Despite what traditionally has been the case it's still very good compared with other makes (or is it...anyone know about Ferrari/Masser/Porsche. etc)
A Porsche 911 will retain roughly 60% of the purchase price (not including silly options like extended leather, etc) over 3-years.
Lamborghinis are VERY bad because Lamborghini only provide a 2-year warranty with their Murciélago and (as of 2006) a 3-year on the Gallardo. These are non-extendable with Lamborghini (and after market warranties at £50.00 labour per hour (on a car that needs £200.00+ per hour) are not even worth the paper they are printed on.
So, Lambos drop quickly at first, then seem to level out at 50% after year 3 but the 1st and 2nd years are painful (£25,000+ per year drops).
Ferrari are better because you can extended the factory warranty; however, as they require heavy servicing, this also tends to affect residual value. Even so, 50% after 3-years on V8 models (V12s loose more) isn't too far from reality.
Maserati
...but with improved build quality on the GT, this may change. I believe Rich (and a few others) have owned the 3000 and 3200, so they will be able to give you a real world account of how quickly these cars loose money.
A big problem with the brands mentioned above (excluding the 911 because of the MSRP) are not what they are worth after 3-years but just how much a 50% loss is. For instance, if you paid £200,000 for a Murciélago and after 3-years, you were offered £100,000, that is £2,775 loss a month, not including all the running costs. So while 50% residual value may not sound too bad - it's still a lot of money.
Hence the crux, the more you spend, the more you loose!
