LOLOL - Did you really think you were going to pull that off?
Here is the
entire Auto Trader Canada inventory for the CTS from your link:
http://wwwa.autotrader.ca/cars/cadillac/cts/2014/?hprc=True&wcp=True . You picked the lowest priced car, the average price of the other used CTS-Vs is ~$64K. There is probably a reason why this particular car is $15K below the average of the other CTS-Vs. Perhaps it's been in an accident? Has interior problems? Modded? How did you know "the guy decided he didn't want it"? You a mind reader?
Lets use a mathematical average of $64K. The Cdn list price for a 2104 CTS-V was $71K. We all know that GM will discount off list (quite heavily for Cadillac), I'll assume he got $0K off (even though TeasePlease claims $10K off sticker is possible) to balance against any options that may have been bought. That represents a 9.8% depreciation in the first year. I did the same calculation for a 2014 QX70 and the depreciation was 1.5% better than Cadillac. According to wikipedia (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_costs#/media/File:Depreciation_car.svg) an average car depreciates 15% in the first year.
BUSTED JAMES! I admit it's hard to do an exact comparison, but even if I'm out 3-4%, the Caddy is still better than the market average. Important point: with GM, list price means nothing, you really have to know selling price when doing this math, which means the Cadillac depreciation is definitely less than my calculation.
BTW, I did the same research and calculations for a 2 year old Cadillac Escalade. So, either your boss is an idiot, there is something you are not telling us about the condition or mileage of the SUV, or you got your facts wrong (I'll let you off easy).
Back to the original discussion. I disagree with you; GM does not only build shit.