> It's actually, probably better "bang for the buck," although it won't seem like it, on the surface.
A car's primary function is to move its passengers from point A to point B, safely and timely. Both cars do this very well, but the Mercedes will probably be costlier over their respective lifetime (fuel, parts, service).
The only way for it to be a better bang for buck would be to turn its secondary functions (comfort, prestige, signalling) into a primary tool. For instance, if a broker or salesperson finds that owning the car gives them the added confidence to project the image they want during negotiations and thus contributes to their overall success, then it becomes a worthy investment.
A car's primary function is to move its passengers from point A to point B, safely and timely. Both cars do this very well, but the Mercedes will probably be costlier over their respective lifetime (fuel, parts, service).
The only way for it to be a better bang for buck would be to turn its secondary functions (comfort, prestige, signalling) into a primary tool. For instance, if a broker or salesperson finds that owning the car gives them the added confidence to project the image they want during negotiations and thus contributes to their overall success, then it becomes a worthy investment.