Dealix recently announced their Precision Targeting product, allowing dealers to customize what zip codes they receive leads from for each model. This kind of flexibility is not something most lead providers have advertised, but is something they are capable of doing, and it's vital that dealers understand how to capitalize on it. What follows applies to all non-finance, new-car leads.

Start by understanding what a lead is worth to you at the model level. Some of your new models are selling like hotcakes, and you can't get as many of them as you would like to. These are going to sell fast whether you have leads for them or not, so don't spend the money. This may frustrate the companies charging you on a cost-per-lead or cost-per-sale basis, because these are the vehicles it is easiest to produce leads for. Nonetheless, if you don't need them don't buy them. Here is the exception, you may want to still buy leads in the zip codes closest to you. If you lose these customers to a competitor buying leads in your backyard, you might lose the service business as well. Think about the competitiveness of service when deciding on your lead procurement strategy. This is why the GM, not the GSM, should have the final say on leads procurement.

You probably have some models in your new inventory you wish you didn't have so many of. Chances are, these are the same models the factory is cramming down your throat. This is where you need leads. In fact, you probably need leads from a wide radius. Whether you have any chance of getting the subsequent service business, you need to get rid of those units. We don't always think about the value of new-vehicle inventory declining over time the way used-vehicle inventory does, but that is the reality. These vehicles are not going to get any more valuable as the next model year approaches. Let some lucky customer own them for awhile.

Even with an expanded level of flexibility, there are some challenges. If all you have are the trim package with cloth interior, and all anyone sends leads on is for leather interior, just drilling down to the model level is not going to be enough. This is a challenge I expect leads providers to step up to going forward.

To make sure there is no confusion, subscription listings (AutoTrader.com, Cars.com, etc.) do not fall into the same category. You pay one price for the service, so don't hold any of your inventory back. Treat these sites as you would your own site. In both cases, your marginal cost for including the hot-selling, low-supply vehicles is zero. Your decisions for subscription services are whether to use the service or not, and at what level. 

Dealix recently announced their Precision Targeting product, allowing dealers to customize what zip codes they receive leads from for each model. This kind of flexibility is not something most lead providers have advertised, but is something they are capable of doing, and it's vital that dealers understand how to capitalize on it. What follows applies to all non-finance, new-car leads.

Start by understanding what a lead is worth to you at the model level. Some of your new models are selling like hotcakes, and you can't get as many of them as you would like to. These are going to sell fast whether you have leads for them or not, so don't spend the money. This may frustrate the companies charging you on a cost-per-lead or cost-per-sale basis, because these are the vehicles it is easiest to produce leads for. Nonetheless, if you don't need them don't buy them. Here is the exception, you may want to still buy leads in the zip codes closest to you. If you lose these customers to a competitor buying leads in your backyard, you might lose the service business as well. Think about the competitiveness of service when deciding on your lead procurement strategy. This is why the GM, not the GSM, should have the final say on leads procurement.

You probably have some models in your new inventory you wish you didn't have so many of. Chances are, these are the same models the factory is cramming down your throat. This is where you need leads. In fact, you probably need leads from a wide radius. Whether you have any chance of getting the subsequent service business, you need to get rid of those units. We don't always think about the value of new-vehicle inventory declining over time the way used-vehicle inventory does, but that is the reality. These vehicles are not going to get any more valuable as the next model year approaches. Let some lucky customer own them for awhile.

Even with an expanded level of flexibility, there are some challenges. If all you have are the trim package with cloth interior, and all anyone sends leads on is for leather interior, just drilling down to the model level is not going to be enough. This is a challenge I expect leads providers to step up to going forward.

To make sure there is no confusion, subscription listings (AutoTrader.com, Cars.com, etc.) do not fall into the same category. You pay one price for the service, so don't hold any of your inventory back. Treat these sites as you would your own site. In both cases, your marginal cost for including the hot-selling, low-supply vehicles is zero. Your decisions for subscription services are whether to use the service or not, and at what level. 

I've heard a number of industry professionals say that cars are now a commodity, usually in the process of explaining why it is so important to price relative to the market. I'm concerned about the use of this exaggeration. In fact, It is because I am a proponent of pricing tools and adjusting prices relative to market forces that I am concerned about any exaggeration used to support the argument.

Let's start with new vehicles. A new Buick Verano with the leather group is not a commodity. Some have sunroofs, spoilers, navigation, all-weather floor mats, and cargo nets. Some come with the $125 pedal covers and some do not. Even if two of these vehicles were exactly configured and of the same color, the deal does not stop there. There is the entire back-end portion of the deal to consider. I know some dealers I'd happily pay $50 more to just to avoid having to deal with other dealers at the F&I stage. Even if the customer is paying cash and not buying anything else in F&I, that does not preclude some dealers from charging an additional processing fee.

It doesn't matter who you buy a bar of gold from, because it is a commodity. But it does matter who you buy a vehicle from, because when we look at the entire bundle of features and benefits delivered by the dealer, it is not a commodity. Not only do some stores have better reputations than others, there are probably many shoppers in your community you have no reputation with. This is why actual photos of the new vehicles produce more contacts than stock photos, many customers don't even trust that you actually have the vehicles you say you do. Preference for the retailer impacts the price paid. In the strictest sense, you can't say that about a commodity.

Two used cars of the same year/make/model/trim and accessories with the same mileage and in the same condition will likely sell in the same market for a similar price. Just how similar can depend as much on how well they are merchandised as it does the slight variations demonstrated by that merchandising. If the basic information is the same, the vehicle with more detailed information may appear to be a better value even if some of that information discloses imperfections. Some imperfections are to be expected, disclosing those that are known can reduce the worry about imperfections that cannot be observed. Vehicle condition reports can build preference for the vehicle and the store.

Commodity means there is no preference, and the word is often misused. Oil is said to be a commodity, but it is not. Only oil that is properly categorized can be called a commodity. Crude oil that is certified to be both light and sweet can be confidently purchased at the same price as other light/sweet crude. If the condition report is the same, then it is a commodity.

Price is an essential element to marketing. Now that consumers have access to market information online, there are many of them you will never even meet unless you have the right car at the right price. But that is not enough. Shoppers buy value. Without detailed information about what that price represents, it cannot be processed into a comparable value. When all dealers merchandise their vehicles the same and have the same disclosed back-end practices, then we can talk about cars being a commodity. Until then, competitive attractive pricing will bring more contacts from online shoppers, but the advantage among comparable cars at the same price goes to the vehicle with the most transparent merchandising from the dealership with clearly disclosed policies.

I've heard a number of industry professionals say that cars are now a commodity, usually in the process of explaining why it is so important to price relative to the market. I'm concerned about the use of this exaggeration. In fact, It is because I am a proponent of pricing tools and adjusting prices relative to market forces that I am concerned about any exaggeration used to support the argument.

Let's start with new vehicles. A new Buick Verano with the leather group is not a commodity. Some have sunroofs, spoilers, navigation, all-weather floor mats, and cargo nets. Some come with the $125 pedal covers and some do not. Even if two of these vehicles were exactly configured and of the same color, the deal does not stop there. There is the entire back-end portion of the deal to consider. I know some dealers I'd happily pay $50 more to just to avoid having to deal with other dealers at the F&I stage. Even if the customer is paying cash and not buying anything else in F&I, that does not preclude some dealers from charging an additional processing fee.

It doesn't matter who you buy a bar of gold from, because it is a commodity. But it does matter who you buy a vehicle from, because when we look at the entire bundle of features and benefits delivered by the dealer, it is not a commodity. Not only do some stores have better reputations than others, there are probably many shoppers in your community you have no reputation with. This is why actual photos of the new vehicles produce more contacts than stock photos, many customers don't even trust that you actually have the vehicles you say you do. Preference for the retailer impacts the price paid. In the strictest sense, you can't say that about a commodity.

Two used cars of the same year/make/model/trim and accessories with the same mileage and in the same condition will likely sell in the same market for a similar price. Just how similar can depend as much on how well they are merchandised as it does the slight variations demonstrated by that merchandising. If the basic information is the same, the vehicle with more detailed information may appear to be a better value even if some of that information discloses imperfections. Some imperfections are to be expected, disclosing those that are known can reduce the worry about imperfections that cannot be observed. Vehicle condition reports can build preference for the vehicle and the store.

Commodity means there is no preference, and the word is often misused. Oil is said to be a commodity, but it is not. Only oil that is properly categorized can be called a commodity. Crude oil that is certified to be both light and sweet can be confidently purchased at the same price as other light/sweet crude. If the condition report is the same, then it is a commodity.

Price is an essential element to marketing. Now that consumers have access to market information online, there are many of them you will never even meet unless you have the right car at the right price. But that is not enough. Shoppers buy value. Without detailed information about what that price represents, it cannot be processed into a comparable value. When all dealers merchandise their vehicles the same and have the same disclosed back-end practices, then we can talk about cars being a commodity. Until then, competitive attractive pricing will bring more contacts from online shoppers, but the advantage among comparable cars at the same price goes to the vehicle with the most transparent merchandising from the dealership with clearly disclosed policies.

The relationships between a dealer and the vendor reps that call on him or her have always been an important part of the retail automotive business. I noticed in the 70s, that the newspaper rep was the information conduit between local dealers. The GM would ask, "What are you hearing out there?" At a minimum, they needed some gauge as to whether their own movement is sales was something earned or simply a function of the local market going up or down.

Today, dealers have access to incredible tools like J.D. Power's PIN for transactional data and Dataium for shopping data. (Both can be acquired for free in their basic forms.) So the vendor rep has less usefulness as a mere conduit of information regarding sales and shopping activity in the local community.

Some reps are leaned on heavily by dealers for their knowledge about technology and other vendors. They often hear things like, "I'm not happy with my website, what are you hearing about Dealer.com?" Dealer satisfaction studies and rich repositories of dealer reviews, like DrivingSales.com, allow dealers to accesses hundreds of opinions and ratings from other users at one time. So the value of this added service can best be obtained from sources other than the rep.

Ironically, most dealers are not receiving all the value from vendor products that they should be or could be. Personal selling is very expensive. Reps need to be constantly evaluating the performance of their dealer customers and recommending actions sure to increase profitability. That doesn't mean just up-selling them all the time. Dealers need to be diligent about asking the question, "what can I do to get more value out of your product?" Just telling the rep that you are not happy with the product or not happy with the price will likely put them on the defensive and eliminate any chance you had of getting real value out of them.

I've written plenty about when dealers should not buy something, but millions of dollars are being wasted each week on vendor products that should be purchased, but the dealer is only extracting a fraction of the value from. From my experience, most dealers using vAuto are getting sufficient value from the product, but not all the value it is capable of delivering. Some dealers buying leads from AutoUSA, Dealix, Autobytel, and NewLeadsPlus have teams skimming those leads rather than working them diligently. A good rep can show you signals when that takes place. Many dealers using listings services like AutoTrader.com, Cars.com, Edmunds, and others are not sufficiently merchandising their vehicles to receive full value. Worse, they are too slow in merchandising their vehicles at all.

As a dealer, you may wish your vendors would just move to a transactional selling model and lower their prices accordingly. Over time, I'm certain that more and more vendors will do that. For now, you are paying the price anyway, so you may as well be strategic about how you extract value. Some reps are as useless as a hangnail, but many know how to get maximum value from the products they sell. Start there. If you exhaust their ability to improve the value of their products, then you can grind them or dump them; however, it may not be the most profitable place to start.

The relationships between a dealer and the vendor reps that call on him or her have always been an important part of the retail automotive business. I noticed in the 70s, that the newspaper rep was the information conduit between local dealers. The GM would ask, "What are you hearing out there?" At a minimum, they needed some gauge as to whether their own movement is sales was something earned or simply a function of the local market going up or down.

Today, dealers have access to incredible tools like J.D. Power's PIN for transactional data and Dataium for shopping data. (Both can be acquired for free in their basic forms.) So the vendor rep has less usefulness as a mere conduit of information regarding sales and shopping activity in the local community.

Some reps are leaned on heavily by dealers for their knowledge about technology and other vendors. They often hear things like, "I'm not happy with my website, what are you hearing about Dealer.com?" Dealer satisfaction studies and rich repositories of dealer reviews, like DrivingSales.com, allow dealers to accesses hundreds of opinions and ratings from other users at one time. So the value of this added service can best be obtained from sources other than the rep.

Ironically, most dealers are not receiving all the value from vendor products that they should be or could be. Personal selling is very expensive. Reps need to be constantly evaluating the performance of their dealer customers and recommending actions sure to increase profitability. That doesn't mean just up-selling them all the time. Dealers need to be diligent about asking the question, "what can I do to get more value out of your product?" Just telling the rep that you are not happy with the product or not happy with the price will likely put them on the defensive and eliminate any chance you had of getting real value out of them.

I've written plenty about when dealers should not buy something, but millions of dollars are being wasted each week on vendor products that should be purchased, but the dealer is only extracting a fraction of the value from. From my experience, most dealers using vAuto are getting sufficient value from the product, but not all the value it is capable of delivering. Some dealers buying leads from AutoUSA, Dealix, Autobytel, and NewLeadsPlus have teams skimming those leads rather than working them diligently. A good rep can show you signals when that takes place. Many dealers using listings services like AutoTrader.com, Cars.com, Edmunds, and others are not sufficiently merchandising their vehicles to receive full value. Worse, they are too slow in merchandising their vehicles at all.

As a dealer, you may wish your vendors would just move to a transactional selling model and lower their prices accordingly. Over time, I'm certain that more and more vendors will do that. For now, you are paying the price anyway, so you may as well be strategic about how you extract value. Some reps are as useless as a hangnail, but many know how to get maximum value from the products they sell. Start there. If you exhaust their ability to improve the value of their products, then you can grind them or dump them; however, it may not be the most profitable place to start.

On any given day, 17-18% of used-vehicle inventory posted online by dealers has no photos. Virtually every dealer realizes the critical nature of photos. If there is no photo showing on the Search Results Page, that listing has very little chance of being selected for the viewing of a Vehicle Details Page. Nonetheless, more than one in six vehicles are standing naked in the face of tough competition.

Even some of the largest, best known dealers have a poor record when it comes to merchandising their vehicles quickly. Last night, Sun Chevrolet had 33% with no photos, Paragon Honda 27%, Galpin Ford 12%, and Longo Toyota 10%. Mighty CarMax did little better than the national average. From a random sample of 10 CarMax stores, the percentage with no photos averaged 16% and ranged from 9% in Burbank, CA to 26% in Charlotte, NC. The point here is not to pick on any store but to point out that the problem is going unnoticed at even some of the finest stores.

The two best stores I've found so far are Texas Direct Auto (6%) and Finish Line Ford (3%). I track Finish Line Ford regularly, because I know they understand the importance of getting vehicles merchandised quickly. On most days fewer than 2% of their vehicles are without photos. I'm convinced that 2% is a reasonable standard for any store. If the vehicles are not merchandised online, then it is not much of an exaggeration to say they are not really for sale, even though the flooring costs and depreciation are in full swing.

Time is the problem. As the numbers below indicate, most vehicles get merchandised eventually. The problem is that it takes too long to get around to it.

Age of Listing                     Percent with No Photos

1 Day                                     87%

2-3 Days                               60%

4-7 Days                               41%

8-14 Days                             29%

15 Days to 1 Mo.                 15%

More Than 1 Mo.              

    5%

Vehicles often wait days or even weeks for merchandising. Commonly, one person is in charge of taking the photos, whether they are an employee or outsourced. When they are not there or unavailable, the vehicles stand naked online and wait. Another problem is detailing and reconditioning. The best stores process nearly every vehicle in just one or two days. Better yet, photos are taken at the time of purchase and later replaced after detailing or reconditioning.  

The solution to both of these problems is simplicity. When the process is so simple anyone can do it quickly and easily, then the vehicles get merchandised the day they come in. When involving human labor, the path to speed is simplicity. Engineers have understood this for over 100 years. Assembly lines break tasks down to their simplest form. Similarly, batch work can be segmented and distributed to specialized teams. But both these systems require volume. Tasks like used-vehicle merchandising, where one person tackles a series of differentiated vehicles, requires automation of the process instructions. Merchandising a pickup truck is different than merchandising an SUV or a sedan. Simplicity is achieved by automating the process instructions to fit the job and allowing the device to guide the person rather than the other way around. This method is similar to a GPS providing specific instructions based on the travel objective. Any number of drivers can follow the directions with little trouble and no need for thinking through the changes when the next objective is different.

The research for this article was done on October 30,2011 using the over 1.3 million cars listing on Cars.com by dealers only. Since the inventory feeds going to Cars.com are generally the same as the majority of feeds going to AutoTrader.com, and website providers, it is a good representation of the industry as a whole. This research can be duplicated at any time using data and filters that are publicly available on Cars.com. Results vary only a few percentage points from day to day. My hope is that this article can stimulate action that will move these metrics over the month ahead. This is not a zero-sum game. When inventory is merchandised faster inventory turns improve for everyone participating in the change.

On any given day, 17-18% of used-vehicle inventory posted online by dealers has no photos. Virtually every dealer realizes the critical nature of photos. If there is no photo showing on the Search Results Page, that listing has very little chance of being selected for the viewing of a Vehicle Details Page. Nonetheless, more than one in six vehicles are standing naked in the face of tough competition.

Even some of the largest, best known dealers have a poor record when it comes to merchandising their vehicles quickly. Last night, Sun Chevrolet had 33% with no photos, Paragon Honda 27%, Galpin Ford 12%, and Longo Toyota 10%. Mighty CarMax did little better than the national average. From a random sample of 10 CarMax stores, the percentage with no photos averaged 16% and ranged from 9% in Burbank, CA to 26% in Charlotte, NC. The point here is not to pick on any store but to point out that the problem is going unnoticed at even some of the finest stores.

The two best stores I've found so far are Texas Direct Auto (6%) and Finish Line Ford (3%). I track Finish Line Ford regularly, because I know they understand the importance of getting vehicles merchandised quickly. On most days fewer than 2% of their vehicles are without photos. I'm convinced that 2% is a reasonable standard for any store. If the vehicles are not merchandised online, then it is not much of an exaggeration to say they are not really for sale, even though the flooring costs and depreciation are in full swing.

Time is the problem. As the numbers below indicate, most vehicles get merchandised eventually. The problem is that it takes too long to get around to it.

Age of Listing                     Percent with No Photos

1 Day                                     87%

2-3 Days                               60%

4-7 Days                               41%

8-14 Days                             29%

15 Days to 1 Mo.                 15%

More Than 1 Mo.              

    5%

Vehicles often wait days or even weeks for merchandising. Commonly, one person is in charge of taking the photos, whether they are an employee or outsourced. When they are not there or unavailable, the vehicles stand naked online and wait. Another problem is detailing and reconditioning. The best stores process nearly every vehicle in just one or two days. Better yet, photos are taken at the time of purchase and later replaced after detailing or reconditioning.  

The solution to both of these problems is simplicity. When the process is so simple anyone can do it quickly and easily, then the vehicles get merchandised the day they come in. When involving human labor, the path to speed is simplicity. Engineers have understood this for over 100 years. Assembly lines break tasks down to their simplest form. Similarly, batch work can be segmented and distributed to specialized teams. But both these systems require volume. Tasks like used-vehicle merchandising, where one person tackles a series of differentiated vehicles, requires automation of the process instructions. Merchandising a pickup truck is different than merchandising an SUV or a sedan. Simplicity is achieved by automating the process instructions to fit the job and allowing the device to guide the person rather than the other way around. This method is similar to a GPS providing specific instructions based on the travel objective. Any number of drivers can follow the directions with little trouble and no need for thinking through the changes when the next objective is different.

The research for this article was done on October 30,2011 using the over 1.3 million cars listing on Cars.com by dealers only. Since the inventory feeds going to Cars.com are generally the same as the majority of feeds going to AutoTrader.com, and website providers, it is a good representation of the industry as a whole. This research can be duplicated at any time using data and filters that are publicly available on Cars.com. Results vary only a few percentage points from day to day. My hope is that this article can stimulate action that will move these metrics over the month ahead. This is not a zero-sum game. When inventory is merchandised faster inventory turns improve for everyone participating in the change.

The purpose of most marketing research is better decision making. The problem is that it is cheaper than ever before to generate data, and as easy as ever to claim that the data supports the conclusion the author wants it to. Over the past few months, I've plowed through over 1,000 pages of books and articles on social media. Much of the data I've encountered is simply not credible. However, separating the facts from the non-sense has long been my calling card in the auto industry. There is some good, solid research supporting the call for more attention to social media by auto dealers.

The recent study conducted by GfK Automotive and supported by Dealer.com and DriverSide has merit. A research friend of mine rightly brought up the fact that survey respondents don't always remember what influenced them in their shopping process. So when the research says 28% of Facebook users who bought new or late-model used vehicles said they saw a posting that caused them to add a dealership to their consideration set, that may not be the actual number. However, the penetration of Facebook among auto shoppers is so high that an influence rate of half this much would demand action. The statistical margin of error is not the relevant range for decision making. What is important is for dealers to recognize that the actions being recommended would be justified at influence rates far lower than those being uncovered, even at the outer edge of the margin of error.

It seems that every week brings a new round of vendor research designed to impact how dealers allocate their marketing resources. Most of this research deserves to be viewed with a suspicious eye. These studies are not funded by vendors as some kind of altruistic gesture. With that said, some vendor backed research is very useful and reliable. There are occasions where vendors believe their products would be the beneficiaries of truth. They distance themselves from the study design and data collection process and let the chips fall where they may. Kevin Root, recognized as an internet pioneer for his work at Parr Auto Group in the mid '90s, has been a very prolific source of this kind of research from the vendor side. His deep association with this study further adds to its credibility.

The study claims that 38% of new vehicle shoppers will use social media to research their next vehicle purchase. No matter how carefully the study was designed, that number may be off. But how big does the number need to be before your store realizes it needs to take social media seriously? Would 20% of your customer base be enough, because there is very little chance that the difference between intentions and actions can be that great.

We went through this same thing with the Automotive Internet Use (AIU) rate more than a decade ago. It didn't really matter whether the AIU rate was 40% or 50%, an AIU rate anywhere close to those levels meant dealers needed to have a website. The same sort of decision making is occurring with respect to social media. It is still difficult to know how many sales would not have taken place if the dealership did not have a website. After all, there is no shopping cart on most dealer websites; they buy their cars from the store. Today we hear the same arguments about social media. Those who don't use it say it doesn't sell cars because there is no "buy" button on Facebook or Twitter. Those who use it well are whistling all the way to the bank.

I'm looking forward to the complete study report coming out in November from the partnership of Dealer.com, DriverSide, and GfK Automotive. Will I then be able to confidently say precisely what influence social media has on auto shopping? No. Will I have enough evidence to confidently say any dealer with a good, honest operation should seriously consider a strong social media effort? I'm already there. And for the record, I don't sell social media services.

The purpose of most marketing research is better decision making. The problem is that it is cheaper than ever before to generate data, and as easy as ever to claim that the data supports the conclusion the author wants it to. Over the past few months, I've plowed through over 1,000 pages of books and articles on social media. Much of the data I've encountered is simply not credible. However, separating the facts from the non-sense has long been my calling card in the auto industry. There is some good, solid research supporting the call for more attention to social media by auto dealers.

The recent study conducted by GfK Automotive and supported by Dealer.com and DriverSide has merit. A research friend of mine rightly brought up the fact that survey respondents don't always remember what influenced them in their shopping process. So when the research says 28% of Facebook users who bought new or late-model used vehicles said they saw a posting that caused them to add a dealership to their consideration set, that may not be the actual number. However, the penetration of Facebook among auto shoppers is so high that an influence rate of half this much would demand action. The statistical margin of error is not the relevant range for decision making. What is important is for dealers to recognize that the actions being recommended would be justified at influence rates far lower than those being uncovered, even at the outer edge of the margin of error.

It seems that every week brings a new round of vendor research designed to impact how dealers allocate their marketing resources. Most of this research deserves to be viewed with a suspicious eye. These studies are not funded by vendors as some kind of altruistic gesture. With that said, some vendor backed research is very useful and reliable. There are occasions where vendors believe their products would be the beneficiaries of truth. They distance themselves from the study design and data collection process and let the chips fall where they may. Kevin Root, recognized as an internet pioneer for his work at Parr Auto Group in the mid '90s, has been a very prolific source of this kind of research from the vendor side. His deep association with this study further adds to its credibility.

The study claims that 38% of new vehicle shoppers will use social media to research their next vehicle purchase. No matter how carefully the study was designed, that number may be off. But how big does the number need to be before your store realizes it needs to take social media seriously? Would 20% of your customer base be enough, because there is very little chance that the difference between intentions and actions can be that great.

We went through this same thing with the Automotive Internet Use (AIU) rate more than a decade ago. It didn't really matter whether the AIU rate was 40% or 50%, an AIU rate anywhere close to those levels meant dealers needed to have a website. The same sort of decision making is occurring with respect to social media. It is still difficult to know how many sales would not have taken place if the dealership did not have a website. After all, there is no shopping cart on most dealer websites; they buy their cars from the store. Today we hear the same arguments about social media. Those who don't use it say it doesn't sell cars because there is no "buy" button on Facebook or Twitter. Those who use it well are whistling all the way to the bank.

I'm looking forward to the complete study report coming out in November from the partnership of Dealer.com, DriverSide, and GfK Automotive. Will I then be able to confidently say precisely what influence social media has on auto shopping? No. Will I have enough evidence to confidently say any dealer with a good, honest operation should seriously consider a strong social media effort? I'm already there. And for the record, I don't sell social media services.