I had this same discussion with my best friend a few months back. I am a manual guy, he's auto guy. As we were hot in the debate, he finally said: "Sir, you can not shift better than a computer."
And the more i think about that, the more I think he's right.
The computer doesn't have as much information as an attentive driver. It doesn't know about the slowpoke who is just about to get out of my way - so the computer thinks 7th is fine when I know I need 4th. The computer might see that my foot is not touching the throttle and the car is doing 60mph, so it chooses 7th. But it doesn't know I'm going down a 6% grade and the SLK will be doing 90 at the bottom of the hill, or 60 and the brake rotors will be glowing. If the computer was getting that information (certainly possible now or in the near future) automatics wouldn't need several operating modes and paddles.
To the original point, I think in markets like the US, the manual transmission is so rare, that it'll add value. I think the SLK attracts many people who want the auto, and they have plenty of choice. But it also attracts a few people like me who really want a manual, and those people will spend time looking for one just like any other option or color. I read that in the US R172 models, only about 5% of the cars had manual transmissions, and now it's 0%.
If it was 30%, sure, they'd have to sell at a discount. The tiny number of cars makes actual data hard to come by. Used car averages may not be aware that the MT was offered. Only a couple of MT cars come up every time I look at CPO cars. That could be less than a hundred sales a year, not a lot of data. Anyway, I discussed this with my wife before buying and she said we'd find out in 2028.
