I asked in another thread weeks ago, but how do you best evaluate advertising efforts in this situation (attribution of the sale)? The dealers that give me good feedback about my advertising service are the ones with a paper survey after the sale. It feels silly to recommend that my dealerships push a paper survey to evaluate performance of my digital advertisement. But, my shoppers will just walk on the dealer's lot when they see a vehicle on my website they like. No web form, no phone call.
100% attribution is is not linear, nor achievable. Paper survey, Autotrader gets "checked" - dealer has not been on Autotrader in a year, etc. I like open ended write/fillable questions if you ARE doing a survey - no checkboxes.
Instead we look at spend, and movement in inventory, that spend "should" affect.
Examples:
1 - Current used turn is 2.0. If I sign up with a primarily used provider for $X,XXX incremental advertising dollars, and 6 months later I am still at 2.0 turn, that spend really did nothing for me. If 6 months later I am at 2.2 turn, then they most likely had an impact.
2 - Current new market share is 12% (zone, region, etc - doesn't matter as long as the data is consistent). I sign up for your program at $X,XXX incremental advertising dollars, and 6 months later I am still at 12%, again it did nothing for me. 6 months later I am at 14%, incremental spend had an impact.
Same examples can be used for spend swap …. IE: canceling one thing to pay for another. If 6 months after canceling one program and signing up for another I am at the same turn, market share, etc - then I just traded one vender for another, and all the headache that comes along with changing.
Are there other things that can affect the above examples == yes. We use it as a baseline in evaluation of venders/products/tech.