I can't tell if you're being sarcastic but cars are the definition of an absolutely terrible investment - they might beat out randomly hoping you'll land big on r/wallstreetbets but both are extremely poor investment decisions.
Ordinary cars are a strongly depreciating asset. However, above a certain level this stops being true. I had the fortune to buy, use and subsequently sell a number of higher end cars (Ferrari, Lamborghini) and I made little to no loss on any of them. In fact, the Ferrari 458, which to this day I consider the best supercar to drive, appreciated during the year or so I had it.
It sounds like the cars might have slightly more than broken even on cost for you which sounds like a terrible investment option when you've got everything from real estate to mutual funds that will generally outperform cars - and, much like stock picking, most of the models you purchased didn't significantly appreciate - just one ended up gaining in value.
I suppose I was misinformed in that I thought that cars of all value ranges were pretty disastrous assets to hold - but it sounds like holding on to them for value appreciation still isn't a particularly good tactic.
When you have enough cash on hand to buy one, chances are you already have investments in money-returning assets, and you're diversifying into entertainment-returning ones. No point making a bunch of money just to spend it all on making more money. If you can tie up a bundle of cash for a year, get a bunch of entertainment out of it, then liquidate for approximately the same amount, who is to complain?
I'm assuming they were making a comment about the value of classic cars. Some of them could absolutely be a good investment, if, (big, giant, planet sized) if you know what you are doing.
