Yes, it is. Do the math. You get killed on depreciation. Let someone *else* buy the car new, and pay all the depreciation.
You both drew the wrong conclusion. The correct conclusion is that if a new car, and the same thing used, one year old, are basically the same price -- then they are *both* a bad deal.
Total cost of ownership is *always* lower buying a used car -- *if* you use your head. Buying a one year old used car that's the same price as a new one is obviously stupid. But that doesn't mean that buying new is smart, only that buying new is (in that case) less stupid than buying the one year old used car. Buy three years old, or five years old.
No, they didn't. Your eagerness to buy a new car worked in the car dealer's favor that time.
How much could you have saved by getting one four years old, with 50K on it?
Did you even check?
It obviously makes more sense to buy new than one year old used at the same price -- but it makes still more sense, much more, to buy three, four, five years old used.
And I bet you never even looked at the same thing, four years old, with 40 or
50K miles on it. The price difference would have been thousands.No, it's not. It's *never* a financially sound decision to buy a new car. It may be less unsound, in some circumstances, to buy new vs. one year old, but that does *not* make buying new a smart thing to do.