Great points above. A few points to expand and contrast:
1) ILM's typically lack CRM capabilities too. They typically lack the database of prospects and customers and the ability to market to that database effectively as I understand it. The market is going to converge. Who has the advantage and will win? How?
2) IMO workflow flexibility must be balanced with accountability that managers demand. ILM's allow more flexibility IMO because the Internet department is typiclly small and can held more accountable for results, as opposed to findng where the sales process breaks in the scope of the whole floor sales and sales management force.
4) CRM's have weak email engines, I agree. eMail specialists are preferred to the CRM email tools IMO, because they manage whitelisting and blacklisting issues effectively. It's slightly more difficult for server-based CRM systems to manage opting-in and opting-out IMO. I believe this issue can be fixed, and I'd love to know what CRM's are fixing it in their toolset and email services.
Do you think ILM's don't face so many spamming issues because people have inherently opted from via the internet or by giving their email out via phone typically?
5) This does seem to be an issue CRM companies haven't handles well. I wonder when or if it will change, becuase they are highly complex tools with great value if used effectively. Yet dealers also need to take responsibility for having people who know how to use them effectively. I suspect dealers fail in that capacity more often than they succeed.
One misunderstanding appears to be that ILM does not equal CRM. ILM's are incredible valuable. I too hear iCar is great, and I hear some of the same about AVV. But they are simple ILM's, managing a lead through the sales pipeline. They are marketing engines to target customers and prospects for specific campaigns AND follow them through the floor sales process. In fact, I hear of one dealership using AVV for phone and internet leads, then switching to another CRM provider for floor activity and follow up.
Another reflection on an item above-------------
"I think it also says a lot when there is no contract with iCar while there is a 36 month + agreement with Higher Gear."
It does say a lot, but not what may be implied above. These CRM companies aren't out to ripoff dealers, get their money and pay no attention to them. That's not their intent.
They simply have so much invested in installing and training people on highly sophisticated tools that profitability has to be achieved over a long period of time. In fact, profitability appears quite fleeting in this space, despite what you may hear or believe.
Interesting, automotive CRM appears to be a reflection of CRM's issues in the rest of the world. Siebel has been a disappointment if not a failure for much of corporate America it seems. Achieving great results with all these tools, requires great investment of time. I have come to believe that CRM must be supported by either a) services to help dealers use the tools well or b) services that do it for them.
Reflections appreciated. Full disclosure - I work in a company that owns a CRM company as well as ILM products.
