View Single Post
Old 09-17-20, 12:38 PM
  #56  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,985

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10440 Post(s)
Liked 11,914 Times in 6,101 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
No one is using that definition in this discussion.
So I went to the dictionary, or at least the online equivalent of it. Here's how it (Merriam-Webster) defines "Affordable":

: able to be afforded: having a cost that is not too high
Which really doesn't definitively fall down on either side of the tastes great/less filling "financing makes things affordable/no it doesn't" argument. If you define "able to be afforded" as " can afford to make this payment every month for the life of the loan", then, yeah financing makes it "affordable". It doesn't make you more able to pay the full price up front, so arguably it DOESN'T make it "able to be afforded", and with the exception of situations where the rate of interest is below the rate of inflation, financing will make the item more expensive in real terms.

Personally, I don't believe in financing something that will likely be or become worth less than what I'd owe on it. That way, madness lies. And I wouldn't ever see a bike as an "investment", unless we're talking about a collectible, and even then, collectibles are risky investments. Then again, I already have several bikes and none of them were financed.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline