Jim Ziegler Has The Cars.com Marketing Strategy All Wrong - Automotive Digital Marketing Professional Community
Before I put my muscle on one side let me say that both contenders, Zig and Brian, have the dealer’s interest in mind when discussing these issues. For this there is no right or wrong but a point of view to make things better. Thank both of them for their efforts.
I try to see what every 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] party site does not just from the POV of their monetary advantage but for what could this do for the customer—the car buyer. In the last few years social media and better Internet systems have changed the way companies shape their programs: What is better for the customer creates more interactions and more interactions create more business. Everything else is almost secondary. Look at all the efforts Microsoft has put on mobile or the Zune, in the end what customer wanted won. Microsoft’s vision had no relevance whatsoever.
Looking at Cars.com inventory display share I can’t find any advantage for Cars.com other than maybe claiming more VDP views in their reports. No further trick here. Pay attention than unlike other cases like for example Autobytel selling the customer info to Get Auto (as it was claimed by a dealer) where one lead source is selling to another lead source, Cars.com is showing another dealer cars to a customer but they also show your cars to the other dealer’s customer. This is not a “customer data selling” but a customer sharing that works both ways for the dealers.
In this case I have to agree with Brian Pash that we shouldn’t lynch the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] party site without knowing whether this is a good thing or not. A good thing in this case would be that customers don’t feel boxed by a set of results start searches all over again. for example a customer searches for a Ford Mustang and because they see your competitor’s they look at their, come back to your’s, contact both, etc. If Cars.com doesn’t share the inventory maybe the customers, as research shows, will go to other sites to look for more options forcing you to be on every single website there is; hence the old question: why do I have to be on every single 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] party site? Well… maybe you were telling customers to go to other sites to see more options.
We are in the age of transparency and we need to look at things from the customer POV. If they want to look for more cars they will. Your trucks to keep them boxed in our inventory will not work. The easier you make the search for them the more they will use the assets that you pay perhaps allowing you to have to pay for less assets.
You should cancel Cars.com if the ROI is not good but you shouldn’t cancel Cars.com because they are spending money on R&D and looking for better ways to service the public. Cars.com customer is the car buyer, not you. Think about it: If Cars.com makes you happy but you sell no cars, you leave. If Cars.com makes you mad but you sell a lot of cars, you stay.
Let’s work with Cars.com to create a better system and not assume that everything on the vendor side is done by their evil ways to get your money. Maybe this is a wrong move and customer will get confused with so many choices but let’s learn it so we can discard it instead of creating a digital lynching.
