Websites, SEO, SEM, Display, Social, Marketing

Ryan Leslie shares a humorous article from Nifty Marketing that critiques Google+ Local through the lens of an ice cream shop's frustrating experience with the platform. The post highlights common pain points small businesses face when using Google+ Local for local business listings and marketing. The thread suggests that despite its potential utility, Google+ Local creates unnecessary complications that frustrate small business owners trying to manage their online presence.

A dealer asks about live chat best practices—specifically whether to proactively message visitors and whether declining response rates warrant stopping outreach—and expresses concern that chat availability might reduce form submissions. Multiple vendors and professionals counter this concern with case study data showing that live chat increases overall leads and conversions rather than cannibalizing other contact methods, with managed chat services reporting 57-100% conversion rate improvements, though the thread ends with debate over whose statistics are most credible.

Automotive dealers need to prepare their online presence for Apple Maps, which replaced Google Maps on iPhones and iPads, by claiming and optimizing listings on Localeze and Acxiom (which feed into Apple's "Info cards") and building positive Yelp reviews. The thread provides step-by-step instructions for registering on these platforms, notes that basic Localeze listings are free while Acxiom requires paid claims, and highlights that mobile marketing strategy should now parallel desktop-focused Google efforts. A practical takeaway emerges: focus on generating positive reviews across Yelp and these data aggregators rather than paying for advertising, as review volume and quality appear to influence visibility in Siri searches.

The thread criticizes a dealership manager's "just get 'em in" approach to internet sales inquiries, arguing that sending generic price quotes without strategy wastes opportunities on customers who arrive heavily researched and comparison-shopping. The original poster suggests this shortcut tactic is unlikely to convert leads and fails to address the actual needs of modern car buyers who have already done extensive research before contacting the dealership. The discussion includes a reference to a Joe Webb consulting video, presumably offering better practices for handling internet sales inquiries.

The thread debated whether dealers should invest in third-party websites while minimizing their manufacturer-mandated sites, with Emily Moore questioning why dealers would completely ignore OEM-driven traffic. The consensus leaned toward maintaining both platforms strategically rather than abandoning the manufacturer site: OEM sites have built-in traffic and compliance advantages, while custom sites allow dealers to differentiate and optimize beyond manufacturer constraints, but dealers must navigate OEM compliance rules around URLs and approved vendors carefully.

• Poll

Tim Martell publicly criticized automotive SEO vendors for misleading reporting and delivering little real value, sparking agreement from dealers and industry professionals frustrated with overhyped services, vague metrics, and vendors lacking actual automotive retail experience. The thread consensus emphasizes that dealers need better education to understand what they're buying, more transparency about what constitutes service versus product, and a distinction between legitimate SEO practices and "snake oil" marketed through fake awards and buzzwords like "Video SEO" and "Web 3.0." The key insight is that the automotive vendor community relies on dealers' lack of technical knowledge to justify charging for busywork that doesn't produce measurable results or sales.

Brad asks whether services like Relyable.com and ReviewBoost.com can legitimately help remove negative reviews from Google Places listings. The consensus strongly discourages using these services, as they violate Google's guidelines; instead, respondents recommend legitimately responding to negative reviews, reporting genuinely fraudulent ones, and focusing on generating authentic positive reviews through automated requests. A particular red flag is raised about ReviewBoost's evasive tactics when confronted about their practices, with one marketer describing suspicious claims about multiple IP addresses and defensive behavior during a sales call.

This thread discusses an NPR article on fake online reviews and their implications for car dealerships, with members debating both the prevalence of fraudulent reviews posted by dealers and the challenge of distinguishing between genuinely bad reviews and those motivated by extortion, competition sabotage, or trivial complaints unrelated to actual service quality. Key insights include the recognition that consumer awareness of fake reviews is rising (inviting potential regulatory action), that consumers are savvy enough to disregard obviously fraudulent or petty complaints, and that dealers face a difficult situation where they need better policies to prevent unethical review practices while also lacking adequate tools to defend against or edit unfair negative reviews.

Billfred initiates a discussion inviting automotive professionals to share their Google Analytics dashboards using Google's new Share Dashboard feature, which distributes configuration details without exposing actual data. He provides his own dashboard as an example, noting his dealership uses eBizAutos for inventory (with /detail- URL structure) and posts exclusively to Columbia Craigslist. The thread appears designed to help dealers benchmark their analytics tracking practices and learn from peer setups.

The thread centers on Tim Martell's viral article accusing automotive SEO vendors of unethical practices and misleading reporting, sparking debate about vendor accountability and dealer education. A key point of contention is why some industry sites removed the article, with DrivingSales explaining it violated their terms of service around vendor-versus-vendor disputes. Commenters largely agree that dealer ignorance enables bad SEO practices, with one suggesting Google Analytics alone can expose the gap between vendor promises and real keyword performance.

Automotive professionals share amusing and bizarre search phrases that customers use to find their dealership websites, including misspellings like "fitzgarrel catalack" and "jim hudsom cadalac," as well as oddly specific or grammatically broken searches like "auto financing without job" and "subura dealerships in pa and ohio that finance with bankruptsy." The thread highlights how Google Analytics reveals the reality of customer search behavior—often poorly spelled, desperate attempts to find financing options, and surprisingly lengthy browsing sessions despite the query quality.

A dealer asks about managing spam reviews on CarGurus and receives guidance from a CarGurus representative to use the orange feedback button to report problematic reviews. The company explains that reviewers are limited to users who posted leads through their listings, and clarifies that they source inventory from multiple feeds including Cars.com and other aggregators. The thread ends without resolution to the dealer's original concern about review management processes.

Mike Robbins seeks advice on responding to a negative Google review alleging his dealership took advantage of customers, particularly women, and buried fees in financing for a used Mercedes. Community members, particularly Glenn Jimerson and Chip Grueter, provide practical guidance: claim the business listing through Google Places to enable public owner responses, and reword the reply to focus on demonstrating professionalism to other readers rather than directly challenging the reviewer's credibility.

Dealers discuss their experiences with aggressive Yelp advertising sales pitches, with the original poster questioning the platform's inflated claims (calling itself the "#1 search engine") and expensive pricing ($1 per impression vs. pennies elsewhere). Respondents largely dismiss Yelp advertising as ineffective and overpriced, with one dealer noting the absurdity of a competitor paying to advertise a Yelp page full of negative reviews. The consensus is skepticism about Yelp's value for automotive dealerships, combined with criticism of Yelp reps' lack of understanding of basic advertising terminology.

The thread discusses how some dealers pursue shortcuts in marketing, SEO, reviews, and pricing to gain competitive advantages, but these tactics ultimately damage long-term reputation and business sustainability. Participants emphasize that transparent, honest business practices—while requiring more work—deliver better results, stronger customer relationships, and genuine peace of mind, with one vendor raising an important point that consultants and vendors also bear responsibility for enabling these shortcuts by promoting quick-fix solutions.

A digital marketing professional outlines five reputation management strategies for car dealers in 2012, arguing that ignoring online reviews puts dealerships at serious risk. A dealer respondent pushes back on prioritizing platforms like Yelp and DealerRater given their low traffic impact, while other commenters caution against dismissing those sites and raise concerns about privacy risks from full-name reviews and the credibility of dealer-hosted review pages. The key tension is between concentrating resources on high-traffic channels versus maintaining a diversified review presence across platforms.

A small Ford-Lincoln dealer asks for low-cost website solutions after Lincoln brand requirements forced them to create a separate website for their 3-4 Lincoln vehicles, rejecting their original splash page approach. Respondents suggest various budget options including WordPress with DealerTrend ($300-500/month), eBizAutos ($299/month), standalone services starting at $200/month, or Ford/Lincoln's mandatory ClickMotive platform ($299/month). The thread reveals widespread frustration with Lincoln's increasingly stringent compliance requirements and highlights that dealers often have limited cost-effective choices, with many ultimately directed toward manufacturer-mandated platforms regardless.

A dealer shares a YouTube video about SEO fundamentals from Dejan SEO that he found valuable and thought would benefit the community. The thread appears to be a simple resource recommendation rather than a discussion, offering fellow automotive professionals an educational video on search engine optimization best practices.

Dealers discuss the effectiveness of email marketing for both customer retention and conquest campaigns, with agreement that it's underutilized despite strong ROI potential when executed properly. Key challenges include finding reputable email list vendors for conquest efforts, managing internal resistance from staff who view frequent emails as excessive, and understanding that basic CRM email tools often underperform compared to dedicated email marketing platforms. The consensus is that email marketing works well—achieving 20%+ open rates with proper execution—but requires investment in quality list sources, professional campaign design, and realistic expectations about opt-outs and engagement metrics.

This thread discusses how adding personal touches and human connection to automotive dealership marketing—such as employee videos, personalized emails with photos, and staff introductions—significantly outperforms impersonal, faceless advertising. Participants share concrete examples like Zappos's conversion rate jump (6% to 30%) and argue that online sales processes should mirror the relationship-building that happens on the lot with salespeople. The emerging consensus is that customers respond better to personality, relatability, and genuine engagement, with several dealers planning to implement video testimonials and customer photos at delivery to humanize the buying experience.

A dealer unhappy with their current photo service seeks recommendations for on-lot photography providers and pricing. Responses recommend Dealer Specialties as a reliable vendor and suggest that service quality depends heavily on finding experienced photographers and holding providers accountable, with one user advocating for in-house photo booth investment as a long-term cost solution. The key insight is that photography quality is determined more by personnel quality and attention to detail than by the vendor system itself.