I like the new format, and the site content is continually engaging! Keep it up!

i agree with Brain, and i would like also to add that you should register the typos of the domain name of your dealership. like missing characters or the wwwdomain.com etc.. and redirect them to your website with a 301 redirect. if your main site generate type-in traffic , your domain name typos will generate traffic also.

Deskins Motors

I would also like to add that you should purchase the .net and .org versions of your domain for a higher POD Score. You can place a blog on each of those domain names (.net and .org) to increase the branding consumers find when they search your name. Purchasing them and not placing a blog or website on them does nothing to help or harm you.

Jeff et al,

Wanted to respond to a few things mentioned here

First, as a unicorn owner I'm a little offended by the implications thereof but seriously there are some good points being made by this thread. I want to clarify the number of web site links refers to all portions of Cars.com so the impact is really on both the used and new car segments not just the 12-13mm annualized new vehicle space-- but the much larger used category as well.

As to creating essentially an intercept offer as a person is clicking over to a dealer's site, I think there's merit there to try something and we are discussing with customers and consumers as to the practicality. One of the more intriguing parts of the idea is translating that to a mobile/app environment where the possibility exists of creating an offer that truly matches up to the timing of the mobile shopper -- latest stage and deciding where to buy.

As evidenced by this thread, it's really tough to judge what will be valued and what won't be by the dealer. Email close rates are still used by many dealers to justify their online ad spend-- yet the number one consumer complaint we receive is lack of response to their email.

We will to continue to innovate to provide more means to drive shoppers to your stores-- our first in the industry leadership in phone tracking and chat are good examples. Stay tuned and keep the ideas coming.

No problem Joe, I've done it too. You just need another vacation.

D Rawls,

I also owe you a public apology. Although I have issues with your posts, I failed to temper my response and I completely flamed out and made an ass of myself.

I have but one mission. To sell MORE cars. I must learn to ignore everything else.

I hope you accept my apology and we can move forward.

Lightenup,

I publicly apologize for my unfair reply. I was out of line and I need a bitch-slap. I ask myself when I write, would I say that to your face. If yes, then aok. If no and I post it anyway, then I have failed myself and my fellow DR members.

Thank You Lightenup;

As a tribute to your apparent understanding that Joe is defying the ideal of 'socialization' in the fashion by which he has tried to bully across only his own perspective, I share with you the following link. It probably makes sense to you, and to other open-minded professionals trying to intelligently discuss the idea of how to increase ROI for offerings from products like those of AT and Cars.

Joe - Not to ask better questions (which couldn't hurt), but to ask the darn question in the first place, which you think will alienate the walk-in customer somehow. You want more shopper visibility from your online marketing but don't want to ask the shopper that's right in front of you if they were online. Whatever.

I get a lot out of your many posts Joe and you offer many thought provoking ideas. However, apparently you are so used to never being disagreed with that you feel anyone with a differing opinion is incapable of intellectually challenging you or offering any value to your thought processes. In this thread alone, you've suggested that both Alex and I live in the land of unicorns and rainbows. Must be nice to be the only one rooted in reality. I can only aspire to your level.

BTW, over a decade of dealership new & used management experience under my belt, putting cars over the curb, burning gas, in the street, down the road. Been there, done that successfully.

Joe - Not to ask better questions (which couldn't hurt), but to ask the darn question in the first place, which you think will alienate the walk-in customer somehow. You want more shopper visibility from your online marketing but don't want to ask the shopper that's right in front of you if they were online. Whatever.

I get a lot out of your many posts Joe and you offer many thought provoking ideas. However, apparently you are so used to never being disagreed with that you feel anyone with a differing opinion is incapable of intellectually challenging you or offering any value to your thought processes. In this thread alone, you've suggested that both Alex and I live in the land of unicorns and rainbows. Must be nice to be the only one rooted in reality. I can only aspire to your level.

BTW, over a decade of dealership new & used management experience under my belt, putting cars over the curb, burning gas, in the street, down the road. Been there, done that successfully.

Lightenup,

I am sorry to speak boldly, but, you have shown me that you have zero dealer management experiences to fish from.

For example, You suggest that we teach 25,000 dealers how to train their reps to ask better questions. ...I pause with a puzzling look.... Are you kidding me? Then it hits me. You're lost in the land of rainbows and unicorns, not burning gas and get'in them over the curb. Lightenup, forget teaching them marketing queries, we're 18months into Jerry T's Phone Ninja training and they still suck.

In addition, the real thrust here is simply a mental exercise in exploring digital marketing opportunities from existing traffic. The idea is to challenge the platform to produce more ROI. This should be a never ending project for AT and Cars.com.

I was really hoping for a great intellectual challenge from you. From your reply, I am sorry to say, replies have little value to this thread.

Joe, in your last paragraph you write, "....They’ve invested time and energy into drilling thru classified pages, finding the best choice. The auto shopper who is ready to buy has to visit the dealer(s) in person."

I rest my case.

You also wrote: "what of the lack of shopper visibility (which is the CORE problem of AT and Cars)?"

IMO, that's why shoppers like AT and Cars... shoppers want to be able to do their research, view inventory and narrow their choices without having to become visible. They have plenty of opportunity to reveal themselves through email, phone call or chat. 70% don't do that. Instead, they get in their car and go to the dealership.

You wrote: "Reps can't interview ups for lead sources without the shopper feeling like they are giving away secrets."

Joe - Don't reinforce the status quo - challenge it. Would you refrain from asking if they heard your radio ad or saw your TV ad? Haven't you heard a receptionist answer the phone with, "Are you calling about our sale?" Mentioning to a walk-in customer that more of your advertising budget is going to numerous Internet sites so that shoppers are better informed when they come in, and then asking for help in judging whether those efforts are being seen and, if so, on which site(s) is not asking them to give away any secrets. In fact, asking implies transparency on the dealer's part. Not asking the question implies that you hope they didn't see your (lower) Internet price... which is a whole different topic.

Like Uncle Joe I was on vacation myself and my wife hates my online addiction.....that being said, WOW! Eureka, Uncle Joe 52 comments and 10 reactions (even after some trimming) !

"DealerRefresh....The whole thing is real " Uncle Joe

Nice work man, lots of good reading here.

Like Uncle Joe I was on vacation myself and my wife hates my online addiction.....that being said, WOW! Eureka, Uncle Joe 52 comments and 10 reactions (even after some trimming) !

"DealerRefresh....The whole thing is real " Uncle Joe

Nice work man, lots of good reading here.

Lightenup,

I disagree.

#1). Reps can't interview ups for lead sources without the shopper feeling like they are giving away secrets.

#2). Shoppers who are ups have spent 19hours on sites all over the internet, and have taken weeks and months to become an up. Any interview of an unsold up looking for lead source info is prone to significant error.

Don't reinforce the status quo. Challenge it! My BOB gateway suggestion creates a new opportunity.

Not sure why, but this thread feels like trying to chase a single spaghetti noodle through a 5 gallon pot. Joe wins "most relevant" comment in my opinion. Without an introduction there cannot be a consummation. All points of significant influence have to be considered, not just what the customer "remembers" or is willing to give up at the time they are asked if you are trying to calc ROI on a source.

The last thing a customer does is important, but is it more important than everything else they did along the way? Still waiting on that study that shows what the customer really does for 6 months leading up to the purchase. Where you at Polk?

D Rawls,

I am very pissed at your selfish behavior. You have completely ruined my project here. This is a very complex concept and I consider it important to our industry.

Your replies are totally WACKED OUT and you've totally FUCKED and the threads that follow this topic.

I can't wait to personally meet you and do to you what you've done to me.

When I meet you I will interrupt whom ever you are speaking to and start screaming to takeover your conversation and turn the attention to me.

You behavior is ANTI-SOCIAL. What makes you worse, you are a self centered person that has no idea how selfish you are.

There are a lot of people that agree with me, the smartest thing you will do here and now is to NOT REPLY and STOP TALKING, START READING AND LEARN SOMETHING or YOU WILL BE BANNED HERE.

You have been warned.

Jeff K,

The BOB is an example of optimizing a page to produce a new result.

Adding a gateway page off the BOB link is simply a lead generating tool that focuses specifically on that link and that link alone. IMO, the circus barker is the content that goes on that gateway page. If the Circus barker is delivering the WRONG MESSAGE it's a fail.

I have a headache.

Alright Champions;

A prosperity meeting I have commitments to attend will curtail my ability to comment for now (surely, some of you are saying, "Thank God!").

I say to you, this.

All that we are doing right here on DealerRefresh.com is a zeitgeist. It represents the commerce of an Information Age. We are socializing, practicing "Active Communicating".

To J. Kershner, I would be remiss if I did not offer commendation for all the effort, perseverance, and vision it has taken for you to make DealerRefresh.com such a valuable destination for the commerce and socialization of Auto Retail Future (and past) to be exchanged. Thank you, All-Star, you are appreciated!

Let's keep up the good work innovating 'our industry' (Joe, just what do you mean by that - exclusion or inclusion).

Your able professional,

D. Rawls

Thank You J. Kershner;

Superstar champion and president...

Indeed, you tap into the wealth of the dialogue I create.

"what if AT and/or Cars could own 'the conversation' of these 1 Million potential car buying consumers per month...".

Social is the ONLY way to go with a product like B.O.B. AT has linear visits to there website based upon their humongous marketing spend, and it still is only producing a menial conversion ratio. Hence our discussion.

At social networks across the web there are potential auto buyers who are willing to become our customers. All the relevance AT and Cars offers to consultants (sales people who sell cars, Top Performers) and consumer in auto retail spaces can be optimized and leveraged into a product to capture these potential auto buyers who are willing to become our customers.

If AT took B.O.B. and made it a link sharing, plug-in, or widget device that social networkers could ad to their pages as "doors" to either AutoTrader.com and/or Cars.com, then what we have is a connection to these communities of warm referrals. And, C. Perry took a failed swoop at this in 2005 when he proposed the added value proposition of 'building your dealership online at AutoTrader.com' to dealers subscribing to basic AT product offerings. However, his failure was rooted in the idea that the dealership is the conductor or manager of the transaction with the consumer. AT has millions of visitors to its site, now and is responsible for an unmentionable % of total units retailed.

A prospect exists in the majority of geographically-based auto retail market places to leverage the referral as a means of incentivizing consumers for adding B.O.B. to their social networking pages.

If there are 13 Million new cars and 45 Million used (thank you TMF) retailed in 2011, then AT and Cars can't lose by approaching B.O.B. as a transaction-based revenue model. And, by adding revenue-sharing to the mix, AT and/or Cars puts the entire auto retail universe to work for them.

Just think, if AT and/or Cars goes into dealerships (which are still in shrinkage mode, by the way) in January or February 2012 able to tout that they have the most lively auto retail TRANSACTION production portal in the universe, then what will the complaint be about ROI? If AT and Cars own 50% of total units retailed when all is said and done, then they grow in value. Then, their service offerings to dealers grow in value. Then, we all grow in value. That's appreciation, my champion.

Got more, Jeff...

Thank You TMF;

At the root of this discussion is what AT and Cars might do to deliver a better ROI.

If there are 45 Million used and 13 Million new autos to be retailed in 2011, then the easy measurement of how successful any product offering from these traditional Online Buying Service companies has been is % of total units retailed.

Hope that makes more sense, champion...

It seems to me Rawls that somewhere (conveniently) in your math, you failed to figure into your equation the 45 million used vehicles that will be retailed in 2011. Based on your math, you're saying that ATC and Cars.com is worth every penny and dealers need to be on both sites. I'm not following your "instant deduct" theory.

CONSUMER
A shopper is an independent potential customer of a particular brand or product. 'SHOPPERS ARE NOT LINEAR' is the truest post to this entire Thread, and it takes us along this road. An impulse is necessary to move a shopper from wherever they might be into our 'Transaction'.

Auto retail present is almost out of impulse. The car isn't an impulse most times because 80% of consumers already have studied it well online. Pricing is not even an impulse. AT and Cars must produce a platform for establishing an involuntary inclination prompting to action...

AutoTrader's Chip Perry had the advantage of knowing this 5 or 6 years ago, because I told it to him.

Subscriptions are a poor value proposition in an Information Age. Think about it, what you are paying for in a subscription - simply information. It's free to the consumer to gather all the information a dealer has to offer at traditional OBS's. But, dealers are paying for their access to the info through current AT and Cars subscription-based product models. Why so?

At least a portion of consumers are willing to pay gross profit on a car deal. The approach to traditional advertising takes the portion down percentage-wise because traditional advertising in auto retail for 120 years has conducted a linear conversation (and, let’s remember here the point Joe makes that “SHOPPERS ARE NOT LINEAR”) moving the customer to action primarily on the basis of discount or price driven messaging.

Consumers are not all alike, though. And, this is one of the gigantic pains of traditional advertisers figuring on how to keep their age-old product offerings valuable in an Information Age.

Since consumers are not all alike, ‘the handshake’ which is necessary to deliver a shopper from an online buying service like AT is not always alike, either.

Consumers, hence, are to be driven to the Transaction in any number of ways. As dynamic as consumers are today, it would be impossible to believe any spin on a traditional advertising approach would yield any substantial increase in the percentage transactions a dealer client expects.

A social-based approach to attracting the consumer into the Transaction must be the answer. And, today, the perfect platform for that social-based approach exists.

J. Kershner, consumers/customers, as you well know, are the end client of all OBS’s. All shoppers are not Consumers. And, for 120 years the common denominator in ‘our industry’ (I still can’t help but wonder what exactly Joe Pistell meant by that…) for determining the difference has been the Consultant.

To such point, isn’t easy to see the value of putting the consumer and consultant in ‘the handshake’ mode as soon as possible. Isn’t this what will need to happen anyway, if the shopper is to be converted – whether online, or on premises?

Consumers are social creatures to which we sell our products, and Consultants are the conduit by which we do it in almost every instance.

TRANSACTION
A valuable thing is transpiring online each and every day in an Information Era. Socialization is virtual, now. Because a conversation that once occurred only by phone or physical interactions between prospective consumers/customers is now available online, the sales channel for auto retail has an added dimension.

Transactions are the result of consultants and consumers shaking hands after, during, or in rare instances prior to a conversation about a specific value proposition. That specific value proposition doesn’t exist at AT or at Cars, right now. In example, even cars listed at these OBS’s at clearly competitive prices are being negotiated to less valuable selling propositions for the dealers. This is dysfunctional!

If individual consumers are looking for the one dynamic that moves them to the Transaction point, then individual value propositions must be offered. We are already doing this in auto retail, and have been doing it just this way for 120 years. ‘The handshake’ is how we have done it. And, in this Information Age, it is still how we will do it.

Transactions, let’s say, can come from any one of a 360 degree dynamic. Conversations are the information gathering processes that determine which one. Consultants are prepared with negotiating, product knowledge, and sales process training to help them do this each and every day – several hours at a time. They have the ‘active communicating’ skill down as it pertains to the auto retail process, because they are doing it more often than anyone else.

Transactions are 50% consultant, 50% consumer, and 100% handshake. If a dealer is waiting until a potential consumer from an OBS is actually on the premises to commence ‘the handshake’, then he is shooting himself in the foot. While AT and Cars have products that are relevant to how we all do our work in Auto Retail Present, that they wont need significant innovation behind their next product offerings beyond the idea of driving shoppers to yet another online space is a farce. If I am a dealer who pays to subscribe to their services, I am asking for a per unit breakdown of my cost against which ROI may be measured. The Transactions are eluding AT and Cars on their current platforms.

It is an easy fix. OBS’s must learn to measure the Transaction. There are about 13 Million new cars forecast to be retailed in 2011. If between AT and Cars there are over 25 Million unique shoppers for cars being generated, then this is an instant deduct in the value of their product offering. It says that a subscription to either means I am spending at least 100% more than what I should for each Transaction they are able to deliver. And, that would be if AT and Cars were responsible for 100% of the 13 Million new cars expected to be delivered in 2011.

The fix is inherent what J.D. Rucker is doing through his Hasai offering over at TK Carsites and I do look forward to working with him. At this point, there is more to share. And, of course, “Appreciation Rules Creation” being my life credo, I would be happy to share more of it with you, Jeff.

Michael;

As a provider of services to dealers and the overall auto retail industry sector, Cars.com must realize "1 Million Visits to Individual Dealer Sites..." must be improved upon. And, the great news is, in an Information Age it absolutely is possible.

If I know 13 Million cars are forecast to be sold in this year, and Cars.com says to me their product can deliver 1 Million potential car buying consumers per month, then I expect to generate a mean percentage of the 13 Million.

However, this is the pain of Cars.com being owned by a traditional advertising conglomerate. "Active Communicating' is terminology I use when I think of what traditional advertising has evolvled to in 2011, an Information Age. I think, "what if I/we could own 'the conversation' of these 1 Million potential car buying consumers per month?". Inside these conversations are jewels of information that lead to 'the handshake'. I know this is true because I have worked Internet Management and Training inside dealerships on showroom floors and in BDC's since 2003.

So, Michael, if Cars.com is able at the end of 2011 to track that they were responsible for say 10% or 12% of auto retail transactions overall, then the value proposition they offer dealers is one that becomes appreciable and grows in value over time. As Cars.com improves its ability to pull Identifiers from 'the conversation' that begins online and must move into a physical location in order for 'the transaction' to ensue, they will make a more and more efficient product offering for themselves and for their dealer clientele.

I have more on this champion, and would be happy to share...