Selling Class A DP - Tires ??

[Bollee]

I am trying to sell my 2003 Revolution with 53,000 miles on it.


Currently, I have Michelin XZA-3 that have approximately 5,000 miles on them. However, the Manufacture Date is BN1X-2810 (Oct 2010).

Per Michelin's website, these tires have a 7 Year / 700,000 / 3-Retread Manufacturer's Limited Casing Warranty.

It also identifies, tires that have been in use for 5 years or more should continue to be inspected by a specialist at least annually.
These tires do not have in cracks on them and look great.

So, my questions to you is:

Should I replace all of the tires now and increase the price.
Do you think this would provide an additional incentive to a Buyer purchasing a Coach with new tires ?
Or negotiate from the existing asking price and offer to have new tires installed after a deposit is secured, possibly
splitting the cost of the new tires with prospective buyer.

The estimate I received for Michelin XZE's was $3,973.40.

Thanks in advance for you thoughts and feedback.

[toedtoes]

valhalla360 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
So as a buyer, I can buy it for $45k without new tires or $48.5k with new tires. If I buy tires on my own, they will run me $3.5k.

Hmmmm. Let's see. Which is the better deal????

Let's modify the question a little bit to demonstrate:

Let's say it's $49k without and $51.5 with.

Lots of people will plug a nice round number like $50k into the search engine and never see the rig priced with the new tires (it's the old trick of ending with 99cents).

But even with your example numbers, more people will follow up with the lower price if there are two otherwise similar rigs available. Then once they get invested in your rig, you can negotiate over the tire value.

We have no idea if the example given was anything close to full value. NADA is a joke at best and there is always the rare chance, someone wanted that exact rig and had no idea what the value was, so from a single sale, we can't infer much of anything. We also don't know if the buyer would have happily taken $1000 off and bought his own tires after he got home.

My point is that the buyer is paying for the new tires regardless - there is no cost incentive either way.

The only incentive is one of convenience and preference. Is it more convenient for the buyer to have the tires part of the purchase or not. That is going to be dependent upon other factors like distance to the buyer's home.

So, price it without new tires (so you show the lower price), then be willing to work with the buyer on tires if that convenience factor comes into play. But either way, provide the tire inspection results so the buyer is aware.

Buying new tires now and listing it at the higher price isn't going to net you anything as the seller.

[valhalla360]

toedtoes wrote:
So as a buyer, I can buy it for $45k without new tires or $48.5k with new tires. If I buy tires on my own, they will run me $3.5k.

Hmmmm. Let's see. Which is the better deal????

Let's modify the question a little bit to demonstrate:

Let's say it's $49k without and $51.5 with.

Lots of people will plug a nice round number like $50k into the search engine and never see the rig priced with the new tires (it's the old trick of ending with 99cents).

But even with your example numbers, more people will follow up with the lower price if there are two otherwise similar rigs available. Then once they get invested in your rig, you can negotiate over the tire value.

We have no idea if the example given was anything close to full value. NADA is a joke at best and there is always the rare chance, someone wanted that exact rig and had no idea what the value was, so from a single sale, we can't infer much of anything. We also don't know if the buyer would have happily taken $1000 off and bought his own tires after he got home.

[rowekmr]

Would the warranty for the tires carry over to the buyer or would it be better for warranty purposes to have them purchase the tires themselves?

[westernrvparkow]

When selling something nice, it usually pays to have it in top condition. Remember, you goal is not to recoup the cost of tires, a detail job, or any repairs or updating you do to get the rig in selling condition. Your goal is to sell the rig. Anyone buying your rig, or another 15 year or rig they are contemplating, is probably going to have to come out of pocket for the entire purchase price. Using the new tires as a sales pitch would probably be an advantage on a rig like yours. New tires mean less out of pocket expense for the buyer and gives them pause when comparing yours to a rig without new tires.
BTW, whatever you do, I wouldn't mention the current tires being nearly 8 years old with only 5000 miles on them. I would be concerned the rig had been parked for years on end and normal maintenance had been deferred. Out of sight, out of mind would be gnawing at the back of my brain.

[rgatijnet1]

You are right, the buyer did have to drive 1200 miles home but when I placed my ad to sell the RV, I had no idea what any potential buyer's requirements would be. I felt I had nothing to lose by mentioning the tires in my ad and adding the price of replacements in to the selling price.

[toedtoes]

rgatijnet1 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
So as a buyer, I can buy it for $45k without new tires or $48.5k with new tires. If I buy tires on my own, they will run me $3.5k.

Hmmmm. Let's see. Which is the better deal????

It seems like a wash doesn't it. For my buyer, I eliminated the hassle of him finding the specific tires he wanted, scheduling the installation, delivering and picking up the coach, etc. For him it was worth it to pay my full asking price to not have to deal with the tire issue. It also gave me the upper hand during negotiation by being willing to go the extra mile for the buyer. Naturally the deal had been consummated and a substantial down payment made, before I purchased the tires.
The buyer was able to hop in the coach and drive the 1200 miles home without any issues. It was a win for both parties.

Ah, see now you've added the "drive 1200 miles home" to the equation. That does make a difference (as you'll note in one of my prior posts, I pointed out that someone having to drive a long distance home in the RV may appreciate the added assistance in purchasing new tires).

But, I still think the actual cost of the tires is a wash. The buyer is paying for them either way. So rather than assume they want it done one way or another, just provide the tire inspection results and let them decide how to do it. For most folks buying within their home area, they've most likely already got a preferred tire shop they use and they can buy when and where they want rather than right at that moment. A friend just bought a class C that sat in her driveway for a month while she waited to renew the registration - it wouldn't make a monetary difference if she bought the tires at purchase or 4 weeks later, but it may be more convenient one way or the other for her. Better to let her choose.

If they are traveling a distance to buy the rig, then offering to refer them to a tire shop and help with the logistics will suffice. Saying "I'll buy the tires if you pay me $3.5k more" is just semantics when it comes to the money. It's the convenience of when it is done that mattered.

[rgatijnet1]

toedtoes wrote:
So as a buyer, I can buy it for $45k without new tires or $48.5k with new tires. If I buy tires on my own, they will run me $3.5k.

Hmmmm. Let's see. Which is the better deal????

It seems like a wash doesn't it. For my buyer, I eliminated the hassle of him finding the specific tires he wanted, scheduling the installation, delivering and picking up the coach, etc. For him it was worth it to pay my full asking price to not have to deal with the tire issue. It also gave me the upper hand during negotiation by being willing to go the extra mile for the buyer. Naturally the deal had been consummated and a substantial down payment made, before I purchased the tires.
The buyer was able to hop in the coach and drive the 1200 miles home without any issues. It was a win for both parties.

[toedtoes]

So as a buyer, I can buy it for $45k without new tires or $48.5k with new tires. If I buy tires on my own, they will run me $3.5k.

Hmmmm. Let's see. Which is the better deal????

[rgatijnet1]

valhalla360 wrote:

rgatijnet1 wrote:

My RV sold at full asking price to the second person to look at it and we negotiated about the tire issue to close the deal.

I don't think anyone here has suggested that he hide the age of the tires but sale 101, you don't highlight issues and sales 102, don't spend full retail on something you can use a far lower discount to get to the same end point.

Apparently you missed where I said that I sold it at FULL asking price(which was well above NADA), quickly(within one week) to the second person that looked at it. I always thought that SALES 101 was to sell your product at the best price, PERIOD. :B

[valhalla360]

rgatijnet1 wrote:
I recently sold a Class A and I received a lot(30+) of phone calls from potential buyers. About 2/3 of them asked about the age of the tires.
Sure you could remain silent and hope that your buyer is one of the few people that is ignorant about tires on an RV. On the other hand, if someone knowledgeable calls and asks about your tires, they may just assume that you have allowed everything else on your RV to age out, which is why you are now dumping it.
I would still address the tire issue in your ad description and increase your sales price to negotiate with a tire replacement.
My RV sold at full asking price to the second person to look at it and we negotiated about the tire issue to close the deal.
If you are going to write a sales ad listing all of the good things about your RV, why not list the tire replacement as a positive item and price your coach accordingly?

I don't think anyone here has suggested that he hide the age of the tires but sale 101, you don't highlight issues and sales 102, don't spend full retail on something you can use a far lower discount to get to the same end point.

I think you are over thinking it. If someone asks about the age, you simply tell them that they are due but you adjusted your price figuring the new buyer would want to select their preferred option. Not many would run screaming away from the deal thinking it's a poorly maintained unit.

[okhmbldr]

If the tire age really bothers you, why not put new tires on the coach, but just find a cheaper tire instead of Michelin. Now you have a selling point "New Tires".
Most buyers won't question brand as long as they are new.
Also, you could probably sell the old tires to someone who runs a local dump truck company delivering sand, etc., and help minimize the cost of the new tires.

[rgatijnet1]

I recently sold a Class A and I received a lot(30+) of phone calls from potential buyers. About 2/3 of them asked about the age of the tires.
Sure you could remain silent and hope that your buyer is one of the few people that is ignorant about tires on an RV. On the other hand, if someone knowledgeable calls and asks about your tires, they may just assume that you have allowed everything else on your RV to age out, which is why you are now dumping it.
I would still address the tire issue in your ad description and increase your sales price to negotiate with a tire replacement.
My RV sold at full asking price to the second person to look at it and we negotiated about the tire issue to close the deal.
If you are going to write a sales ad listing all of the good things about your RV, why not list the tire replacement as a positive item and price your coach accordingly?

[valhalla360]

As long as there is no sign of impending failure and you don't do anything to hide the age, it's on the buyer to ask about it.

Now if there is a bulge on the inside of a tire that you are aware of that is the sign of impending blowout, that's a different story. Now you would be putting the buyer at risk but even then, I would point it out after the buyer makes an offer and let the buyer research the price.

For all you know, the buyer will drive it 10miles down the road and park it never to move again, so he could care less about having new tires.

[BurbMan]

Bollee wrote:
It also identifies, tires that have been in use for 5 years or more should continue to be inspected by a specialist at least annually.

Definitely get the tires inspected as advised by Michelin, Bruce is correct, you don't want to send the buyer down the road with a problem.

Unless you already did that and you know they need to be replaced, in which case I would just get them replaced now and price the coach accordingly rather than push it off to the buyer.