I'm not so sure. I bought my car mostly to minimize total-cost-of-ownership. I assume I'll resell my car when the TCO of maintenance exceeds the TCO of a new car.

I know a lot of other folks who do something similar to that too.

TCO includes my time, so if I need to take a car to the shop, or miss meetings because things break down, that raises TCO by that opportunity cost. Selling a car is a hassle, and by the time I'm ready to give it up, it's not worth too much (and the buyers will probably be poor, since TCO exceeds a new car) so I don't feel the need to maximize resale value.

While this is an overly rationalist way of phrasing things, but most people I know take a similarly pragmatic approach. Teachers. (Real, not software) engineers. Etc.

I don't buy used cars, since some people sell to upgrade, and some sell because there's some issue. The headache adds a lot to the TCO.

There's also material differences, there's a reason the Nissan CEO from that era is currently a fugitive and on trial for financial misconduct.

And not by some technicality either, he literally hired a paramilitary group to disguise themselves as musicians and smuggle him out of Japan while on bail.

Since 2001 Nissan has used their defective CVT transmission in the vast majority of their lineup from the compact Versa to the Pathfinder SUV (aside from the sports cars and pickup trucks).

The average time to failure depends slightly on the model, but it's often around 60-70k miles.

The cost to replace it is typically most if not more than the value of a typical Nissan.

Because they were selling defective cars, their buyers dried up, so they had to resort to buyers with sub-prime credit. At this point it's joked the Nissan Altima is the official car of bad credit or bad neighbourhoods.

While the poor upkeep by the sub-prime owners certainly doesn't help, the poor resale value is largely due to everyone knowing they are ticking time bombs.

I've shopped for many different used 10-15 year old cars, and through my research have found the used market is extremely accurate in pricing in expected upkeep or failures, even among different variants of the same model from the same brand.

When I wanted an W211 E-class Mercedes (2003-2009), I researched the common failures and the cost to repair. I found the whole range was actually priced pretty similarly once you factored that in.

There were major defects in the 2003-2004 models which would cost around $2500 to fix. The 2005+ models were worth about $2500 more than a 2004 (despite only being worth $5000 and $7500)

The E500 had an air suspension failure issue which would be around $2000 to remedy, the same model year E320 with normal suspension was worth $2000 more. And for 2003-2004 they were only worth $3000 and $5000 respectively.

After months of browsing craigslist and test drives, it was clear it didn't matter which model or year I bought, a Mercedes W211 E-class was going to cost me $7500.

At that point I figured I'd just keep saving and get a Lexus 2IS for $10,000 as it was much better value despite the difference in owner reputation.

tldr: The used market knows exactly what a car is worth regardless of owner reputation. Nissans are worthless because they're shit cars.

Until Masayoshi Son & friends face the music, or the convincion rates drop from a comical 98%, I'm inclined to believe this was entirely politically motivated.