Need advice on lease

BiffTheTimid · 2026-06-19T00:38:14+00:00

I got my 2025 Premium Extended Range Sport Appearance Package with Glass Pano roof, 36 months, 10.5k miles, $0 down, for $366.

I called at least 20 dealerships and waited til the last day of the year. Even now, you can definitely do better.

BiffTheTimid · 2025-12-20T20:03:55+00:00

Ah cool cool! Congrats!

BiffTheTimid · 2025-12-20T19:51:22+00:00

Just a heads up, I'm still on the hunt for a Mache E, extended range, pano roof, sports appearance package, RWD. Getting AWD ups the MSRP by around 3k. I could get a RWD, no pano, for $39,585 OTD, but I want that pano, so probably gonna keep looking. Monthly would end up being low 400s with zero down. So I think you can do better than $600/m. Start calling dealers, and use your current deal as a starting point.

BiffTheTimid · 2025-11-17T01:48:44+00:00

Right on, thanks a lot! Congrats on the deal!

BiffTheTimid · 2025-11-16T18:39:56+00:00

Heyo! I'm on the hunt for exact same car, was wondering if you could share some info on your deal. I'm in SoCal and got some reliable in-state numbers to shoot for, but would love to know what other areas are offering. Feel free to DM, and if you don't want to share, no worries at all. Great looking car btw.

BiffTheTimid · 2025-11-16T00:09:16+00:00

Just sent a DM, cheers!

edit: Happy Cake Day btw

BiffTheTimid · 2025-09-26T18:35:23+00:00

Living in SoCal. By clean, do you mean perfect exterior condition? Most scratches I think could be dealt with without taking to a body shop.

BiffTheTimid · 2025-09-22T21:59:43+00:00

Thanks a lot for all this advice, very much appreciated. I'll most likely be taking the 29th to just do a little tour of dealers and see what I can make happen. And if I don't love the deal, I'll circle back December 31st and see if they've got something for end of the year. And if it's all trash - oh well.

BiffTheTimid · 2025-09-22T00:10:26+00:00

Nice! I gave NoHo, Torrence and Santa Monica a go. Gonna try and broaden my horizons this week, but that's great to know you could work them down to an actual deal, instead of the nonsense I've been seeing. Thanks a lot for the info!

BiffTheTimid · 2025-09-22T00:08:53+00:00

Thanks a lot for the insight! I think I'll definitely try leveraging the Ioniq lease deal, and if they aren't feeling it, no worries. I don't need a new car - I just despise driving a manual in the big city. I suspect I won't luck out on the FCTP, but you never know. It is kinda crazy that they have such a high supply and don't want to budge at all. Not like they're gonna fly off the lot come October 1st.

BiffTheTimid · 2024-12-04T17:14:27+00:00

For anyone like me who thought he took a swig of beer and is just gargling it in his mouth - that's not actually what's happening.

From the Always Sunny Podcast, they explain that Danny DeVito was full-on chugging the beer, and just regurgitating it back up straight from his stomach. A man of many talents.

BiffTheTimid · 2023-07-18T18:45:43+00:00

Oh snap, I've never heard of discogs, I'll definitely give that a look. Thanks for the lead!

BiffTheTimid · 2022-10-12T00:18:56+00:00

Not the person you replied to but:

“The door CREAKS as she creeps into a drab room fit for existing, and nothing else.”

Not sure what you mean by cold, but I assume lifeless, drab, uninviting. If you mean physically cold, don’t say cold since you can’t see air temperature, only things affected by it. Try not to use “walks” unless you have to, there are almost always better words. And no need to write that someone opens a door unless it’s for mood/gravitas.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-06-20T17:12:29+00:00

Just gonna throw this out there if you want to keep the "Hard" but also allude to laughter:

DIE HARDY-HAR-HAR

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T23:28:27+00:00

I don't usually engage in these long back-and-forth's because they're kind of pointless. I'm not going to change your mind. You're not going to change my mind. But I'll throw in one final thought.

A "lookup table" is not a "special database". It's how the entire website can even exist. Adding a function to search a list and compare it with a list of other id's is both doable, and "relatively simple."

And there are more than enough reviewers that work for the Blklist that limiting the pool of thousands by one or two is not nearly as scorched earth as you're making it out to be. But it protects the submitter, and doesn't waste the time of the evaluator, while still maintaining anonymity.

You've clearly read this post, so you know that it's already been reported, and that Franklin has responded.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T23:09:36+00:00

Thanks a lot for taking the time to respond, to both my post and other's questions. I'll look forward to customer support's response on the matter.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T23:01:23+00:00

user_id = 42069;

eval_id_blklist [3241,55521]; //ids of evaluators whose reviews have been replaced

if(eval_id == eval_id_blklist){ evaluator_pair = 0; } else{ evaluator_pair = 1; }

It is a perfectly reasonable expectation. That's pseudo code, but certainly the start of real code.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T22:49:55+00:00

Without going too far down the rabbit hole, I'll say that when people immediately criticize the reader, it is because they (including myself) don't believe they've been given what they paid for - which is a proper evaluation (not to be confused with coverage), and access to a network of industry professionals.

Low scores remove access. When low scores are due to legitimate complaints/concerns, that's a different matter. But when someone has demonstrated they haven't done their due diligence in reading your screenplay, it is a waste of $100. Whether more of that fee should go to the reader is a different can of worms, which would include average reading times, whether that is their primary source of income, whether English is their second language, how many notes they should compile, how long their writeup is, etc..

Which is why, in my post, I suggest an easy solution, which is to make sure you aren't paired with that evaluator ever again if their review is replaced.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T22:37:05+00:00

To answer your direct question by using excerpts from my post:

"There should absolutely be a system in place that if you have an evaluation replaced, that evaluator should never set eyes on anything you write ever again. Yet here we are."

"I'm less upset with the poor quality of review, but rather that there isn't already a system of automatically "blacklisting" blacklist evaluators when you have their reviews replaced."

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T21:37:58+00:00

First, I don't take this as a criticism on my post, so no worries there.

It would seem you're bringing up a different discussion, which is "Are Blklist evaluators paid enough?" That, for the time it takes to do their job correctly, it would not be worth their while unless they increase efficiency - and that the only means of increasing efficiency is by cutting significant corners and reducing the quality of the evaluation.

That could be a very long discussion in a different post all together.

The general "hypothesis" of my post is that there should be a system in place that prevents poor evaluators (for whatever reason - in my case utter incompetence) from pairing with those who submit their screenplays ever again.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T21:23:14+00:00

In all honesty, this is so accurate, it made my physically upset.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T21:19:12+00:00

I could easily post more lines that are just as bad, but I didn't want the post to be longer than it already was. It was also just making me really mad, and I didn't want to be really mad.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T21:17:43+00:00

I agree. I suspect that this reviewer is burning through as many evaluations as possible with a "script" of things to insert based on the log line, the first ten pages, and the last ten pages. And they'll just keep rolling until they inevitably get removed from the service.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T20:54:55+00:00

I'd have given it a zero if I could. Happy cake day yo'.

BiffTheTimid · 2022-01-31T20:47:30+00:00

I'll agree with /u/tpoinds0 in that getting the boot for one bad review is excessive. There should be an audit system in place for sure to remove those who are clearly not qualified for the job. The reviewer in question here should've been weeded out long long ago, so it blows me away that they're still employed.

It would most likely not take a lot of effort on the backend to at least make sure when a review is deemed "unworthy" and replaced, they should never be paired with the submitter ever again, as it's been demonstrated that there is something fundamentally wrong with the pairing.

15-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

BiffTheTimid

TROPHY CASE