Does Your CRM Have the Right to Hijack Your Data?

[FrigginBandit]

But, to devil's advocate myself a little, think about how the CRM does have an obligation to keep you legal and they purposely (if they're worth a darn) don't print out the sensitive client information, not even SSN's on credit aps. Further, wasn't there just a lawsuit because "Lithia" was "Lithia" and wanted something in their CRM custom overridden so they could mass text and break the law and clearly, they didn't know better. They were sued. And they lost. I can't recall the Automotive News it was in but they had coverage. And the CRM, again, if they're worth a darn, want to keep themselves white listed and by adhering to the spam rules helps with that. Most dealership work flows are nonsensical and thus create an abnormally high number of spam emails. That not only hurts the dealer but also makes it more difficult for the CRM. I'm fascinated by this, really great question you've posed.

 

[derrickwoolfson]

I didn't vote because "it depends" is my answer and that's solely based on the assumption (ass - u - me) that it's not literally hijacked, just locked until a pronounced and valid action allows it to be visible again. This has been going on since AutoBase started it 12 years ago, that I recall, and they'd put "######" over the phone number for a client that you've not had any contact with. The number was there, but due to the law you couldn't call without, say, a showroom visit or they called you. Then, if you had that valid interaction, the number would open again and you'd see it but the clock would reset.

Are they basing this on the law or did they just arbitrarily make this up? Arbitrarily made up wouldn't surprise me as so many CRM's out there have no credible retail successes on staff and oftentimes their only interaction is through "advisory boards" and those are mostly made up of the store staff that don't actually work in the CRM and are only interested in free dinners from the vendors.

Which CRM is it?

Awesome username for the record. This a multifaceted argument. I offer that because there are those dealers (such as ourselves) who know how to manage and send email blasts working with scrubbed *valid* data. As far as the relationships go, if the customer did not purchase or service with you, but inquired (regardless of the time frame in which they inquired) and have a valid email you should be able to send a campaign within the CRM. Albeit, the results will be *extremely* minimal and you are going to see much better results doing a social campaign. But the point is the CRM should not dictate what you can or cannot do with a valid email regardless of what they offer the relationship is or should be.

Now, as far as the law goes if the customer opted out on then it is, in fact, illegal to continue to send them emails. And for those dealers who use a 3rd party provider that is not connected to their CRM (as it extracts info from those VINS that have had transactions within the DMS) than it is the dealers responsibility to scrub the email lists to ensure that they are compliant.

The bottom line is that I can account several retailers that continue to send emails 2-3 (sometimes 4x+) a month despite the fact that I have not opened or purchased anything from them in the last 2-3 years. The fact is that I have a valid email, and have not opted out. And the whole point is not about the success rate of the marketing campaign, but rather the notion that the CRM should not dictate what constitutes a relationship with a valid email.

 

[derrickwoolfson]

I didn't vote because "it depends" is my answer and that's solely based on the assumption (ass - u - me) that it's not literally hijacked, just locked until a pronounced and valid action allows it to be visible again. This has been going on since AutoBase started it 12 years ago, that I recall, and they'd put "######" over the phone number for a client that you've not had any contact with. The number was there, but due to the law you couldn't call without, say, a showroom visit or they called you. Then, if you had that valid interaction, the number would open again and you'd see it but the clock would reset.

Are they basing this on the law or did they just arbitrarily make this up? Arbitrarily made up wouldn't surprise me as so many CRM's out there have no credible retail successes on staff and oftentimes their only interaction is through "advisory boards" and those are mostly made up of the store staff that don't actually work in the CRM and are only interested in free dinners from the vendors.

Which CRM is it?

I will not disclose the CRM as I respect anonymity as this conversation encapsulates the current tone in our industry which I offer is just masking a larger issue, which is the fact that dealers are generally piss poor in understanding data management, marketing, and how to leverage their vendors.

 

[Alex Snyder]

I will not disclose the CRM as I respect anonymity...

Very professional of you Derrick. I ain't that professional

The CRM in question is eLead.

And even though I'm not as professional as Derrick, I will say that @Jeff Kershner is working with them to come on the next Friday Refresh. Fingers crossed we get to dive into this subject from both perspectives!

 

[john.quinn]

I ain't that professional

This must be Understatement Monday

 

[FrigginBandit]

Awesome username for the record. This a multifaceted argument. I offer that because there are those dealers (such as ourselves) who know how to manage and send email blasts working with scrubbed *valid* data. As far as the relationships go, if the customer did not purchase or service with you, but inquired (regardless of the time frame in which they inquired) and have a valid email you should be able to send a campaign within the CRM. Albeit, the results will be *extremely* minimal and you are going to see much better results doing a social campaign. But the point is the CRM should not dictate what you can or cannot do with a valid email regardless of what they offer the relationship is or should be.

Now, as far as the law goes if the customer opted out on then it is, in fact, illegal to continue to send them emails. And for those dealers who use a 3rd party provider that is not connected to their CRM (as it extracts info from those VINS that have had transactions within the DMS) than it is the dealers responsibility to scrub the email lists to ensure that they are compliant.

The bottom line is that I can account several retailers that continue to send emails 2-3 (sometimes 4x+) a month despite the fact that I have not opened or purchased anything from them in the last 2-3 years. The fact is that I have a valid email, and have not opted out. And the whole point is not about the success rate of the marketing campaign, but rather the notion that the CRM should not dictate what constitutes a relationship with a valid email.

Thanks!

So it's not based on anything legal, makes sense. Here's my question to you then, while I agree with you, you're the "10%" and thus you pay the price for the fact that the systems are built for the 80% in the middle. The question, would you rather be able to email 100% of your valid email addresses with 50% less effectiveness or 90% of your most valid and most likely to buy email addresses?

 

[FrigginBandit]

Very professional of you Derrick. I ain't that professional

The CRM in question is eLead.

And even though I'm not as professional as Derrick, I will say that @Jeff Kershner is working with them to come on the next Friday Refresh. Fingers crossed we get to dive into this subject from both perspectives!

eLead... Interesting

 

[FrigginBandit]

I will not disclose the CRM as I respect anonymity as this conversation encapsulates the current tone in our industry which I offer is just masking a larger issue, which is the fact that dealers are generally piss poor in understanding data management, marketing, and how to leverage their vendors.

Well said about dealers not getting it. With that said, you can't forget that most systems, like most cars, most phones and most everything, are made for the 80% in the middle, not power users and not the 10% at the bottom that can't spell CRM.

 

[FrigginBandit]

When you say “hijack” do you mean it’s still there and they’re just opted out or you mean it’s locked or removed altogether? What’s their basis for this? Is it based on the spam laws or the telemarketing laws or did they arbitrarily just say “this is how it’s going to be now” and it’s based on “their” logic?

It looks like they're just arbitrarily saying "here is the line in the sand" and that's it. It's their logic which I'm not mad at given the fact most dealers have no clue how to manage themselves. I imagine it's to keep the mail servers white listed. It's kind of like a Doc Fee really, all the CRM's are getting together saying we're going to show you a better way and dealers get together and say "we're charging a doc fee" so everyone is even hahaha

 

[Jeff Kershner]

Very professional of you Derrick. I ain't that professional

The CRM in question is eLead.

And even though I'm not as professional as Derrick, I will say that @Jeff Kershner is working with them to come on the next Friday Refresh. Fingers crossed we get to dive into this subject from both perspectives!

I tried to get Bill Wittenmyer from Elead to jump on Refresh Friday with us but they are to no current availability. Too bad.