What do consumers really want in a car buying experience?
Maybe a little on my personal background is in order. I grew up in the car business, literally. My family (both sides actually) have been in the car business, quite literally, since there was a car business. My father is still a dealer, though not as an extension of his father's business (not even in the same market). I began taking an interest in marketing/merchandising as it relates to the auto industry around my sophomore year in High School. I used to sit at my father's desk (when I wasn't too busy sweeping up cigarette butts etc. on his lot) and help spec out cars, evaluate advertising opportunities, and study his interactions, as a very "hands-on" dealer, with his staff. I attended Northwood University on golf and academic scholarships, and graduated with a BBA in Automotive Marketing (an odd degree, I know...NU is the only school in the USA that offers it). I have worked in various capacities in the retail auto industry, most outside of my family's stores. I have worked for one of the largest dealer groups, as well as single points in small towns.
Point is, I don't have any "preconceptions" about the car business that just happen to conveniently fit into my side of this discussion. Any of my conceptions regarding the car business come from a lot of years of experience and formal education. The word preconceptions makes it sound as though you believe I form my opinions, then look for an argument to support them. This is simply not the case.
I feel the need to reiterate that it was you who first compared the car business to a sporting good store (think Golfsmith), by defending the practice of loss leader ads. I simply wanted to highlight what I see as a crucial difference in that comparison. I totally agree with you that they employ a quite different business model, and therefore may not be worth the comparison.
As far as your "intellectual challenge" goes, I'm in. I don't see the business as "victims and predators." Though I believe you do. Here is why: in your first post on this thread, you said "The days of old are gone. Consumers have all of the information tools needed to chart their own course, they can take control of their own fate. What of the personal responsibility to understand what rolling over negative equity means down the road? That falls into the realm of education does it not? We're here to move iron, not be mini Dr Phils." In other words, you believe in the theory of survival of the fittest. If the customers are too weak (read: stupid) to take advantage of all the tools available to them, then we should prey upon their weaknesses in order to move the iron, and they get eaten, right? You made the argument for the very definition of the predator/prey relationship.
I simply see a lot of room for improvement in the business with regard to how we "talk" to our customers. I think that we can do better by setting proper expectations...do you really still wonder why customers "beat us up" for better prices and not salespeople in other verticals?
My only point on this thread so far has been that there are better ways to market our products and services to the car buying public. We need not resort to pricing tricks, numbers juggling, and hard-sells. As Shaun's video and his post seem to suggest, our customers are asking us for better than that.
Tim
PS. I'm not mad, don't you be either. I love marketing as much as I love a lively debate!
Point is, I don't have any "preconceptions" about the car business that just happen to conveniently fit into my side of this discussion. Any of my conceptions regarding the car business come from a lot of years of experience and formal education. The word preconceptions makes it sound as though you believe I form my opinions, then look for an argument to support them. This is simply not the case.
I feel the need to reiterate that it was you who first compared the car business to a sporting good store (think Golfsmith), by defending the practice of loss leader ads. I simply wanted to highlight what I see as a crucial difference in that comparison. I totally agree with you that they employ a quite different business model, and therefore may not be worth the comparison.
As far as your "intellectual challenge" goes, I'm in. I don't see the business as "victims and predators." Though I believe you do. Here is why: in your first post on this thread, you said "The days of old are gone. Consumers have all of the information tools needed to chart their own course, they can take control of their own fate. What of the personal responsibility to understand what rolling over negative equity means down the road? That falls into the realm of education does it not? We're here to move iron, not be mini Dr Phils." In other words, you believe in the theory of survival of the fittest. If the customers are too weak (read: stupid) to take advantage of all the tools available to them, then we should prey upon their weaknesses in order to move the iron, and they get eaten, right? You made the argument for the very definition of the predator/prey relationship.
I simply see a lot of room for improvement in the business with regard to how we "talk" to our customers. I think that we can do better by setting proper expectations...do you really still wonder why customers "beat us up" for better prices and not salespeople in other verticals?
My only point on this thread so far has been that there are better ways to market our products and services to the car buying public. We need not resort to pricing tricks, numbers juggling, and hard-sells. As Shaun's video and his post seem to suggest, our customers are asking us for better than that.
Tim
PS. I'm not mad, don't you be either. I love marketing as much as I love a lively debate!