Apparently you don't have the mad bargaining skills of a NYT reporter. They actually sell used cars for more than they paid for them. Old property is worth more than new property, you see, and they always turn a handy profit. That kind of moneymaking genius is why the Times is raking in revenue hand over fist.
*eye roll*
Apparently, they've also never tried to sell anything, either. If you put an ad in the paper to sell your car, and someone buys your car because there was a "For Sale" sign in the window, how is it disingenuous to mention later that you put an ad in the paper to sell your car?
"Oh, so you put an ad in the paper, but someone bought the car because they saw a sign in your window? As if such a thing were possible?! When will the lies stop...?", sneered the news reporter.
Said NYSlimes reporter probably doesn’t even own a car. If he has one, it’s probably a company car. He certainly doesn’t have a clue about the economics of operating and maintaining a jet plane (or a used car with problems), and the cost savings that can accrue from unloading a high-maintenance asset. That’s real-world stuff that these ivory tower types can’t fathom.
Book value doesn't necessarily have ANYTHING to do with market value, so the plane could have been sold at a "book loss". I would bet everything I own that 9 out of 10 reporters could not explain or likely even understand what I just said.