Return to Greatness - The Interviews

Visit www.autolinedetroit.com and see the Buickman interview with John McElroy. Click on archive to download this week's show.
Also, if your local radio covers it, listen in to Car Concerns with Harry Douglas this Saturday at 2PM. In the alternative, visit www.fastlanepublishers.com shortly afterward to hear the broadcast.

Interesting.

"I've got GM D.N.A. in my blood, and I'm really not interested in any of the other manufacturers or what they have to offer."

"I've got GM D.N.A. in my blood, and I'm really not interested in any of the other manufacturers or what they have to offer."

Damn we must be related...

blood brothers or something, cause i got that same stuff in my blood

"I've got GM D.N.A. in my blood, and I'm really not interested in any of the other manufacturers or what they have to offer."
Not to rain on the parade, but that quote - while heartwarming - did not answer the question asked. The journalist asked him what he thinks ToyoHondaNissan are doing better on the marketing side. He really didn't directly answer too many questions, but rather delivered the same recorded message we've been hearing for weeks.

On the plus side, he comes off very well - I have no doubt he can sell a car. If I had not seen his statements dissected here, I would have been really impressed.

The "dissecting" by members of this group has been tremendously beneficial. The level of issue comprehension and the passion that exists went way beyond expectations. GM executives could increase their level of understanding the market were they receptive enough to "Listen to the Heartbeat" of CamaroZ28.com.

I still cringe at the fact you talk about yourself in the third person all the time. Buickman is about as much a superhero as that character Eminem plays in his music videos.

Jason,
I welcome your criticism, but don't understand the "all the time" comment. Didn't you watch the video? It was all first person.
Jim

Jim,
Decent interview, unfortunately constrained by the realities of sound bite friendly segments. Only gripe I have is that in the interview you said " the product is fine" but quickly thereafter talk about the lack of product. Not that I am disagreeing with you, but wondered if you could expound on what you meant by that?

James

Not to rain on the parade, but that quote - while heartwarming - did not answer the question asked. The journalist asked him what he thinks ToyoHondaNissan are doing better on the marketing side. He really didn't directly answer too many questions, but rather delivered the same recorded message we've been hearing for weeks.

On the plus side, he comes off very well - I have no doubt he can sell a car. If I had not seen his statements dissected here, I would have been really impressed.

It's called controlling the conversation. It's a form of manipulation that politicians, PR reps and car salesman excel at.

Just watched the video:

You presented yourself better in person than you do on the Internet... I sort of pictured you be a wild maniac. You started to get a little ranty there toward the end though... ;)

Issues I have with some of the stuff you said:

1) You want to get rid of the destination charge.... OK, fine... but, is there an auto munufacturer that doesn't have this charge right now? It may help, but in reality, all you will be doing is shifting money. The $650 deestination charge will simply be rolled over into the base MSRP... granted it may become more "transparant"... but it's 6 in one hand, half dozen in the other. One down side to doing it is that the "base MSRP" at the top of the window sticker will now be inflated, even though that number really is just about meaningless.... but a higher number there, even if it's the same at the bottom... could maybe scare off a few folks.

2) Delivering the cars to the customer at their house, etc... I would imagine just about any dealer would do this if the customer asked. Of course, I live in Ohio... if I buy a new car from you up there in Michigan.... are you going to bring it to me free of charge? I doubt it. Where do you draw the line? Then what do you tell the person that is 1 mile out of your "free delivery" range? :shrug: I think this the benifits of this were really blown out of proportion.

3) First you say flat out "It's NOT the product! It's the marketing!"... then, you say "Where's my new product?!" :confused: .... kind of shooting yourself in the foot there.... that one made you look really bad, IMHO.

3) First you say flat out "It's NOT the product! It's the marketing!"... then, you say "Where's my new product?!" :confused: .... kind of shooting yourself in the foot there.... that one made you look really bad, IMHO.

One of the big things I don't understand about his point of view. Right there in the interview he said it wasn't the product, 3 minutes later he's asking "where Buick's large coupe is....give me a large coupe." How can GM's problems not be the product but at the same time, it is lack of product? :confused:

One of the big things I don't understand about his point of view. Right there in the interview he said it wasn't the product, 3 minutes later he's asking "where Buick's large coupe is....give me a large coupe." How can GM's problems not be the product but at the same time, it is lack of product? :confused:

You paid attention. You were not suppose to do that. Just stare blankly and let yourself be steered to the correct conclusion.

"I've got GM D.N.A. in my blood, and I'm really not interested in any of the other manufacturers or what they have to offer."
Wait, maybe I am on the right site after all! Sometimes I'm not so sure. I'm with you 100% on that! :thumb:

Point is, the product is not the problem. GM has many wonderful products, they've suffered from disastrous marketing. Product though, is an evolving thing. The competition is constantly bringing new vehicles and we must keep up by introducing competitive units. Buick in particular has suffered from a dearth of product. Again, this isn't the main issue, it's perceptiopn, image, and a lack of leadership.
Will gladly deliver to Ohio, took 2 to S Carolina last month and one to Florida. We can do that. My focus is on the customer and getting the job done, not the price, payment , or rebate.
I tried to explain to LaNeve how to dismount the tiger of inflated pricing. The proper procedure would be to eliminate useless, confusing, incentives with offerings of perceived value. Instead, he chose to listen to MBA's with virtually no experience, or common sense. The repurcussions will surface and the true nature of the incompetent direction provided by borderline corrupt, useless excuses for management will reveal themselves for what they are.

Point is, the product is not the problem. GM has many wonderful products, they've suffered from disastrous marketing. Product though, is an evolving thing. The competition is constantly bringing new vehicles and we must keep up by introducing competitive units. Buick in particular has suffered from a dearth of product. Again, this isn't the main issue, it's perceptiopn, image, and a lack of leadership.
.

So your saying the current product isn’t bad, but needs updating because the competition is passing it up?

Wouldn’t that mean its lacking? Your going in circles here.

I will agree the marketing is very hit and miss with GM but even good marketing cant make up for lack of product.

Image and perception also comes from an exciting quality product. Once again marketing stems from that.

I agree that in the past GM has had a lack of leadership though I know we will disagree that currently I believe Gm’s leadership is headed in the right direction.

I see overall what your trying to say, I overall once again I just don’t agree.

Point is, the product is not the problem. GM has many wonderful products, they've suffered from disastrous marketing. Product though, is an evolving thing. The competition is constantly bringing new vehicles and we must keep up by introducing competitive units. Buick in particular has suffered from a dearth of product. Again, this isn't the main issue, it's perceptiopn, image, and a lack of leadership.
Will gladly deliver to Ohio, took 2 to S Carolina last month and one to Florida. We can do that. My focus is on the customer and getting the job done, not the price, payment , or rebate.
I tried to explain to LaNeve how to dismount the tiger of inflated pricing. The proper procedure would be to eliminate useless, confusing, incentives with offerings of perceived value. Instead, he chose to listen to MBA's with virtually no experience, or common sense. The repurcussions will surface and the true nature of the incompetent direction provided by borderline corrupt, useless excuses for management will reveal themselves for what they are.


Lets be real.......most of GM's current line up stinks. It's no where near wonderful. People were not going to the dealerships because the current product was overpriced, outdated and/or bad. The best marketing machine in the world cant pull people into dealerships for you to work your mojo on in those conditions. GM fixed one of those by implementing the employee program. They will fix the rest with new product.

Lets be real.......most of GM's current line up stinks. It's no where near wonderful. People were not going to the dealerships because the current product was overpriced, outdated and/or bad. The best marketing machine in the world cant pull people into dealerships for you to work your mojo on in those conditions. GM fixed one of those by implementing the employee program. They will fix the rest with new product.

Wow!This is the first time I have completly agreed with you this week ;)

Current product is useful. The absence of truly desirable product makes life more difficult than it need be. Improving the marketing fills a temporary void, giving our engineers, stylists, and production people the time they need to win in the marketplace.

I haven't closely followed the exploits and the salvation plan of "Buickman", but I do not agree with falchulk's claim that "most of GM's current lineup stinks."

:blah:

:)

Same here, I completely disagree with Falchulks claim and I am not nessarily a Chevy guy, Im just a car guy in general and many of their cars look very good especially after some of these newer models get refined some more.

Current product is useful. The absence of truly desirable product makes life more difficult than it need be. Improving the marketing fills a temporary void, giving our engineers, stylists, and production people the time they need to win in the marketplace.


Therefore, the PRODUCT IS THE PROBLEM!

You want to reach more people, speak simply. Don't rely on marketing tactics, don't rely on doublespeak, don't rely on confusing.

Therefore, the PRODUCT IS THE PROBLEM!

You want to reach more people, speak simply. Don't rely on marketing tactics, don't rely on doublespeak, don't rely on confusing.

Yeah no one is trying to buy a car from you here :D ;) :p

I haven't closely followed the exploits and the salvation plan of "Buickman", but I do not agree with falchulk's claim that "most of GM's current lineup stinks."

:blah:

:)

I'll second that. Cobalt, G6, '06 Impala, Vette, Solstice, Torrent, Equinox, GXP Grand Prix...all are solid contenders in their respective fields. LaCrosse is a good car, but IMO its a car in search of better motors...give it the 240hp 3.9 as a base engine and the CTS's 260hp 3.6 as optional...not the 240 version.

"I've got GM D.N.A. in my blood, and I'm really not interested in any of the other manufacturers or what they have to offer."

I'd like to think that way, but GM does not offer $hit that appeals to me at the moment..... :rolleyes:

Current product is useful. The absence of truly desirable product makes life more difficult than it need be. Improving the marketing fills a temporary void, giving our engineers, stylists, and production people the time they need to win in the marketplace.

Agreed, big time. The other issues are lag time between the introduction of a concept and when it actually makes it to market, and the lack of dealer buy in. Regardless of what excitement the factory marketing produces, if the dealers aren't excited the public won't buy. It sure appears that the factory gives the dealers a loaded gun and they turn around and shoot themselves right in the foot. Everything from disreputable sales practices right down to a plain lack of enthusiasm for their product. The entire retail sales end needs to be seriously revamped.

Couldn't agree more. The dealer experience is the greatest opportunity for growth. The first step is elimination of factory interference with push/pull incentives. We must let the dealers have control over their operations. Then we set about convincing them of the most effective practices which develop customer enthusiasm, leading to repeat and referral business.

Couldn't agree more. The dealer experience is the greatest opportunity for growth. The first step is elimination of factory interference with push/pull incentives. We must let the dealers have control over their operations. Then we set about convincing them of the most effective practices which develop customer enthusiasm, leading to repeat and referral business.
We should just nix "dealers" all around. Just have people go online, build their own car, have a set price they pay, and pick it up at the "dealership". Only a dream right now though...

Kind of ironic, for years the dealers were the strength of GM. Today they have in many ways become the liability. I have much criticism for GM management, but the dealers must accept their share of the blame for mistreatment of customers.

Couldn't agree more. The dealer experience is the greatest opportunity for growth. The first step is elimination of factory interference with push/pull incentives. We must let the dealers have control over their operations. Then we set about convincing them of the most effective practices which develop customer enthusiasm, leading to repeat and referral business.

The dealer system that sells GM cars is as outdated and obsolete as the Unions that build them. The bottom line is that GM (and all other automakers) builds and advertises their cars, and should sell them directly as well. They would not have to build anything - just use GMbuypower to order the car. The website would calculate the price including rebates - as it already does now - and would tell you where the nearest vehicle with your options is located - also something GMbuypower already does. The only difference is that instead of having to then go through the teeth pulling experience of a car dealership, you would go to a holding lot, present the base contract printed out on GMbuypower, sign the papers with the help of perhaps a GMAC rep, and pick up your car as if you're at Hertz rental.

I know the dealers would obviously never agree this - it would mean their destruction - but it is the way it should be.

I'd like to think that way, but GM does not offer $hit that appeals to me at the moment.....

They have stuff that appeals to me I just cant afford what appeals to me.

Couldn't agree more. The dealer experience is the greatest opportunity for growth. The first step is elimination of factory interference with push/pull incentives. We must let the dealers have control over their operations. Then we set about convincing them of the most effective practices which develop customer enthusiasm, leading to repeat and referral business.

Hmmm. More control? Like the way the Pontiac dealers totally botched the new GTO? My local dealer wouldn't even let me TOUCH their car, much less sit in it or, God forbid, test drive it. And then, as a final insult, they stuck on a $5,000 "Market Adjustment" sticker. It's a PONTIAC, not a Ferrari! After watching the dust collect on their GTO's for 6 months, they were begging me to test drive one. I wound up purchasing for $9,000 BELOW sticker! I guess I should thank them for their moronic behavior. Pontiac, however, probably wasn't too thrilled.

The dealer system that sells GM cars is as outdated and obsolete as the Unions that build them. The bottom line is that GM (and all other automakers) builds and advertises their cars, and should sell them directly as well. They would not have to build anything - just use GMbuypower to order the car. The website would calculate the price including rebates - as it already does now - and would tell you where the nearest vehicle with your options is located - also something GMbuypower already does. The only difference is that instead of having to then go through the teeth pulling experience of a car dealership, you would go to a holding lot, present the base contract printed out on GMbuypower, sign the papers with the help of perhaps a GMAC rep, and pick up your car as if you're at Hertz rental.

I know the dealers would obviously never agree this - it would mean their destruction - but it is the way it should be.

State Francise laws strictly forbid this from happening...........

I think there still needs to be a "dealer" structure of sorts... it would be better as a company owned "store" though.

Going strictly to a GMBuyPower.com setup really limits you.

1) How do you test drive?
2) How do you look over any given car?
3) You can't buy one and drive away the same day...
4) How can someone show you how everything works (though a lot of dealers are lacking at this as it is... I remember when I bought my 99 Z28, and five, YES FIVE, people had to come out and figure out how to work the T-Tops... this after I told them all several times that I already knew how to do it. :rolleyes: )
5) What happens to the servce department for warranty and other work?

Basically, I think GM needs a brick and mortar retail structure, but a Company Owned setup would be best... of course, like Scott has eluded too... franchise laws and other issues would probably prevent this from ever happening. :(

Roy Roberts announced such an intention a few years ago and the dealers went ballistic. I belive GM would LOVE to do this. Build them overseas and sell them on the internet. Perhaps that explains why they perhaps 'on purpose" continue to lose share. Combining stores greatly reduces legal exposure when the "closings" of franchises occur.

I think there still needs to be a "dealer" structure of sorts... it would be better as a company owned "store" though.

Going strictly to a GMBuyPower.com setup really limits you.

1) How do you test drive?
2) How do you look over any given car?
3) You can't buy one and drive away the same day...
4) How can someone show you how everything works (though a lot of dealers are lacking at this as it is... I remember when I bought my 99 Z28, and five, YES FIVE, people had to come out and figure out how to work the T-Tops... this after I told them all several times that I already knew how to do it. :rolleyes: )
5) What happens to the servce department for warranty and other work?

Basically, I think GM needs a brick and mortar retail structure, but a Company Owned setup would be best... of course, like Scott has eluded too... franchise laws and other issues would probably prevent this from ever happening. :(
Well yes - wat you're describing is what I was envisioning. Of course, it's just a pipedream *sigh*.

Well yes - wat you're describing is what I was envisioning. Of course, it's just a pipedream *sigh*.Pipedream? More like nightmare.

As I'm sure Jim and Jason agree, how would you like to take that car you bought off the internet and have warranty work done by, wait......nobody!

That's right folks, the dealers need customers, but the customers need the dealership in return. You read this correct. Not every dealer is bad to deal with, it is up to you, the customer, to find a dealer that makes you feel comfortable and treats you fairly. If you find that you are getting screwed with, go to another dealer. And as has been mentioned many times before, go to a smaller hometown type dealer for some of the best treatment (in most cases) that you'll find.

The one thing I'll never get over (and I'm sure Jim and Jason know what I'm talking about) is how people feel it's ok to screw the dealer in anyway possible, as if that's ok, but if the dealer does, "Oh oh oh, I don't think so, only I (the customer) can do that" attitude that is all too common place amongst car shoppers.

Here's a helpful hint for free: be educated before you shop for a FAIR deal (Stress the fair), but also realize that the person on the other end has to make a living too. By grinding the salesperson down to dust, you are making a situation worse for yourself (as well, others) in the long run. Just remember, who's getting better service after the sale, a customer who was fair and fun to deal with, or the person who wanted to deal until the salesperson made nearly nothing because of being ground to dust and was determined to make the dealer "stick it"? Look beyond your noses people.

Every person on this board wants to make this a one way street of "let's get the big bad dealer". Why not make a little effort and find a dealer that'll treat you right? They're out there. It's up to you to determine what kind of expirience you want to have before, during, and after the sale.

Lew,
I think you have the right ideas. If I ever get out of the business (probably not), I would look you up to purchase from.
Jim

Roy Roberts announced such an intention a few years ago and the dealers went ballistic. I belive GM would LOVE to do this. Build them overseas and sell them on the internet. Perhaps that explains why they perhaps 'on purpose" continue to lose share. Combining stores greatly reduces legal exposure when the "closings" of franchises occur.


You're right! We're gonna shoot 'em all from the Grassy Knoll.........

I don't believe for a minute that GM wants to do this.....nor does any other manufacturer.........

Pipedream? More like nightmare.

As I'm sure Jim and Jason agree, how would you like to take that car you bought off the internet and have warranty work done by, wait......nobody!

That's right folks, the dealers need customers, but the customers need the dealership in return. You read this correct. Not every dealer is bad to deal with, it is up to you, the customer, to find a dealer that makes you feel comfortable and treats you fairly. If you find that you are getting screwed with, go to another dealer. And as has been mentioned many times before, go to a smaller hometown type dealer for some of the best treatment (in most cases) that you'll find.

The one thing I'll never get over (and I'm sure Jim and Jason know what I'm talking about) is how people feel it's ok to screw the dealer in anyway possible, as if that's ok, but if the dealer does, "Oh oh oh, I don't think so, only I (the customer) can do that" attitude that is all too common place amongst car shoppers.

Here's a helpful hint for free: be educated before you shop for a FAIR deal (Stress the fair), but also realize that the person on the other end has to make a living too. By grinding the salesperson down to dust, you are making a situation worse for yourself (as well, others) in the long run. Just remember, who's getting better service after the sale, a customer who was fair and fun to deal with, or the person who wanted to deal until the salesperson made nearly nothing because of being ground to dust and was determined to make the dealer "stick it"? Look beyond your noses people.

Every person on this board wants to make this a one way street of "let's get the big bad dealer". Why not make a little effort and find a dealer that'll treat you right? They're out there. It's up to you to determine what kind of expirience you want to have before, during, and after the sale.


Very good post, Lew.......

I've said it at least a million times.......the BEST deal is not always the CHEAPEST deal......there are many good dealers out there......and some bad ones.....and it always amazes me that people keep going back to the bad ones to save $100...............

Pipedream? More like nightmare.

As I'm sure Jim and Jason agree, how would you like to take that car you bought off the internet and have warranty work done by, wait......nobody!

That's right folks, the dealers need customers, but the customers need the dealership in return. You read this correct. Not every dealer is bad to deal with, it is up to you, the customer, to find a dealer that makes you feel comfortable and treats you fairly. If you find that you are getting screwed with, go to another dealer. And as has been mentioned many times before, go to a smaller hometown type dealer for some of the best treatment (in most cases) that you'll find.

The one thing I'll never get over (and I'm sure Jim and Jason know what I'm talking about) is how people feel it's ok to screw the dealer in anyway possible, as if that's ok, but if the dealer does, "Oh oh oh, I don't think so, only I (the customer) can do that" attitude that is all too common place amongst car shoppers.

Here's a helpful hint for free: be educated before you shop for a FAIR deal (Stress the fair), but also realize that the person on the other end has to make a living too. By grinding the salesperson down to dust, you are making a situation worse for yourself (as well, others) in the long run. Just remember, who's getting better service after the sale, a customer who was fair and fun to deal with, or the person who wanted to deal until the salesperson made nearly nothing because of being ground to dust and was determined to make the dealer "stick it"? Look beyond your noses people.

Every person on this board wants to make this a one way street of "let's get the big bad dealer". Why not make a little effort and find a dealer that'll treat you right? They're out there. It's up to you to determine what kind of expirience you want to have before, during, and after the sale.

Agree 100%! I bought my last 3 cars from the same salesman/dealership. I researched prices for the cars I wanted, plus my trade-ins, and as long as the dealer was close to my price on both, we had a deal. I only haggled once over the trade-in value, and they gave me what I wanted after finding out my price for my trade. In all instances the salesman searched the area for the exact cars I wanted, so I didn't mind not haggling because of the work he did. Plus the dealer now knows us and treats us well.

This is still an enthusiasts board, so I'm surprised how riled up we all get over the opinions of a Buick salesman, however competent and knowledgeable he may be. Every car buying experience that I have been involved with was excruciating. I'm sure that there are exceptions, but my experience has been that car salesmen have earned their stereotype.

My point is, who on here really cares that much about the actual buying experience if you are not buying a car that you can enjoy. It's all about the product to me. If GM had 75% market share and their stock price went through the roof, I still wouldn't give them a second look if all that they sold were Buicks.

This is still an enthusiasts board, so I'm surprised how riled up we all get over the opinions of a Buick salesman, however competent and knowledgeable he may be.
What difference does Jim's selling of Buicks make? He sells Chevrolets too, does that make him more "worthy" to you? It makes no difference what a person sells.

Hell, I sell Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, GMC, Cadillac, and Olds (before the phase out). Does this make me the ring master of all enthusiast boards? Ah, not quite.

Thank you, Jim, for the kind words also.
Every car buying experience that I have been involved with was excruciating. I'm sure that there are exceptions, but my experience has been that car salesmen have earned their stereotype.
Time to search for a dealer that will give you the service you desire. If it still seems that "everyone is out to get you", you may want to look in the mirror and see it from a different perspective.

My point is, who on here really cares that much about the actual buying experience if you are not buying a car that you can enjoy. It's all about the product to me. If GM had 75% market share and their stock price went through the roof, I still wouldn't give them a second look if all that they sold were Buicks.
Hey, no cheap shots at Buick. They build great comfortable mid-lux cars with moderate power. Nothing wrong with that. Plus, if GM had 75% market share with Buick alone, I'd sure think there'd be something you'd like, eh? ;)

Hmmm....

Let's talk about some good dealership experiences I've had:

Lunghamer Chevrolet, Waterford Michigan:
Went on a search for the car I was looking for. Found it about 400 miles away, shipped it in. Took care of my Camaro on any further warranty issues, after I was well and truly screwed by John Bowman Chevrolet on a warranty claim (that's still unresolved, but the car has been modified to the point that it's a nuisance more than a big issue - but trust me, GM and Bowman treated me and others VERY, VERY badly). Nice atmosphere, good salesman (now a friend of mine). The high profit car car I brought from them that they went through all that effort to find for me?

A stripped Cavalier, bought on GMS.


ABC Harley-Davidson, Waterford Michigan:
Gave a good deal on my wife's latest bike, and a great deal on her trade-in. The salesman in particular is a very calm, very friendly individual who is really, really busy... mostly because he's attentive. He'll go to war with the service or parts departments if they start messing with the customers.



Wheels USA, Oxford Michigan:
I bought the Hayabusa there. Nick, the salesman, was very professional and good to deal with. Gave me his best price, said it was his best price, I checked up on it and it was highly competitive - so I bought the bike. Sold me the ONLY add-on coverage I have ever found to be worthwhile, which was a $100 lifetime of the bike tire protection warranty (getting a flat tire on a motorcycle is a BIG, BAD, HAIRY, HORRIBLE thing...). I picked up a nail in the rear tire of the Busa a week ago, they replaced it on the spot, no questions asked with a $200 Dunlop and gave me a smoking deal on the front tire (it's a good idea to match front and rear tires on a motorcycle) - replacing both on the spot while I waited. Two thumbs up.




Now, those are three good dealership experiences... pretty much ALL of the others have been bad.

There's the Chevy dealer who sold me am aftermarket spare tire carrier lock for a pickup truck I bought... which then rusted solid and would no longer work... which, of course, you only find out about when you really, really need it... and THEN he wants to charge me to cut the damned thing off so I can finally get at my spare tire.

There's the Pontiac dealer who was furiously screwing over GMS buyers by over-charging them for cars (GMS is and has been a single price, but this particular dealer screwed all kinds of GMS buyers by lying through their teeth and over-charging, but still claiming it was GMS). Now remember, these are regualr Joe Schmoes this place is screwing over, these are EMPLOYEES and their FAMILIES!!!!!!!!!

Then there's Randy Hosler Pontiac, who were tasked with replacing a screw that held the headliner up in our Aztek. The screw backed out on it's own, so they then STRIPPED the replacement and tried to fix it with a plastic christmas-tree type fastener that lasted for all of about a week. Concurrently, they were to replace an airbag sensor... which failed again in about 10,000 miles. That may not be their fault, but since there's only a year of warranty on a dealer fixed non-warranty issue, guess who gets to pay for the next fix?

There are the a$$hole$ with their "market adjustments". I hope those guys in particular burn in he!!.

The best plan, in my opinion, is to take pricing control COMPLETELY out of the hands of the dealers. Make it a "voluntary" program, much like the 55mph speed limit was "voluntary", but get it done. Dealerships and salesmen simply cannot be trusted to have a long-term view of the business. There may be exceptions, but they're rare, and the customers spoke loudly and clearly that they like "no-haggle" pricing.

TurboGP,

I meant no disrespect meant to Buickman in particular, but I will admit to a shot at the Buick brand in general. Their cars are great for what they are, but by no ones estimation are they the sort of thing that anyone gets excited about. If everyone in the world who now buys boring Toyotas, Hondas, Hyundais and whatnot suddenly decided to buy Buicks and boosted their market share, it would be because they made a really good, comfortable, bland car, certainly not anything that enthusiasts enjoy. From a "save GM" standpoint, that would be just as well as building and selling a million fifth gen Camaros, but would exite me about as much as refrigerators or roofing supplies.

For GM to be successful, I'm sure that they do need to sell ten times more boring cars than interesting ones, but as an enthusiast, I'm not going to get too worked up over the design of these appliances, much less how they market them in Southern Michigan.

I do stand by my assessment of car salesmen. I actually don't begrudge them this behavior at all, their livelyhood is dependant on getting the most money out of me that they can, and my best interest is to give them as little as I can. Given the degree of variability that dealers charge on their product, that leads to an adversarial relationship. It's just the nature of the beast.

The ebb and flow of the market make up the 'beast" of free enterprise in the market. That is what makes the truly compassionate salesman a rarity, and such a success in the marketplace.

The ebb and flow of the market make up the 'beast" of free enterprise in the market. That is what makes the truly compassionate salesman a rarity, and such a success in the marketplace.

Speaking from 18 years of high ticket retail sales, I can vouch for that. If automotive dealers were to embrace relationship selling instead of commodity selling, they wouldn't be a rarity. Relationship selling is what makes the difference between a huge success and a huge failure in high ticket sales.

You hit the nail right on the head. Now imagine if GM could establish just such a "connection" with customers. That my friend is the essence of The Plan for a Return to Greatness.

The ebb and flow of the market make up the 'beast" of free enterprise in the market. That is what makes the truly compassionate salesman a rarity, and such a success in the marketplace.

I agree with your first sentence, although I wonder why, if they are so successful, are they so rare?

You hit the nail right on the head. Now imagine if GM could establish just such a "connection" with customers. That my friend is the essence of The Plan for a Return to Greatness.


The dealers are the face man to the customers. To the majority of the public, they are GM. It's their responsibility to establish a connection.

They are rare, I believe, due to the high turnover in the industry, and the lack of proper training. The price of entry to the profession is nil, walk-in and get hired. The fact no true standards apply opens the door to anyone regardless of their past. Many stores have long hours which aren't condusive to family life and we end up with many less than desirable members of society as our representatives. Add in the decades of adversarial relationships with prospective clients and you begin to see why this industry suffers from an image problem.
Dealers, and perhaps moreso the salespeople, are the face of GM. This problem is addressed in the first twenty steps of The Plan.

They are rare, I believe, due to the high turnover in the industry, and the lack of proper training. The price of entry to the profession is nil, walk-in and get hired. The fact no true standards apply opens the door to anyone regardless of their past. Many stores have long hours which aren't condusive to family life and we end up with many less than desirable members of society as our representatives. Add in the decades of adversarial relationships with prospective clients and you begin to see why this industry suffers from an image problem.
Dealers, and perhaps moreso the salespeople, are the face of GM. This problem is addressed in the first twenty steps of The Plan.

Your comments gave me these thoughts.... being a dealership General Manager, you can probably give a good answer...

Whenever I go to just about any dealership... it seems that there are 7 sales people for every 1 customer... most of the salespeople are standing around chatting amongst themselves, and stare at you as you walk around like you are a bother to them. There are usually a few good, interested ones, but they are usually busy doing something like helping a customer, or researching stuff for a customer, etc....

If the overall general quality of the people applying is so bad, why hire them? It seems that most dealerships have way too many salespeople on hand anyway... and it really gives an air of "employee loitering" rather than "look at all the people waiting to serve you"....

If dealerships cut down on hiring literally "anybody who walks in off the street"... you'd have a smaller, but much more focused, educated and dedicated staff of salespeople.... with presumably less turnover, and an inherant better public image and relationship over time.

While a very long article, it is very good reading.

http://www.edmunds.com/advice/buying/articles/42962/article.html

Many things in here point out the problems with the retail system. Good people are hard to hire and keep because the consumer is so conditioned by previous retail buying experiences. It takes a unique individual who can handle the rejection of the consumer day in, day out and continue on a relentless path of success. Because of that, one must hire more staff than needed and hope to find that one in ten that will rise to the occation. There are two schools of thought, one being the hire many and keep one, the other is hire what you need and provide substantial and relentless training. Actually training is a broad term, it should be called mentoring. Both seem to work, the latter requireing more effort from management to acheive the goals needed for profitability. The latter also creates a less hostile work environment as well as a more long term employee.

One of the most frustrating things I see in the business is the unproductive nature of retail salespeople. At the dealerships I have run, or advised, the personnel are required to perform a set schedule of daily tasks. No factory could run with employees "standing around", neither can a dealership office. Obtaining performance from these individuals generates sales and goodwill. The issue is proper supervision and training.
There should be only one salesperson at a time "on watch", covering the floor. The rest should be at their desks, back in service or body shop, or out in the world prospecting and building a business.

While a very long article, it is very good reading.

http://www.edmunds.com/advice/buying/articles/42962/article.html

Many things in here point out the problems with the retail system. Good people are hard to hire and keep because the consumer is so conditioned by previous retail buying experiences. It takes a unique individual who can handle the rejection of the consumer day in, day out and continue on a relentless path of success. Because of that, one must hire more staff than needed and hope to find that one in ten that will rise to the occation. There are two schools of thought, one being the hire many and keep one, the other is hire what you need and provide substantial and relentless training. Actually training is a broad term, it should be called mentoring. Both seem to work, the latter requireing more effort from management to acheive the goals needed for profitability. The latter also creates a less hostile work environment as well as a more long term employee.

I can see the concept....

but... to me, that is nothing more than putting on a blindfold, and throwing darts at the wall, hoping to hit a bulleye... when, in reality, you miss the dartboard entirely much more often.

If I am an owner or manager, I don't want those poeple representing my company....

Now, if I have a lack of applicants and employees, I may be FOCRED into hiring them just to have a warm body on the lot... but, like I mentioned earlier... it seems like every dealership out there has 7 salesmen for every 1 customer at the dealership at any given time.... so I really don't see the point, unless I am missing something major.

One of the most frustrating things I see in the business is the unproductive nature of retail salespeople. At the dealerships I have run, or advised, the personnel are required to perform a set schedule of daily tasks. No factory could run with employees "standing around", neither can a dealership office. Obtaining performance from these individuals generates sales and goodwill. The issue is proper supervision and training.
There should be only one salesperson at a time "on watch", covering the floor. The rest should be at their desks, back in service or body shop, or out in the world prospecting and building a business.

I agree that is what you would want in a perfect scenario... but I can't think of a single dealership I have ever walked into that has been that way.

But... still... why hire 10 to find 1?

Or, better yet, assuming some slipped through a strict applicant interview, why retain the ones that are really just dead weight?

But... still... why hire 10 to find 1?

Or, better yet, assuming some slipped through a strict applicant interview, why retain the ones that are really just dead weight?

We don't keep them. When they are let go after their trial period, you still have to replace them with the next series of applicants or you find yourself short on staffing. Many people interview well but don't perform up to expectations......... remember, high ticket sales isn't a job for everyone. Hiring and firing is an endless task, management is always looking to replace the weakest link. Why hire 10? It just appears that a small percentage of the general workforce seem to be the go-getter, the self motivated and hungry for success. Until you find those and retain them, you will always have a certain amount of turnover until your staffing is full.... and even then, successful management is once again always looking to replace the weakest link. A large sales staff also creates competition between employees who want to rise to the occation. It isn't an exact science, but one thing is for sure..... you are better off with an excess of employees than not enough to get the job done. The theory is that each saleman should create a certain amount of business, not take a certain percentage of total business that is sold.

We don't keep them. When they are let go after their trial period, you still have to replace them with the next series of applicants or you find yourself short on staffing. Many people interview well but don't perform up to expectations......... remember, high ticket sales isn't a job for everyone. Hiring and firing is an endless task, management is always looking to replace the weakest link. Why hire 10? It just appears that a small percentage of the general workforce seem to be the go-getter, the self motivated and hungry for success. Until you find those and retain them, you will always have a certain amount of turnover until your staffing is full.... and even then, successful management is once again always looking to replace the weakest link. A large sales staff also creates competition between employees who want to rise to the occation. It isn't an exact science, but one thing is for sure..... you are better off with an excess of employees than not enough to get the job done. The theory is that each saleman should create a certain amount of business, not take a certain percentage of total business that is sold.

That makes sense...

Maybe the main question then changes to:

"How do you retain your quality employees once you find them?"

Doing so would eventually minimize (probably not eliminate) the need to continually bring in such a mass quantity of sub-par applicants.

One of the most frustrating things I see in the business is the unproductive nature of retail salespeople. .

lol! How true. Have you ever done the exercise of documenting the total work acheived by each member with your staff? Have them explain their productivity during any given day. That's a huge eye opener. Most times during an 10 hour day, a salesman is productive for less than 2 hours. :eek: It's a good thing they are paid on commission.

That makes sense...

Maybe the main question then changes to:

"How do you retain your quality employees once you find them?"

Doing so would eventually minimize (probably not eliminate) the need to continually bring in such a mass quantity of sub-par applicants.

You are correct. How do we retain them? By treating them like family and gold. Statistics show that the main reason most people stay with their current job is that they like their manager/boss and the rest of the employees. By management giving their all in helping the individual become successful, making them feel like an important part of the team and taking a personal interest in them as people, not just as employees goes a long way toward retention. Eventually when your dealership becomes well staffed with happy and productive employees, your hiring criteria changes. That's when an interesting situation occurs..... successful salespeople from other dealerships begin applying because they see your place as THE place that they wish to work. A happy and productive staff attracts successful applicants.

You are correct. How do we retain them? By treating them like family and gold. Statistics show that the main reason most people stay with their current job is that they like their manager/boss and the rest of the employees. By management giving their all in helping the individual become successful, making them feel like an important part of the team and taking a personal interest in them as people, not just as employees goes a long way toward retention. Eventually when your dealership becomes well staffed with happy and productive employees, your hiring criteria changes. That's when an interesting situation occurs..... successful salespeople from other dealerships begin applying because they see your place as THE place that they wish to work. A happy and productive staff attracts successful applicants.


Sounds like a simple and straight forward plan of action.

What I don't understand, though, is how it seems that basically *NO* auto dealerships follow this model.

Yes, there are some good dealerships and bad dealerships... but as a whole, I think the whole "7 salespeople to every 1 customer, who stand around loitering and staring down showroom visitors" is pretty much the norm. :(

For every Jason E out there, we have 7 people who are probably more counter-productive than productive.

It always amazes me how people in a line of work who get paid based on production can know so little about the products they sell, and be so terrible interacting with people.

Sounds like a simple and straight forward plan of action.

What I don't understand, though, is how it seems that basically *NO* auto dealerships follow this model.

Yes, there are some good dealerships and bad dealerships... but as a whole, I think the whole "7 salespeople to every 1 customer, who stand around loitering and staring down showroom visitors" is pretty much the norm. :(

For every Jason E out there, we have 7 people who are probably more counter-productive than productive.

It always amazes me how people in a line of work who get paid based on production can know so little about the products they sell, and be so terrible interacting with people.

I can't understand it either. I do find it done correctly more often in the smaller rural towns than in the larger population areas. I believe that a small population base wouldn't tolerate any less. Not knowing the product is inexcusable excepting of course the brand new employee who hasn't started training, and then it is only excusable for an incredibly short period of time.

Sounds like a simple and straight forward plan of action.

What I don't understand, though, is how it seems that basically *NO* auto dealerships follow this model.

Yes, there are some good dealerships and bad dealerships... but as a whole, I think the whole "7 salespeople to every 1 customer, who stand around loitering and staring down showroom visitors" is pretty much the norm. :(

For every Jason E out there, we have 7 people who are probably more counter-productive than productive.

It always amazes me how people in a line of work who get paid based on production can know so little about the products they sell, and be so terrible interacting with people.

Studies have found that dealers are LESS likely to hire salesman that know cars/trucks well. They want them to be motivated by the sale, not the product.

Studies have found that dealers are LESS likely to hire salesman that know cars/trucks well. They want them to be motivated by the sale, not the product.

You are all too correct. There lies a major problem with the image of the retail end of the industry.

Pipedream? More like nightmare.

As I'm sure Jim and Jason agree, how would you like to take that car you bought off the internet and have warranty work done by, wait......nobody!

That's right folks, the dealers need customers, but the customers need the dealership in return. You read this correct. Not every dealer is bad to deal with, it is up to you, the customer, to find a dealer that makes you feel comfortable and treats you fairly. If you find that you are getting screwed with, go to another dealer. And as has been mentioned many times before, go to a smaller hometown type dealer for some of the best treatment (in most cases) that you'll find.

The one thing I'll never get over (and I'm sure Jim and Jason know what I'm talking about) is how people feel it's ok to screw the dealer in anyway possible, as if that's ok, but if the dealer does, "Oh oh oh, I don't think so, only I (the customer) can do that" attitude that is all too common place amongst car shoppers.

Here's a helpful hint for free: be educated before you shop for a FAIR deal (Stress the fair), but also realize that the person on the other end has to make a living too. By grinding the salesperson down to dust, you are making a situation worse for yourself (as well, others) in the long run. Just remember, who's getting better service after the sale, a customer who was fair and fun to deal with, or the person who wanted to deal until the salesperson made nearly nothing because of being ground to dust and was determined to make the dealer "stick it"? Look beyond your noses people.

Every person on this board wants to make this a one way street of "let's get the big bad dealer". Why not make a little effort and find a dealer that'll treat you right? They're out there. It's up to you to determine what kind of expirience you want to have before, during, and after the sale.

:bow: :bow:

If anyone needs a Pontiac here in the northeast, come see me. I can't promise I'll always be the cheapest, but I can promise I'll be the easiest to deal with :D

That makes it hard to decide between you and Lew. Glad that, near as I can tell, I'm the only Buick salesman here. Now the plug, I offer nationwide delivery!

That makes it hard to decide between you and Lew. Glad that, near as I can tell, I'm the only Buick salesman here. Now the plug, I offer nationwide delivery!
Hey there, I'm Buick too, Jim!

[QUOTE=Jason E]:bow: :bow:

If anyone needs a Pontiac here in the northeast, come see me. I can't promise I'll always be the cheapest, but I can promise I'll be the easiest to deal with :D[/QUOTE

You're in the Northeast as well...same area as me. I'll throw my sales manager father into the hat of easy to deal with B-P-G sales. Just stop on by Columbia in Hanover.

Today's Detroit News:

While the Buickman cometh, General Motors may say go away


The Buickman's secret is out. Six-time Buick sales champ and General Motors Corp. tormentor Jim Dollinger has released the first 20 points of his long-touted 40-point plan to save the automaker. He calls it "Return to Greatness." Elimination of destination charges, home vehicle delivery, and year-round discounts for AARP members are some of his recommendations.

The Flint car salesman and self-dubbed Buickman has been stepping up his personal campaign to publicize the plan, appearing on radio, television and making a big splash at GM's annual shareholders meeting in June. Why release it now? Dollinger says his goal is to put pressure on GM to use his ideas "for the good of the company, the industry and country." GM may not be too receptive, given that Dollinger called for the resignation of GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner at the shareholders meeting.

Contributors: Christine Tierney, Eric Mayne, Ed Garsten and Mark Truby.