Exactly, and thank you.
I've had this discussion with my brother, who gave me flack for buying a $8,000 used Ford instead of a $18,000 used Toyota - because the Toyota will "hold it's value" and have a higher resale price.
That logic works when, as mentioned, the asset is appreciating in value, or at least, not depreciating.
He bragged that, in a few years, he'll be able to sell his Toyota for $10,000 when he wants a different vehicle, and I'll only be able to sell my Ford for $2,000.
So, in that hypothetical scenario, he's lost $8,000 of value, and I've lost $6,000 in value.
He might have more value in his so-called "investment" - he's retaining 56% of the "value" and I'm only retaining 25%.
That kind of thinking works great for politicians and shyster car salespeople, but when you get down to brass tacks, he's lost $2,000 more than I have.
I buy my vehicles, my tools, my computers, my video games, my cell phone, all of that stuff to USE, not to resell at a later date (I've seen the "investment" and "resale value" argument applied to all of these items and more from various sources/locations).
I've also seen the argument used here of "if you have to sell all of your tools because you change professions" as a justification for spending more. Your money, do what you want - but if you're seriously thinking that you may have to sell all of your tools at a later date due to a career change, maybe you should be thinking about a different career before you sink money on those tools, y'know?