Thank you for taking the time to add such a detailed response Adrian. Please see my responses below.

1. You’re right of course. Since I used Edmunds.com US data, the conclusions may or may not apply to non-US markets. Where the markets don’t include a similar mix of vehicles, car-buying choices, and cost structures, the outcome may be very different.
2. At the start of the article I described how I chose which vehicles to analyze, out of a list of “best-value” vehicles. Since it’s already a long read with only three models analyzed, adding the other seven in the list, let alone any of the hundreds or thousands of others out there would have been impractical. The idea is that if someone is interested in a different model, they can recreate the same analysis with that model, and in their specific market if there is access to similar data there.
3. Insurance costs are included in the Edmunds data, so that’s certainly considered, and is treated based on the cars gradually increasing age. Also, if you choose to stop insuring your car against theft, fire, accident damage, etc. then you will reduce the costs whether you buy new or used; unless of course you have an uninsured total loss…
4. Unless you can prove with data from a reputable source that the Edmunds data is inaccurate, it simply is what it is (on average, in the US of course).
5. I’d beg to differ on 5 years being covered by warranty, at least in the US. Most vehicles here are covered for 36 months or 36,000 miles, whichever happens first. Some car makers (e.g., Hyundai) have a 100,000-mile warranty, but that’s the exception, not the rule. I agree, and in fact stated, that if you buy used you’re getting someone else’s problems.
6. At least in the US, leasing is usually a bad deal. You’re paying for the initial depreciation during the first two years, which although no longer the 25% — 30% most people still think is typical, it is highest during those two years. Still, as I say in the article, there can be exceptions where you can get a great leasing deal. It’s just not true in most cases. As for affordability, the whole point of the article is that you need to look at affordability across all aspects of car ownership (or lease).

Regarding your own experience, as you point out, you’re not in the US, so this article doesn’t necessarily apply where you live. In general, if you’re willing to buy a 5-year-old car and keep it for 15 years, you would probably do better buying it new and holding it for 20 years. I haven’t gone through the full exercise to compare that, but I suspect that will be the case.

Regarding your statement “Which is why articles like these make no sense whatsoever,” borrowing from you, I have to say that this statement makes no sense to me. However, you’re welcome to that opinion.

The bottom line is that I agree that the article is biased to the US market. All the rest are not biases.