CRM, ILM, Chat, Desking, Emails, Phone, SMS

# BDC Averages Summary A BDC manager asks whether her 20% appointment-setting rate and 30-50% sales conversion are normal benchmarks. Experienced professionals advise that while industry standards exist (typically 40% sets, 50% shows, 60% sells), establishing a personal baseline and focusing on month-over-month improvement matters more than hitting external benchmarks, especially since lead sources, market competition, and individual dealership conditions significantly impact results.

Chris Fruchey describes his dealership's challenge of scaling their successful incoming sales call process (200-220 monthly sales) to outgoing prospecting efforts, questioning why their CRM metrics looked good but results didn't match. A respondent advises focusing only on high-ROI activities (like recall calls over birthday calls), eliminating low-value touchpoints, and implementing text confirmations to boost appointment show rates—emphasizing that incremental improvements across the funnel compound into meaningful growth.

# Summary Michael Leonard describes a compliance and customer experience problem where multi-store dealer groups sharing a single CDK CRM database cannot maintain separate opt-out preferences by location—when one store opts out a customer, all stores lose that contact, and new leads from other stores automatically re-opt them in, creating legal and satisfaction issues. Respondents confirm there is no native CRM solution for this in automotive, with the only viable fixes being external third-party consent management tools that integrate via API, though most automotive CRMs lack proper API capabilities to support this workflow effectively.

A dealer vents extensively about Call Revu's poor user interface, cumbersome reporting that requires multiple clicks to access, and lack of self-service features like line editing and call notation—requiring support tickets for basic tasks. The thread's consensus recommendation is CallRail as a superior alternative that offers robust, intuitive reporting and complete self-service functionality without requiring human support intervention. The key insight is that call tracking vendors must prioritize user-friendly reporting and self-service controls, as these are the core features dealers rely on and poor execution in these areas outweighs any other missing features.

A dealer criticizes CarGurus's free anonymous email lead service as spam-like and ineffective, citing issues with delivery reliability (5-attempt limit), poor lead quality, and operational headaches like manually removing leads from marketing lists. The poster concludes that paying for targeted organic AdWords and PPC campaigns delivers significantly better results at a lower cost than accepting high-volume free leads. The underlying concern is that free lead sources may prioritize quantity over quality and come with hidden costs in time and effort.

• Poll

# Summary Stefan seeks guidance on which lead sources should be included in an Internet ROI Report, prompting Jerry Thibeau to outline a comprehensive tracking framework covering spend, lead volume, appointments, shows, sales, and revenue by source. While Jerry emphasizes that better CRM systems can automate these calculations, he and subsequent replies highlight that metrics alone are insufficient—dealers must also evaluate whether poor ROI stems from weak lead sources or broken sales processes, making proper lead sourcing and team training equally critical to advertising spend.

The thread debates whether CRM software directly drives car sales, with most participants concluding that CRMs don't sell cars themselves but rather enable sales through process consistency, workflow management, and adoption of best practices. The consensus view is that a CRM's impact depends far more on leadership buy-in, proper implementation, and adherence to defined processes than on the software product itself, though better-designed CRMs can remove friction and improve efficiency. One participant with access to data suggests that modern CRMs do show measurable sales gains compared to legacy systems, primarily due to effective implementations rather than the tools alone.

# Summary Dealers debate the effectiveness of mass email blasts, with Alex Snyder arguing that sending emails to over 100 people typically results in poor engagement and is annoying, while other contributors counter that large recipient lists can work well if properly targeted and personalized. The thread reveals consensus that email quality matters far more than quantity—dealers using hyper-segmentation, personalized messaging, and relevant content report 5-40% open rates and 25-35% click-through rates, versus the 1% or less that generic blasts achieve. Key takeaway: dealers should either drastically limit blast sizes to highly relevant audiences or invest in sophisticated targeting and personalization tools to make larger campaigns effective.

Alex Snyder questions whether the automotive industry's obsession with scheduling and tracking sales appointments actually improves customer show rates and sales outcomes, or if it's an outdated metric that compromises the customer experience. Steve Stauning counters with data showing that properly executed appointments (referred to as "The Perfect Appointment") achieve 80%+ show and close rates versus 20-30% for traditional walk-in traffic, along with shorter transaction times and higher grosses. The thread highlights a key industry debate: whether the real value lies in the appointment itself or in executing a structured, customer-centric appointment process.

Julie seeks CRM alternatives to VinSolutions that offer better email capabilities, DMS integration with Reynolds & Reynolds, and usage reporting—concerns shared by several forum members about email deliverability and CRM-DMS connectivity. The consensus recommends separating bulk campaign emails through third-party services (like Constant Contact or Naked Lime) while keeping transactional emails in the CRM, and specific alternatives mentioned include Contact Management, OpLogic, Momentum CRM, and DealerSocket, though several carry caveats about reliability or workflow issues. A critical takeaway is verifying that a CRM's desking tool integrates seamlessly with the broader system, as disconnected tools can undermine the entire platform's value.

# Summary Dealers and CRM vendors debate whether "Location" should remain as a selectable advertising source in CRM systems, given that staff rarely accurately track what actually brings customers in. The thread reveals a core problem: CRM systems force employees to select *some* source even when they don't know the real answer, making manual data entry inherently unreliable, though removing the option entirely may just push staff toward other default selections. The key insight is that the issue isn't lazy salespeople or even "Location" as a source—it's that CRM systems require staff input on attribution data that they're neither trained nor positioned to accurately capture, making any manual sourcing data fundamentally compromised.

• Poll

# Summary Dealers debate whether CRM providers should automatically opt out inactive customers based on their own definitions of "active relationship," with the original poster arguing this constitutes inappropriate data control. The discussion reveals a key tension: CRM providers claim legal obligation to prevent spam compliance violations (particularly CASL in Canada and telemarketing laws), while dealers argue the CRM cannot accurately determine relationship status and that responsibility should fall on dealers themselves or specialized email vendors.

# Summary Shellie Pierce from DealerSocket asks dealers what single feature they'd most want their CRM/ILM systems to add in 2010, sparking discussion of integration gaps dealers were experiencing. Responses cluster around three main themes: social media and multi-channel communication integration (SMS, chat, Facebook, Twitter), technical infrastructure improvements (Active Directory integration, on-site proxy servers for speed), and data consolidation features (automatic email attachment to customer records, centralized lead notifications). The consensus reveals that in 2010, dealers viewed their CRMs as siloed tools that needed better connectivity to modern communication channels and business systems rather than improvements to core CRM functionality itself.

# Summary Automotive dealership managers discuss which CRM reports they review daily to track team performance on internet leads and follow-up activities. Key reports mentioned include daily appointments, communication effectiveness, unsold opportunities ("Save a Sale" dashboards), contact ratios, appointment show rates, and task completion metrics—with specific examples from CRMSuite and eLeads platforms. The consensus is that effective daily reporting should focus on actionable metrics (contacts made, appointments set, show rates, and sales conversion) rather than marketing reports, enabling managers to quickly identify performance gaps and process issues.

# Summary Dealers and industry professionals discuss whether Salesforce is a viable CRM solution for automotive dealerships, with consensus that while Salesforce works well for non-automotive enterprises, it requires extensive customization to be practical for dealers and isn't competitive with purpose-built automotive CRM platforms. Participants note that Salesforce has little incentive to develop automotive-specific features since the industry's complex inventory management (multiple colors, trims, transmissions, etc.) makes support costly compared to simpler industries. The conclusion is clear: dealerships should opt for industry-specific CRM solutions already designed for automotive rather than attempting to retrofit Salesforce.

# Summary The thread debates whether simple round-robin lead distribution is fair in a newly-established BDC, with Chris Fruchey noting that weaker salespeople waste qualified appointments. The consensus recommendation is to qualify salespeople first—only top performers ("A Team") receive BDC leads while others must generate their own ups or earn promotion—combined with strict CRM logging requirements and accountability measures to prevent opportunity waste. A secondary insight is that lead response time and follow-up capacity matter as much as closing ability, requiring managers to diagnose why lower performers underperform before excluding them entirely.

# Summary Koton asks whether Dealer Activator (Dominion's equity mining service) is worth adding to their dealership's existing CRM versus using their current basic Target tool. Multiple respondents who have tested Dealer Activator praise it as superior to competitors like Target Pro, AutoAlert, and Xtream for ease of use and functionality, though one commenter cautions that less tech-savvy sales staff may struggle with adoption and that simpler tools like Target Pro might be more appropriate for less engaged teams.

# Summary Several automotive professionals recommend various CRM solutions, with DealerSocket, Dominion's Web Control, Momentum CRM, Autosoft, and ELEADONE mentioned as popular options. Recommendations emphasize factors like ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and the importance of proper setup and training for ROI. One participant notes this is a recurring topic with consistent recommendations from the same community members.

A dealer seeking desking software for a large independent lot (1500 units) asks for recommendations on a system that can book inventory and structure subprime deals with callback mechanisms. The inquiry focuses on solutions that can handle diverse customer types and complex financing structures. The thread addresses the specific operational need to streamline deal management and inventory matching for a high-volume, mixed-credit customer base.

The thread debates how dealerships should define and classify "leads" versus "customers" in their CRM systems, with contributors arguing that the distinction matters for accurate ROI reporting and campaign targeting. Key insights include that walk-in prospects ("ups") and verified prospects should be treated as customers rather than leads, that lifetime value and repeat business are what truly define a customer, and that internal terminology and classifications influence how sales teams prioritize opportunities. One participant argues the distinction itself is counterproductive and suggests treating all prospects as customers from the start to improve engagement and outcomes.

A consumer shares his frustrating experience submitting six dealer inquiries with specific, educated questions about vehicles, receiving responses from only two dealerships and noting that initial email response quality is critically poor. Industry professionals acknowledge the root causes—lack of dealer investment in internet departments, poorly trained staff, and automated systems that create friction rather than facilitate genuine customer engagement. The consensus insight is that dealerships are losing educated buyers by failing to treat online leads as actual customers seeking expert consultation, with one participant noting he's since purchased two vehicles privately because dealers don't cater to informed buyers' needs.

Automotive sales professionals debate best practices for responding to internet leads, with key disagreements between using short, personalized responses versus templated auto-responders. The consensus that emerges emphasizes speed (ideally under 15 minutes), asking a clarifying question rather than making statements, and tailoring the response to the specific lead source/customer intent rather than sending generic templates. Multiple participants stress that understanding *why* a customer contacted you (e.g., price inquiry vs. availability check) should drive the response strategy, yet many dealerships fail to teach or implement this fundamental principle.