. This is a major break with the past, considering how most teens of the two previous generations would race to the DMV for their license or permit on the day of their 16th birthday.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13 2016, @11:56PM
Cars today suck. My last Honda lasted me 24 years and was still in great shape when I sold it. My current VW is only 7 years old and it is dying (I can't afford to keep it running). No wonder kids today don't want to buy cars. You will save a lot of money if you can get by without a car.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @12:15AM
Without a car, you need to live in a big city. The good ones range from crazy-expensive to OMG WTF expensive. For home ownership, it's a shift of the decimal point.
IMHO the good deals are in pseudo-suburbia, places that are built kind of like suburbs but not actually being a bedroom community for a big city. Unlike rural areas and true suburbia, you can actually get jobs in these places. Commutes are trivial by car, taking just a few minutes. No, they usually aren't walkable, but you don't face traffic either.
The car-free life is pretty incompatible with having kids. It might work if you are rich, in which case you aren't actually car-free. You're just paying your servants to drive places for you.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @12:41AM
The reverse is true as well. If you live in a big city, it is much more expensive to own a car. Parking either at work or if you live in an apartment without parking. Why not use Uber for in town trips, and Zipcar for occasional longer ones?
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @01:22AM
Dunno, toddler twins chanting "Go mommy GO!" are cute while their mother is pulling them with her bike.
Public transit were I live also allow accompanied children (under 6) to ride free of charge.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Wednesday September 14 2016, @04:02AM
According to USA today it costs 9000/year to own a car. That's $750/mo. If you live in the city the cost of parking drives up cost of owning a car considerably on top of that.
I dunno owning a car in the city is pretty pointless.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:20AM
According to USA today it costs 9000/year to own a car
That is beyond ridiculous. You can buy a used car every year and still be well below that figure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:30AM
Insurance.
Gasoline for 10,000 miles
Maintenance
It adds up.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:53AM
Insurance. Gasoline for 10,000 miles. Maintenance
Insurance: $300/yr. Gasoline: $30 mpg, 10K miles = 333 gal * $3 = $1,000. Maintenance: in this scenario = $0, as you junk the car at the end of the period and buy a new one. $9K - $1,300 = $7,700. You certainly can buy a car for less than that. I sold one of my cars, still running after 250K miles, for $700.
The figure of $9K/yr may work only if you continuously lease an exceptionally expensive, brand new car. Here are some musings [edmunds.com] on the subject of cost. They offer this table:
Leasing=$23,476/6yr, New=$18,417/6yr, Used=$15,570/6yr.
If you divide these numbers by 6 years of the financing scenario, you get this:
Leasing=$3,912/yr, New=$3,119/yr, Used=$2,595/yr.
As you can see, these numbers are less than a third of the number that is claimed by the publication - and they are talking about a pretty good car - a 3-year-old midsize sedan. A car that is 10 or 15 years old may not run as great, but it will cost you 10-20% of the price. You may have to repair it more often, though.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday September 14 2016, @10:07AM
Insurance: $300/yr. Gasoline: $30 mpg, 10K miles = 333 gal * $3 = $1,000. Maintenance: in this scenario = $0, as you junk the car at the end of the period and buy a new one. $9K - $1,300 = $7,700. You certainly can buy a car for less than that. I sold one of my cars, still running after 250K miles, for $700.
That's a fantasy, at least where I live. Car insurance rates vary wildly, depending on where you live/drive.
A number of years ago when I was driving quite a bit for work (consulting with clients in a couple hundred mile radius), I was renting cars all the time, and even picking up long-term rentals. This continued for some time, so I considered buying a car.
One of the first things I did was price out insurance. I had a clean driving record (no accidents within 4 years, no points on my license) and priced out insurance for a used car. Just the minimum liability required by my state, without any fancy collision or additional coverage.
The cheapest rate I could find was $4,000/year, which put an immediate kibosh on that idea. That may have been high, even for my neck of the woods as I'd never had car insurance before, even though I was in my mid thirties.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:28PM
I have a pretty decent driving record, 1 ticket and 2 claims in the past 7 years. Ticket was for failure to yield.
I pay 125 a month for full coverage. Minimum coverage would be approx 40 dollars a month.
You were getting dinged because you had never had insurance before. Don't believe me? Go get a quote and check the box for no previous insurance and then run it again with a previous insurance, it is a DRASTIC difference, not unlike credit.
You score is also based on years with a license, age, occupation, marital status, and where you live. Big cities cost more cause there are more claims. Live in the boonies and its cheaper.
(Score: 2) by quacking duck on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:59PM
I have an excellent driving record (knock on wood), going back 2 decades. No (driving-related) tickets, no claims.
$1300 a year for full coverage, on a subcompact (i.e. not sporty, and not likely to be stolen).
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday September 14 2016, @11:07PM
Where you live has a huge impact on the rates you pay even before you factor in driver specifics. Just a move across town can result in rates changing as the insurance company factors in any changes in risk for theft.
I think if you live in places like New England or California you're going to get screwed on insurance. Sometimes all you can do is buy a cheaper car and not bother with collision on it.
That being said, that's one of the reasons that I ride a motorcycle, insurance is cheap and not even required. I pay about $100 a year for insurance. Next year I might upgrade the insurance policy to something nicer, but motorcycles don't do much damage typically and nobody is likely to want to steal a 250cc bike as long as I don't make it easy for them to steal.
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:41AM
Since I own a car, I don't like to think about what it costs me, but here goes..
car: approx $ 1200 (20 year old Mazda 323. drives fantastic; just don't go over 90 km/h too often, and watch out for the speed bumps)
4 new winter tires $120 iirc.
gasoline: tank 25 l of euro-95 every 2 months = $ 30 => $ 180
yearly checkup: $ 35
things that have broken/rusted off the car without me noticing, and need to be repaired for it to be approved: $100
4 new summer tires $120 iirc.
Changing thetires twice a year I can do myself, but I'm too ignorant to do repairs or even serious maintenance.
we've got the car now for 5 years, so let's divide ( $1200 + $240 + saving for a replacement $2400 ) by 5 => $ 768
I make it $ 1083 / year. But then again I only drive when it's absolutely necessary or when we go shopping, once a week.
This guesstimate is lower if, as I'm fervently praying, my car will also pass its inspection this coming autumn.
It has the lowest (cheapest) environmental tax category w.r.t. CO2. Don't they sell Mazda 323 in the USA, or is that below the dignity of status-conscious drivers?
It doesn't have airbags because they weren't invented yet, that's the only disadvantage I can think of.
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:58AM
oops, forgot about the car insurance. add $ 200 / year. But the bastards upped their price last year, so I'm switching to a cheaper insurance next year.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday September 14 2016, @12:00PM
According to USA today it costs 9000/year to own a car.
You're in a statistical trap. 1% of the population pays 10x to 100x that, and for everyone else its "a couple thou per year" not nearly 10K.
Its kinda like the urban area I work in... its very midwestern in that the city average housing is like $200K HOWEVER there is no housing in the city for anyone making between $25K/yr and maybe $1M/yr. There's only burned out crackhouses that sell for $10K and $6K/month luxury apartments and penthouses downtown and nothing in between. Have to go to the burbs for normal people housing (and the burbs combined outnumber city dwellers around 10 to 1)
So I buy a new $20K or so commuter car (adjusted for inflation) every ten years or so, and I buy quality so maintenance is like $0, but there are enough home equity loans turned into $80K pickup trucks and $80K SUVs not to mention the 1%er Ferrari collectors such that $10K/yr average probably is about right.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:13PM
Why not buy a $10K crackhouse on the edge of a nicer neighborhood? Gentrification doesn't happen by itself, buddy.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Thursday September 15 2016, @01:15AM
If it's anything like Detroit (and that's exactly what it sounds like to me), there is no "nicer neighborhood." It goes almost completely from shitty to super nice with no gradient in between. There are areas where you can find houses in good repair for cheap, with decent neighbors... but the next block over is boarded up traphouses and gangsters, all too ready to come to your block and take your shit.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:18PM
Really? My brother has lived in Ypsilanti, MI, for almost 20 years and for 20 years we heard him badmouth Detroit, but he had never actually been in Detroit. Last summer when we visited him, we decided to return to Brooklyn via Canada instead of northern Ohio. Along the way we stopped in Detroit for the day to check out the Eastern Market, the Detroit Institute of Arts, have lunch in Greek Town, and dinner in Mexicantown. The city was not at all the smoking crater everyone says it is. Eastern Market was as charming as anything you'd see at Union Square in Manhattan or Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. The art museum was world class, and I mean better than the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in NYC. Greek Town was better than Little Italy in NYC, and Mexicantown was a lovely neighborhood with great food.
It's not all roses, and the present is freighted with the disastrous policies of the past, but it's not irredeemable.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:55PM
Downtown is a different animal. I didn't even mean to badmouth Detroit... I would live there myself if I weren't living very cheaply and comfortably in the burbs. However, it IS dangerous, grimy, and a shithole. You would be downright stupid not to own a gun and keep it close while you sleep. You can let your kids play outside and the people are generally friendly and nice, but anyone with a family would not want to raise their kids there. It's not a warzone like some areas of Chicago, but it's nothing nice and I can completely understand why people with assets and attachments scorn it.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:10PM
It is pointless unless you leave the city on a regular basis to go someplace else sufficiently far away, such as if you like to drive 3 hours into the Catskills to camp/boat/bike/whatever, or visit your infirm mother in central Jersey. But if your journey from point A to point B is in the city, you'll probably get there faster, with less hassle than with a car (because you can't cheat and not also factor in time & expense to address the parking part of the journey).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:46AM
Without a car, you need to live in a big city.
No you don't. You need to live in a town that's big enough to contain your job, entertainment, and shops. I've never owned a car and never lived in a big city. I've always walked or cycled to work, or worked remotely.
We're now trying the ZipCar thing for a year. It was a good way of hiring a van when we moved house a couple of weeks ago, we'll see how much we use it after that.
The car-free life is pretty incompatible with having kids.
Around here, you see lots of tandems that are designed for one adult and one child and a lot of older children cycling to school unaccompanied. Driving anywhere near the city centre is either not allowed (taxis, busses, and bicycles only in the very centre) or about the same speed as walking and a lot slower than cycling at peak times.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:17PM
You'd need a place on the ground floor to store a bigger bike like that; doesn't work with 3- or 4-story walkup apartments. You'd also need a much more extensive network of protected bike lanes and a suitable driving culture, for kids to ride unsupervised. Some places like Amsterdam or Copenhagen have it, but no place in the United States is quite there yet. In fact the closest city I can think of in North America is Montreal.
It would be wonderful to get where those European cities are, because it would solve a great many problems at a stroke.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:50PM
You'd need a place on the ground floor to store a bigger bike like that; doesn't work with 3- or 4-story walkup apartments
Planning rules here (Cambridge) make it very difficult to build anything over 3 stories here, and the few places that do have bike storage. There are a couple of blocks of flats that are taller, but they have lifts to all floors and bike storage outside each flat. The newer ones have separate bike storage outside the building.
The problem is how the cities were designed. Most US cities were designed around cars. Most UK cities were designed around pedestrians or, occasionally, people on horseback. The city centre here really isn't designed for any vehicle bigger than a horse, so bikes fit nicely but cars struggle and busses have to go a very small number of ways in and out of the centre.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:07PM
I don't know that that's entirely true. The distance from Nassau County on Long Island to Midtown Manhattan is about 20 miles, as the crow flies. Driving that distance on the Long Island Expressway during rush hour will take 1.5-2 hours. You can bike that distance in less time, easily. Also, you'd save tons on insurance, gas, parking, general maintenance, and endless aggravation, and wouldn't need to take extra time or money to keep a gym membership besides.
In America people are conditioned by various self-interested parties to think the distances they travel daily are simply insurmountable without a car, but they're not. The constraint is psychological, not physical (in most cases--obviously the elderly and infirm need other measures).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Informative) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @12:36AM
I think your problem is you switched form Honda to VW.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @01:56AM
The real lesson to be learned is to not buy VW.
You could have gotten another Honda or something.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @03:12AM
Quality issues, yes - the makers are resting on their laurels. And then its a ton of money for nothing much (trade-in value). I may be in the minority on this, but here is what I think. Cars have become too complicated and jamming them to the gills with electronics is not the way to go. People want a phablet / phone / laptop - they buy that. They carry that everywhere. Why duplicate all this within the car? Millennials are tech-savvy. They won't buy a newer car as they understand better than their parents how hackable they are. Makers must provide affordable, non-boring styling, non-boring colours, fuel efficient motors. 4 USB 3.0 hubs to hook up to - great, but is the cage strong enough in a crash? No popsicle cars like the Fiat 500 or Smartcar. We don't need cars that are 450 HP, v8, top speed of 300 mph. There are speed limits in almost every part of the world, "civilized" or not. Cars need to be realistic, practical, fun to drive - not burdened with tons of unsecured electronic trash nobody asked for. As I said, my 2c, and I am maybe that 1 in 10,000,000 voice of reason.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday September 14 2016, @03:15AM
Yes... more googahs means more money when they fail.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @04:33AM
Fuck the VW, should have stayed with Honda.