Location is the ad source of the unenlightened

[FrigginBandit]

Hmmmm.... Seems to me "location" may be more relevant than ever.

With every dealership in the country only as far away as your fingertips, when it's time to actually take that first step through a bricks door, what is going to influence my decision?

Research a few different places, go where I want to buy, which is usually the place that is most convenient to me.

Dirty little secret? It shouldn't be...

Now -- TRACKING that information? Any data that relies on staff input is inherently useless.

I don’t disagree that it’s important, I just think as of recent we’re entirely too caught up in it. There are many colleagues I know that spend 6 figures (per person) to hire folks that “analyze” the data yet they’re not mathematicians nor are they statisticians... paralysis by analysis is easier today than ever before. The best part, they aren’t trained to analyze said data! So, they’re interpreting it from a foundation of ignorance. I met a data scientist at my son’s school and let me tell you, that guy can tell me where to invest my as dollars. Brilliant is an understatement.

 

[Alex Snyder]

With every dealership in the country only as far away as your fingertips, when it's time to actually take that first step through a bricks door, what is going to influence my decision?

Research a few different places, go where I want to buy, which is usually the place that is most convenient to me.

That sounds like one can assume that if a shopper is within the market area, then location is a factor. It makes me believe a dealership should just assume location is part of the marketing attribution when the customer is within x miles of the store.

 

[john.quinn]

That sounds like one can assume that if a shopper is within the market area...

Every consumer is in some market -- somewhere is the closest dealer, and it's generally their business to lose.

All this technology -- data, targeted advertising, digital retailing... know which dealers win??

Same ones that won before: the ones that take care of their customers and their people - on the floor and in the lane. Tech vendors have a vested interest in making it seem complicated -- it isn't. There really isn't that much science to it: culture sells cars and differentiates dealers, not tech or data.

Dealers who use tech to streamline/enhance the experience for the customers and their personnel have it figured-out. Dealers who look to tech otherwise will continue to be the ones who force their salespeople to enter something for Ad Source when they're loading their deal in CRM

 

[Jason@nabthat]

You can look at it from a Defensive versus an Offensive Strategy when it comes to location based ad serving; search or otherwise. The larger the budget, the more offensive you can be...and the smaller the budget the more defensive. Data in the wrong hands can have a detrimental affect on SEM strategy and vice versa. It is imperative for dealers to get the opportunity to communicate their value propositions to "active" shoppers. If they have the right process in place and the right people to service customers then everything should payoff.

 

[Alexander Lau]

That sounds like one can assume that if a shopper is within the market area, then location is a factor. It makes me believe a dealership should just assume location is part of the marketing attribution when the customer is within x miles of the store.

True and there are a lot of slimy, auto digital agencies attempting to spend budgets (in order TO spend a budget) in zip codes outside core demographic. This is a bad one and agencies get caught red-handed a lot.

 

[Alexander Lau]

I guess crossing into conquest territory (conquesting) might be worth mentioning. If an agency or internal resource decides to go after customers outside of their region and / or attack competitor brands (Honda vs. Toyota or Nissan, etc.), it's a different story. I've seen some of that work in the past, even when outside of a dealer's 25 to 30 mile radius. Places in the middle of nowhere Texas, etc.

 

[Stefan]

… do you trust your sales & service staff to actually probe the customer to find out what truly made them aware of your dealership and what other sources should receive attribution too?

“do you trust your sales & service staff “– No and it should not be part of their duties. They are not qualified “to actually probe the customer to find out what truly made them aware of your dealership and what other sources should receive attribution too?”

“to actually probe the customer to find out what truly made them aware of your dealership and what other sources should receive attribution too” – this should be done by integrating data points from companies like Clarivoy into our CRM and not by our staff.

 

[Jason@nabthat]

I guess crossing into conquest territory (conquesting) might be worth mentioning. If an agency or internal resource decides to go after customers outside of their region and / or attack competitor brands (Honda vs. Toyota or Nissan, etc.), it's a different story. I've seen some of that work in the past, even when outside of a dealer's 25 to 30 mile radius. Places in the middle of nowhere Texas, etc.

If the budget allows for Conquest campaigns, I am all for it. However, Conquest campaigns are expensive and dealers will pay north of $6 per click (and as high as $9). The other issue here is OEM and Tier 2 advertising on specific keywords that Dealers go after, this only drives up the costs for everyone. IMO Tier 1 & 2 should exclusively spend digital marketing (specifically search) on Conquest.

 

[Alexander Lau]

If the budget allows for Conquest campaigns, I am all for it. However, Conquest campaigns are expensive and dealers will pay north of $6 per click (and as high as $9). The other issue here is OEM and Tier 2 advertising on specific keywords that Dealers go after, this only drives up the costs for everyone. IMO Tier 1 & 2 should exclusively spend digital marketing (specifically search) on Conquest.

I completely agree (far more costly and risky), I've seen them work when executed correctly. It's a fine line. Let T1 and T2 do it more so, yeahhhh... zero risk for retailer.