edatoakrun
Well-known member
malloryk said:DaveinOlyWA said:Its an offer. Take it or leave it and what does Nissan corporate policy have to do with a reservation holder who is willing to sell their vehicle after delivery which is essentially what they are doing here.
Remember without the reservationist in on this nothing happens.
That's not what's happening here though. From what I understand, corporateauto is purchasing the car from Nissan. This was his quote:
Purchasing the car is not required. As mentioned previous, we would approach dealer together. I'm not asking to purchase your reservation, rather paying you to walk away from your car. It would be planned and decided with dealer in advance of "walking". We'd negotiate a price to have the reservation holder walk away from the car. Also, I will pay the dealer over an above what they were going to charge you originally. Thus, the reservation holder makes money, the dealer makes more money and no transaction is necessary previous to me purchasing the "Orphan".
Yes, three parties must be parties to the contract, with the new buyer compensating both the dealer and "order owner" who wishes to sell his or her "parental rights" to the "orphan". I don't see any reason another party, such as the OP of this thread, need be involved, or compensated.
Obviously, plenty of opportunities for someone to wind up with the wrong end of the horse in such trading. I doubt Nissan would approve, too great a risk of bad PR, but they might not have the legal right to block such transactions. I wonder how many dealers would really go for it? After all, they normally get the entire profit from orphans, as I understand it, so they probably would only wind up paying many "order owners" for cars that would be "orphaned" anyway.