• This thread is just the tip of the iceberg.The people ahead of the curve aren't Googling for answers — they're already in here, having the conversations you haven't found yet. DealerRefresh is free.Get the full picture →

Cobalt LMCC Dealer Letter?

I've been checking various cobalt sites today, about 15, and all but one the cached versions were messed up. Do you think this affects rank?

To check the cached version of your cobalt site do a search in which you know your cobalt site will show up. Instead of clicking on your site look slightly below and to the right. You will see "cached" in blue. Click on it.

I use this to help me monitor when a site has been spidered last. Then I know any changes in the site have been read and I can then see how my changes have affected position/rank.
 
I'm just glad that when Acura came up with their "preferred website vendor" website solution they had the smarts to pick Dealer.Com and not Cobalt. It's amazing to me, and a little sad, that Cobalt let a business they controlled slip from their hands by 2 - 3 years of complacency right about the time other Website Providers hit the scene. I used to love Cobalt. I remember when I would call Cobalt up with a fix or an issue and they would get right on it and actually accommodate the changes. I also remember the first time I called and they said, "I'll put in an enhancement request and you may see it in your lifetime" I bet there are still open tickets from 5 years ago. It really is a shame!:(


It has nothing to do with leads Matt - I'm talking about websites. Well....it does have something to do with leads when you're speaking about how well your site converts. But overall I'm talking about being forced to only use one tool for anything - regardless if it is a Cobalt website, a Cobalt Lead Management System, or anything at all. It spits in the face of competition because it forces an even playing field.

I just happened to use CoBalt's website platform as the example because that's what I'm most familiar with.
 

✨ AI Highlights

  • GM dealers received notice that Cobalt's LMCC (lead management tool) is no longer an approved vendor and must be replaced, as it doesn't meet new SFE certification criteria requiring mobile interface capability by March 12, 2010.
  • The thread reveals broader frustration with Cobalt's antiquated technology and forced OEM partnerships, though opinions diverge on whether the company's customer service compensates for product limitations.
  • The key takeaway is that LMCC's deactivation reflects GM's push for modernized lead management systems, while dealers and industry pros debate Cobalt's competitive position and product quality more generally.

GM dealers received notice that Cobalt's LMCC (lead management tool) is no longer an approved vendor and must be replaced, as it doesn't meet new SFE certification criteria requiring mobile interface capability by March 12, 2010. The thread reveals broader frustration with Cobalt's antiquated technology and forced OEM partnerships, though opinions diverge on whether the company's customer service compensates for product limitations. The key takeaway is that LMCC's deactivation reflects GM's push for modernized lead management systems, while dealers and industry pros debate Cobalt's competitive position and product quality more generally.

Replies Views 14 8,566 Started Last Reply