Dhruven said:

I've noticed that many dealerships invest in a CRM, but keeping customer information up to date after every call is still a challenge. Some sales reps update notes immediately, while others wait until the end of the day or forget altogether.

How does your team handle this?

• Do sales reps update the CRM after every customer conversation?
• Is CRM usage mandatory, or is it left to individual habits?
• What methods or tools have helped improve CRM adoption?
• Have you seen a difference in lead conversion or follow-up quality when CRM updates are done consistently?

I'm interested in hearing how other dealerships manage this process and what has worked best for your team.

Click to expand...

We make CRM use mandatory. If the customer conversation happened and nothing went in the CRM, the next person is working blind.


I do not need a salesperson writing a book after every call either. I want the stuff that actually matters: what car they want, trade, payment or price concern, what objection came up, what the customer agreed to, and exactly what the next step is.


The biggest thing that helps is taking work away from the salesperson. Calls, texts, emails, appointments, and lead activity should log automatically wherever possible. AI call summaries can help too, but the salesperson still owns making sure the important part is right.


Where it usually falls apart is follow-up. Someone talks to the customer at 11:00, says they will call them back at 4:00, never sets the task, and now the customer disappears into the CRM.


Managers have to inspect it every day. Leads with no next action, overdue tasks, appointments with weak notes, customers sitting untouched. You catch those before they turn into 10-day-old leads nobody remembers.


And yes, I absolutely see better follow-up when the CRM is kept clean. Not because the CRM magically sells cars, but because the next salesperson, BDC rep, desk manager, or GM can see exactly what happened and pick the conversation back up instead of making the customer start over.


To me the rule is simple: every real customer conversation ends with a note and a next action.

joe.pistell said:

OMG, look at this UI slop.

Click to expand...

joe.pistell said:

View attachment 11518

Corporate backgrounding. [face palm].

Carvana Killer?
Bravo offers risk-off promises that dealers HATE to match:
View attachment 11519

Click to expand...

You couldn't have expected more than slop...?!?!?

Jake,

Good stuff. Could you run this study using the user’s visit number instead of source, medium, or geography?

Ideas like:

- Does the specials page UX likley to cause an additional specials page visit?
- Do visitors who view the specials page see more VDPs than those who never visit the specials page?
- For the “did not engage” category, could you restrict it to viewers who are only on VDPs?

Is the specials page the entrance to deeper engagement? It appears so.

Their current online map shows 117 booth spaces and 50 of those are still available. Almost 45% booth space still available with 7 weeks until the show.

Ryan Everson said:

GM missed a massive opportunity with CarBravo - they should have gone all-in with CarBravo and created their version of Sonic's EchoPark used car chain.

Click to expand...

GM intro's CarBravo
"Hey there, we’re CarBravo. We’re the GM certified used program that does more than ever"
Hey There? -- 100% Cringe

OMG, look at this UI slop.


Corporate backgrounding. [face palm].

Carvana Killer?
Bravo offers risk-off promises that dealers HATE to match:


CarBravo risk-free buying is buried :

10-Day Exchange Guarantee​

If for any reason, you don’t absolutely love your vehicle, exchange it for a different one within 10 days or 500 miles.

1). CarBravo Warranty • 12-months / 12,000-miles
2). CarBravo Warranty • 30-days / 1,000-miles​

DR army,
I am looking for a normalized YMMT library that is in the public domain, or, avail for a small fee. A highly vetted output is preferred.

A classic DR rant. Love it.

MattCopley said:

Yeah insane. $3500 a ticket to go stare across the hall at vendors with nothing to do? insane. Wees and Raines Hackathon is literally the only thing there of value and I'd rather pay for Wees and Raines to do an in person training literally anywhere else as a matter of principal. Even if it cost 10X the price of these ridiculous industry tickets. Shameful.

Click to expand...

DjSec said:

And here is the real problem!

Getting 20 disconnected vendors (CRM, DMS, marketing, service) to agree on the same customer ID, VIN, or deal is a brutal engineering nightmare. And you're completely right about "real-time", you are always held hostage by the latency of the feeds coming in.

This is the reason why external data warehouses and BI dashboards will always be fighting an uphill battle. You are spending all your energy trying to stitch together a Frankenstein monster after the fact.

However...what if instead of trying to make 20 databases agree with each other, you instead used one operating layer where they never split apart in the first place?

If the website, CRM, service scheduler, and inventory all write back to a single unified core database natively from day one:

• There are no separate customer records to reconcile between the CRM and service.
• There is no data cleanup pipeline to break every time a legacy vendor updates their API.
• The data is clean because it shares a single, immutable identity from the very first interaction.

Dashboards, alerts for aging inventory, and recon bottlenecks become trivial when a dealership finally stops renting its data pipelines and builds a system that actually remembers.

Click to expand...

Gregg, I agree with the end goal. The store needs one memory, not 20 systems telling 20 different stories.


Where I get hung up is having every vendor write straight into one big database. No dealer is ripping out the DMS, CRM, website, service scheduler, inventory tools, accounting, OEM systems, and lender connections all at once. I also would not want every vendor able to change the same customer or deal record. One bad match or bad API push could dirty up the whole store.


I think the realistic answer is one clean customer, vehicle, deal, and store identity underneath the systems dealers already use.


Let the DMS own the deal and accounting record. Let the CRM own the follow-up. Let service own the appointment and repair-order activity. Let inventory own the vehicle status. But make sure they are all talking about the same customer, same VIN, same deal, and same rooftop.


Even then, the customer identity cannot be locked from the first click. People use work emails, personal emails, old phone numbers, different names, and spouses shop together. Every store has duplicate records. You need to be able to join records, separate them, and undo a bad match without losing the history.


Once that part is right, the dashboard really is the easy part. Then you can trust an alert that says a lead is aging, recon is backed up, inventory is sitting too long, or ad spend is climbing without sales behind it.


Are you thinking this starts as a layer underneath the systems dealers already have, or are you talking about replacing the CRM, DMS, website, service, and inventory stack altogether?

DjSec said:

What is the solution?

If you think about it most dealership websites are built around inventory, not actually solving the customers problem!

Do they want a Toyota Highlander.

Or:

• A vehicle that fits three car seats.
• Something that can tow their camper.
• A reliable commuter under $500/month.
• A sports car that won't kill them on insurance.
• A truck that fits in their garage.
• A first car for their daughter.

When you start with inventory, you force people to become car experts before they can buy.

Think about going to Amazon and the first thing you see is:

• Product ID
• SKU
• Warehouse Location
• Price
• Buy Now

That's pretty much what dealership websites are doing now?

What if...Customer says, "I want a Wrangler."

The website responds...Awesome. Before you decide...

Lets compare it to a Bronco...

You'll gain:

✓ Better aftermarket

✓ Better resale

You'll lose:

• Ride comfort

• Fuel economy

• Interior space

• Cargo room

• Road noise

Now they're learning.

Instead of SUVs, the navigation becomes​

Help me...

• Tow

• Save money

• Fit my family

• Go camping

• Daily commute

• Road trips

• Teen driver

• First vehicle

• Luxury

• Off-road

• Small business

Customer builds their life.

1. 2 adults
2. 3 kids
3. Golden Retriever
4. Weekend camping
5. 8,000 miles/year
6. $550/month
7. Occasional towing

The website says: Here are the five vehicles that fit your life.

Not ... Here are 273 SUVs.

Instead of comparing price, it compares ownership.

Vehicle A

1. Purchase
2. Insurance
3. Fuel
4. Maintenance
5. Repairs
6. Depreciation
7. 5-Year Cost

Vehicle B
Same comparison.

Now the customer understands value.

Instead of 2024 Explorer, The site says...​

We recommended this because:

✓ Fits three car seats.

✓ Enough cargo for hockey equipment.

✓ AWD for Nebraska winters.

✓ Lower insurance than a Tahoe.

✓ Better resale than a Traverse.

✓ Can tow your boat.

As customers explore, the system tracks how well it understands them.

We understand about 28% of your needs. Help us narrow it down, nowe we understand...84%

Then it can say we are confident these three vehicles fit your lifestyle.
No forms.
Just progress.

Maybe a Vehicle Intelligence Page (VIP) instead of a Vehicle Detail Page (VDP).

VDP:

1. Photos
2. Price
3. VIN
4. Features
5. Lead Form

VIP:

1. Why people buy this vehicle
2. Who shouldn't buy it
3. Common owner complaints
4. Long-term maintenance
5. Insurance estimate
6. Fuel costs
7. Reliability
8. Competitors
9. Tradeoffs
10. What owners love
11. Typical owner profile
12. Common upgrades
13. Lifestyle fit
14. AI explanation
15. Questions people ask
16. Video walkthroughs
17. Accessories

The vehicle becomes something the customer understands, not just a listing they can compare by price.

Instead of asking visitors to identify the right vehicle, the platform's job is to discover who they are, what they're trying to accomplish, and why. Every click, comparison, question, and preference builds a richer understanding of intent.

At that point, the lead isn't just:

• 2023 Honda Pilot
• Name
• Email
• Phone

It's something far more valuable:

Family of five, replacing a minivan, budget under $600/month, needs AWD for winter trips, occasional towing for a small camper, values reliability over performance, comparing Pilot, Highlander, and CX-90, currently 92% confident the Highlander best fits their needs.

A salesperson can pick up exactly where the customer left off, instead of starting the conversation over!

Maybe the website shouldn't be an inventory catalog or a lead generator, but a salesperson, researcher, and advisor, handing the dealership a customer who already understands why a particular vehicle fits their life?

Click to expand...

Gregg, you are describing the same core problem AutoUnite is being built around.


The shopper should be able to start with either a vehicle they know or the problem they are trying to solve. AutoUnite then narrows the choices and explains why a vehicle or trim fits, where it may not fit, and what could change the decision. It should not dump 273 SUVs on someone or make them become a car expert before they can shop.


I also like showing the shopper that the system is learning, but I would show what we understand, what we inferred, and what is still missing instead of giving them an unexplained 92 percent confidence score.


The vehicle intelligence and the exact listing still have different jobs. The research side handles fit, comparisons, trim differences, specs, videos, alternatives, and tradeoffs. Then that context carries into local inventory. The VDP remains the truth page for the exact VIN, equipment, photos, price, availability, dealer, payment, trade, lease, and contact decision.


When the shopper chooses to contact a dealer, the dealer can receive what mattered, what they compared, why that vehicle made the cut, and what is still unanswered. That lets the salesperson pick up where the customer left off without pretending the website is the salesperson or turning clicks into false certainty.


That is AutoUnite. Help the shopper understand the vehicle before choosing the listing, then carry that understanding into the dealer conversation.


Decide First. Submit Later.

Tallcool1 said:

I agree with you here. Furthermore, I believe that customer that never knowingly raised their hand will be creeped out by that call. I also believe that vendor method makes it even harder to find a ROI number when I have a vendor in my ear telling me about how they are delivering the leads but my dealership sucks because they aren't converting them. As you said, they never were and still are not "leads". They are nothing more than identified web surfers.

Click to expand...

Exactly. That is the part I do not want the vendor to skate past. I am not against the technology. I am against changing the definition of a lead to make the number look better.


An identified visitor may be useful for personalization, retargeting, or understanding demand. But until that shopper knowingly asks this dealership to contact them, I would not put them in the same bucket as a real lead or hand the record to a salesperson to cold call.


The scorecard should separate identified visitors, valid contact records, consented leads, conversations, appointments, shows, and sold units. Remove existing CRM and DMS customers, prior leads, employees, bots, duplicates, and Do Not Call records first. Then use a holdout group and show the net-new sold units the tool actually caused.


Otherwise the vendor gets credit for a bigger lead count, the store gets blamed for a weak close rate, and the customer may feel like the dealership was watching them.


My question stays simple: what exact permission does my dealership have to call that person, and how many additional cars were sold after every suppression and against a control group?

awolniewitz said:

love this. I'll put something together to gauge interest throughout the community. I agree wholeheartedly, the power of the room cannot be understated. Pair that with the generous legacy that is DealerRefresh and it's an exciting thing to think about.


fantastic feedback. A couple of months ago I tried convincing @Alex Snyder & @Jeff Kershner to migrate the community over to discord. They resisted, and i now see that they were correct in doing so. I do still believe a mobile first UI and more casual, instant message type of chat room is missing.

I'm going to build a simple 'what actually worked' module and we'll see where things go. Stand by.

Click to expand...

I think you landed in the right place. Discord would make the conversation faster, but it would also pull a lot of the best information out of DealerRefresh’s searchable history. Keep the forum as the home base and add a mobile-first chat room inside it. When a chat becomes useful, let someone save it as a regular thread so it does not disappear.


For What Actually Worked, I would keep the first version simple: what was broken, store type and volume, starting numbers, what changed, cost or resources involved, the 30/60/90-day result, what failed, and what they would do differently.


I would also show whether the result came from a dealer, vendor, or consultant, along with the date. Then let the members question it and add their own results. That will keep it useful and stop it from turning into another vendor case study.


Put the newest ones in Daily Activity, but let members filter them so they do not take over the feed. I’ll test it as you build it. Done right, this could become one of the most useful parts of DealerRefresh.

KennySmithAutoUnite said:

I agree dealers should pay a lot more attention to what happens after the traffic lands. But I would separate a website visitor from a lead.

If somebody never filled out a form, called, chatted, or asked us to contact them, appending a name, email, and phone number to that visit does not automatically make them a lead. It makes them an identified visitor. That may still have value, but I would want to know exactly how the match was made and what permission we have to contact them.

Before comparing the results to third-party leads, I would want to see the full funnel:

Unique website visitors
Identified visitors
Valid contact records
Actual conversations
Appointments
Shows
Sold units

I would also want existing CRM and DMS customers, service traffic, duplicate records, employees, bots, and prior leads removed from the comparison.

Attribution matters too. A shopper may have found the vehicle on Autotrader, clicked a Google ad, and then landed on the dealership website. The final visit happened on our site, but that does not mean the other source played no role.

The 4x number could be legitimate, but without the denominator and the duplicate-removal rules, it is hard to tell whether the tool is creating incremental opportunities or identifying shoppers who were already known and further down the funnel.

My biggest question is what happens when the salesperson calls someone who never knowingly raised their hand. Does the customer see that as useful follow-up, or does it feel like the dealership was watching them?

I am all for owning more of the website journey. I just would not call every identifiable visitor a lead.

Can you share one dealer’s complete funnel from unique visitors through sold units, with existing customers and duplicate records removed?

Click to expand...

I agree with you here. Furthermore, I believe that customer that never knowingly raised their hand will be creeped out by that call. I also believe that vendor method makes it even harder to find a ROI number when I have a vendor in my ear telling me about how they are delivering the leads but my dealership sucks because they aren't converting them. As you said, they never were and still are not "leads". They are nothing more than identified web surfers.

It seems as though CG is trying their best to clean it up. Some dealers still like to trudge around in the cesspool of deceptive tactics.

I am not going to spend the time looking because I have looked at this in the past. Search the franchise dealers entire inventory and you will likely see a whole bunch of accidental oversights on the equipment. Ya, I shouldn't make that blind accusation...but I just did. Hope I am wrong.

I was just at a meeting a few weeks ago and 3 of the 6 dealers there completely shut off all 3rd party providers. The subject of this thread was a primary reason for 2 of them.

I agree dealers should pay a lot more attention to what happens after the traffic lands. But I would separate a website visitor from a lead.

If somebody never filled out a form, called, chatted, or asked us to contact them, appending a name, email, and phone number to that visit does not automatically make them a lead. It makes them an identified visitor. That may still have value, but I would want to know exactly how the match was made and what permission we have to contact them.

Before comparing the results to third-party leads, I would want to see the full funnel:

Unique website visitors
Identified visitors
Valid contact records
Actual conversations
Appointments
Shows
Sold units

I would also want existing CRM and DMS customers, service traffic, duplicate records, employees, bots, and prior leads removed from the comparison.

Attribution matters too. A shopper may have found the vehicle on Autotrader, clicked a Google ad, and then landed on the dealership website. The final visit happened on our site, but that does not mean the other source played no role.

The 4x number could be legitimate, but without the denominator and the duplicate-removal rules, it is hard to tell whether the tool is creating incremental opportunities or identifying shoppers who were already known and further down the funnel.

My biggest question is what happens when the salesperson calls someone who never knowingly raised their hand. Does the customer see that as useful follow-up, or does it feel like the dealership was watching them?

I am all for owning more of the website journey. I just would not call every identifiable visitor a lead.

Can you share one dealer’s complete funnel from unique visitors through sold units, with existing customers and duplicate records removed?

Interesting data. The part I would want separated is an actual undisclosed product from a customer who agreed to something but never really understood what it was, what it cost, or how it changed the payment.

Both can end up in a review as “they snuck it in,” but they are two different failures.

From the store side, the weak point is usually the handoff. The customer leaves the desk focused on one number, then gets to finance and sees a different payment, term, rate, or product mix without anyone clearly walking them from the first worksheet to the final contract.

I would audit the whole trail: selling price, out-the-door amount, trade and payoff, base payment before products, each product and its payment impact, final rate and term, and what the customer actually signed. Then compare that to the exact language in the review.

I would also be curious about the customers missing from the data because they walked before completing the purchase.

Can you separate true unauthorized add-ons from poor explanation or a broken sales-to-finance handoff? That distinction would tell a dealer what actually needs to be fixed.

Mico Silver said:

We are debating on whether we should port all our phone lines to the phone tracking software we use (one of the big ones). The hesitation is from an opinion that once we port it to them - we might lose control of the number if we have to fire them. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I would not port every core dealership number unless forwarding cannot give you the reporting you need.

The concern is half right. A valid port-out generally has to be honored, so the vendor should not be able to simply keep the numbers. But a bad setup can still make leaving painful if the vendor controls the account records, routing, CSR, BTN, PIN, or toll-free information.

I would keep the main store numbers under an account the dealership controls and forward them into the tracking platform. Use separate tracking numbers for campaigns.

If they require the main numbers to be ported, I would get the exit process in writing before moving anything. The dealership should be clearly identified as the end user, have account-level admin access, receive a complete inventory of every number, and be able to obtain everything needed for a port-out.

Then I would test a small group of noncritical numbers before moving the rest.

The question I would put back on the vendor is simple:

If we terminate tomorrow, exactly what do you give us, who approves the port, and how long should we expect it to take?

Alex Snyder said:

For the first time in 20 years, we have full control of the technology that powers DealerRefresh. If you’ve ever thought, “I wish DealerRefresh would just…” – this is the time to say it. Big swings, small annoyances, and controversial ideas are all welcome. We have the power to evolve fast!

Not sure where to start? Pick one (or more) of these and drop a quick reply:

1. One thing you’d change about DealerRefresh tomorrow if you had our keys.
2. One feature or thread type you wish we’d never remove.
3. A new section, tool, or recurring series you’d love to see us build this year.
4. Where do you think DealerRefresh has the most untapped potential right now?
5. How would you like to see AI used (or avoided) on DealerRefresh?

Click to expand...

Alex, here are the biggest things I would change.


1. Update the mobile UI first. The thread should take up most of the screen, not the navigation. Collapse the top and bottom bars while someone is scrolling, tighten the member information above each post, and keep Reply, Quote, Follow, Bookmark, and Search easy to reach without covering the conversation.


I would also let members customize Daily Activity. Give us filters for Dealer Only, Following, Unanswered, Reviews, AMAs, and the ability to hide categories we do not want in the feed.


2. Never remove the raw threads. The names, dates, quotes, reactions, and full back and forth are what make DealerRefresh valuable. A summary can help someone catch up, but it should never replace seeing who said what and how the discussion developed.


3. Add a recurring “What Actually Worked” section. Have dealers break down the store type, the problem, the starting numbers, what they changed, what it cost, what happened after 30, 60, and 90 days, what failed, and what they would do differently. That would be useful across lead handling, CRM, BDC, recon, websites, service, AI, vendors, and pay plans.


4. The biggest untapped opportunity is the history already here. DealerRefresh has 20 years of real dealership conversations. Connect related threads, show what is still current, flag advice that may be outdated, and make it easier to find dealers who have already dealt with the same problem.


Verified dealer benchmarks would also be valuable. Show anonymous ranges by store type and volume for response time, appointment rate, show rate, sold rate, cost per sold, recon time, and vendor performance. Always show the date and sample size so dealers know how much weight to give the number.


5. Use AI to help members find the right human answer faster. Better search, thread summaries linked to the original posts, duplicate-question detection, stale-content warnings, topic tagging, and routing questions to members with real experience would all help.


I would not use AI to write member replies, auto-post opinions, or create fake activity. The people and the honest conversations are the reason the site matters.


My first move would be the mobile UI and customizable Daily Activity feed. The bigger long-term opportunity is turning the history here into current, usable dealership knowledge without losing the people who created it.

Tzur.asaf said:

Curious to hear from dealership leaders:

How do you actually know what happens in live sales conversations on the showroom floor?

Most dealerships have strong visibility into leads, CRM activity, appointments, test drives, follow-up, F&I, and closed deals.
But the actual face-to-face conversation between the customer and the salesperson is often much harder to measure or coach consistently.

That conversation is where a lot of value is created or lost:

• How well the salesperson qualifies the buyer
• How objections are handled
• Whether trade-in, financing, protection plans, or next steps are positioned well
• Why some deals move forward and others stall
• What top performers do differently

We’re building InstoreX, an AI platform designed to help dealerships understand and improve showroom sales conversations — with the goal of helping managers coach better, improve customer experience, and close more deals.

We’re currently looking to speak with a small number of dealership managers and sales leaders who would be open to sharing how they manage and coach their teams today, and potentially help shape the product as design partners.

No sales pitch — we’re trying to learn from operators and build this around real dealership workflows.

If you’d be open to a short conversation, comment here or email me at [email protected]

Learn more: www.instorex.co

Click to expand...

Most stores really do not know. You hear the salesperson’s version, review the TO, then look at the CRM and the final deal. By then, you are coaching the result, not the conversation that caused it.


The value is seeing the exact point the deal moved or died. Missed question. Weak value build. Objection not handled. No clear next step.


The biggest hurdle is trust. If the floor sees it as a gotcha tool, they will fight it. How are you handling consent, and can it connect the conversation to the full deal in the CRM, including the trade, payment, pricing, and manager involvement?

NEW ARRIVAL Upgrade

More Form + More Style = Better
p.s. built to be a 4:3 like the original.

craigh said:

I'd be interested to see if a better design with identical content helped moved the needle.

Click to expand...

Function versus style.
Many people believe that white space and style drive the function. Style is fungible, style is like fashion, it's A/B testable. The function is the innovation, the style is like paint on a car.


Google "Change Overlay to 'geo-cities' formatting". lol

joe.pistell said:

Sources: reymore.com inventory feed & 16-month archive · Tiles: reymore.com, Jul 29 2026

Click to expand...

I love what you're doing and I want to know if the design matters.
The fonts and styles you have on the text are straight out of the 90s when everyone learned about "outer stroke" in Photoshop, with some Drop Shadow to boot. I'd be interested to see if a better design with identical content helped moved the needle.

Here is Gemini's first attempt - I asked for a "2026 style overlay"

For me (not a lot operator, work with many lot operators) this has always come down to 2 things:
1. Are the build sheets actually accurate? Can you take a Toyota VIN and accurately decode down to the trim and equipment?
2. Does it require the dealer to use yet another tool? (in this case, yes)

There are many inventory merchandizing solutions that have this as a feature, but very few are actually integrating it into their websites or actually implementing the QR codes. We tried QR codes that scanned to the VDP and the number of scans was shockingly low - consumers didn't seem to interact with it at all when looking at the physical car.

In this AI slop wasteland dealers are telling us every week one clear message: "we want less tools, not more tools"

Another DealerRefresh 1st...
Do the pre-recon shots sell more cars?

Pre-recon are the cell phone lot shots, quick, non-professional (example)


Compared to the stores front line photo process:


Solution?

Give your New Arrivals extra attention!​

1 -- Have your photographer take high-quality photos — more is better.
2 -- Don’t photo dirty cars. Period.
3 -- Annotate NEW ARRIVAL on the footer.



Prepared by AutoMagic Labs · TurnSignal ·
The stats: Jul 1–28, 2026, Reymore GA4 (ASC events) —
--141 fully photographed units: 8.5 median VDP views/day in their first 30 days, 53 leads (forms + calls) ·
--49 photo-pending units: 0.3–1.0 views/day, 0 leads, 14 with zero shopper activity ·
--Average wait for full photos: 15 days ·
Sources: reymore.com inventory feed & 16-month archive · Tiles: reymore.com, Jul 29 2026