As surveys go, the Morpace Omnibus Study [full results in PDF here] isn’t perfect. But even though it’s based on only 1,000 online respondents, it’s chock full of provocative insights. Of course Automotive News [sub] misses the best one, in its haste to trumpet the headline
Buyers usually don’t consider loyalty when choosing dealerships
Fine, that pulls uniques out of the dealership bullpen. The real news: when asked to rate how “influential” different media sources are on their “likelihood to visit a dealership,” respondents gave the category “magazines” the weakest scores. A mere three percent rated magazines as the top rating “high influence,” the lowest such number in the survey. A whopping 32 percent gave it the lowest “low influence” rating, the highest result in the test. And all this from a sample in which only six in one thousand rated “an effective marketing/advertising campaign” as the most influential factor in their dealership selection process, while giving top marks to “best deal offerings” (40%), “positive prior experience” (20%) and “referrals from family and friends (10%). But here’s the twist: respondents were asked to assume they already had a brand and model in mind. The plot thickens…
The Financial Times reports that Anti-trust officials in Switzerland are investigating the Bavarian car maker due to allegations made by a Swiss consumer TV show. The TV show sent undercover reporters to BMW dealerships in Germany (Swiss and Germany share a border, you know) to try and buy a car. The show claims to have found that BMW is blocking its dealerships in European countries from selling their cars to Swiss residents.
What makes this particularly egregious is that although Switzerland isn’t a member of the European Union (they like to stay neutral), it does have Bilateral trade agreements which guarantee free trade with its neighbors. Restricting trade? Under a free trade agreement? Uh oh…
Ohio Republican Reps LaTourette and Boehner have officially requested that President Obama suspend GM’s dealer wind-down agreements until the Special Inspector General for TARP (SIGTARP) completes an investigation of the government-approved GM and Chrysler dealer culls. The representatives focused on the fact that SIGTARP’s initial report on the dealer cull, which had criticism for GM, Chrysler and the government task force, wasn’t publicized until after arbitration for culled dealers ended. WKYC quotes the representatives’ statement as saying
There is too much at stake to proceed in an atmosphere where dealers were denied so much crucial information in a process rife with secrecy. As the findings of this investigation may shed much needed light on the proceedings affecting hundreds of dealerships nationwide, we believe it is necessary to thoroughly analyze its results before continuing with the closures of hundreds of dealerships, and the potential loss of thousands of jobs.
And Republicans aren’t alone in urging a halt to wind-down proceedings pending the SIGTARP’s latest investigation… Democrat Dennis Kucinich has already staked out the position now occupied by the House Republican leader. And did the artist sometimes known as “Government Motors” blink in the face of bipartisan pressure?
With Mercury going the way of Olds and Pontiac, Ford has made much of its intentions to turn its struggling Lincoln brand around. Ford has promised a $2b investment in Lincoln’s product line, and is pushing for the closure of 200 or so Lincoln dealers in order to concentrate the brand’s weak sales at its most successful dealers. But that’s not all. Ford is requiring the surviving Lincoln dealerships to invest heavily, as much as $2m per store, to stay on board the Lincoln Revival Express. But, according to Automotive News [sub], the Lincoln dealers are starting to wonder if they’re being asked for too much. One dealer tells the industry paper
They told us there would be no new products for about 24 months. I don’t know how the stand-alone Lincoln dealers are going to make it, especially those dealers who have to spend $2 million on their upgrades.
Ford has offered several Lincoln stores between $300k and $1.5m to give up ideally-located franchises that they refused to upgrade, but it seems that few dealers are simply rolling over. In fact, the dealer who was offered $1.5m rejected Ford’s offer, calling it “very low” for his profitable franchise. And that’s the polite response. A dealer who was offered less tells AN
“Insulted” isn’t a harmful enough word to describe it. It’s asinine. I’m getting my numbers together and going back. I’m not going to accept this.
Ford, for its part, says the “status quo is not an option,” a position that puts the factory and dealers in place for a nice round of brutal negotiations. And since Ford lacks to the tools to force its entire network to update, it will either have to pay up or live with at least a few remnants of the status quo. And as long as Lincoln’s products remain largely status quo, that’s probably the way it should be.
Back in July, the Special Inspector General for the TARP program (SIGTARP) released a damning report on GM and Chrysler’s efforts to cull dealers during their government-overseen bailout-bankruptcies. The upshot: GM and Chrysler handled the culls either inconsistently or subjectively, and the President’s auto task force pressed the issue unnecessarily and “without sufficient consideration of the decisions’ broader economic impact.” And though that report, the product of a year’s worth of investigation, made the automakers and their government “saviors” look mighty stupid, the awkward walk-back of most of the dealer cuts had already made the point fairly well. But with the TARP program now largely rolled up, the SIGTARP’s office has been bulking up on investigators, targeting fraud and criminal activity around the entire TARP program. And, according to Automotive News [sub], the dealer cull is on the agenda. SIGTARP won’t “disclose the targets of the investigation or the actions being probed,” but it has “opened a follow-up investigation of possibly illegal activity in the [dealer-cull] effort.”
According to Automotive News [sub], both General Motors and Hyundai-Kia have reduced their fleet sales percentages in the last year, as the two firms seek retail-level pricing for their recently-improved products. Ford and Chrysler? Not so much. As the top-selling brand in the US, Ford is simply using fleet sales to boost itself to the top of the pile. Winning the annual sales volume race is good for morale, but The Blue Oval should be careful not to delude itself into unrealistic expectations. For Chrysler, on the other hand, the continued practice of sending 40 percent of sales to fleets is big, big trouble.
Not only has Chrysler been barely making its minimum “survival volume” numbers (and some months, not), it also had a “come to Jesus” moment on the fleet issue back in April. At the time, Chrysler swore it would limit fleet sales to 25 percent of overall volume, but since that announcement, its fleet percentage has held steady at around 40 percent. For a company on the brink, the lost profits are just as important as the lost credibility. Meanwhile, each new Chrysler that ends up in a fleet cements the perception that Chryslers are the automotive purchase of last resort. And at this point, the perception probably isn’t too far from the truth.
I believe that, legally, I’m still their U.S. distributor. And I want trucks delivered to our dealers
Importing niche vehicles from an unknown foreign automaker has long been a fraught process for US-based entrepreneurs, and John Perez’s attempt to bring diesel-powered Mahindra pickups to the US has been no exception. For four years, Perez’s Global Vehicles distribution network waited while Mahindra sought EPA certification for its diesel pickup engine, and then six days after approval arrived, the Indian firm dumped Perez with little ceremony. Now Mahindra says it will consider giving franchisees to the dealers who paid Perez up to $200k for the right to sell Mahindras, but that it is not obliged to do so. Perez is suing Mahindra for failing to fill an order for pickups, while dealers are considering suing Perez and Mahindra is seeking to end its agreement with Perez so it can distribute pickups through independent dealers. Mahindra’s Roma Balwani tells Automotive News [sub]
The current dealers’ contract is with GV [Perez’s distribution channel, Global Vehicles] and hence they do not automatically become Mahindra dealers. However, we would be considering these dealers for our network if they are interested. We will need a new distribution network and soon we will start a dialogue with potential dealers, including the ones who are signed up with GV, if they are interested in signing up with Mahindra.
Fiat/Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne is an agonizing character. There can be no doubt that he’s one of the smartest execs in the business, and yet he so often comes off as the stuffy, pedantic college professor, who sputters into ad hominem at the faintest sign of criticism. His speeches often revolve around stock speaking points and a copy of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, and as the video above proves, his delivery is rarely inspiring. But between the Einstein quotes and plaintive self-sympathy, Marchionne can offer moments of unexpected candor. His speech to Chrysler’s dealers earlier this week offered several such moments, and though it’s too long (and, frankly, boring) to reprint in its entirety (click here for the whole thing), here are a few stunners from the mind of Marchionne.
I think there’s a decent business case if you take the long view
Chrysler Dealer Don Lee gives Automotive News [sub] his take on Chrysler’s pitch to new Fiat/Alfa dealers, thereby confirming that few dealers expect a Fiat franchise to take off in the short term. And for those “decent” long-term prospects, Chrysler’s saying that
a showroom of 2,500 to 3,000 square feet would be sufficient to start… To get there, some dealers are going to have to take it slower. They’ll have to offer a separate showroom but go beyond that as more product becomes available.
So, what will the 500 do for dealers? According to the Pentastar gang, dealers can expect
healthy gross profits of up to $1,500 on each Fiat 500
Lee reckons that figure is “optimistic,” but we disagree. Chrysler has said that 500s will start around $20k, and they’ll have to considering any US-bound 500 that comes out of Chrysler’s Toluca, Mexico plant could be sold for near double that price in Brazil. Per-car profit margins on US-market 500s will be strong… it’s the 50k projected annual sales volume (78k by 2013) that prospective dealers need to worry about.
Chrysler execs met with some 400 potential Fiat dealers today to discuss plans for a new network of Fiat and Alfa-Rome brand stores in the US, and as we have noted, a certain amount of overlap can be expected. Chrysler says that “as many as 200” stores could be opened for the Italian brands, but the company has only identified 119 metropolitan markets in 38 US states where it projects sales growth in small car sales. Even with only “about 165” stores planned for the initial rollout, quite a few markets could host dueling Fiat/Alfa stores. According to the NYT’s Nick Bunkley, Idaho, Iowa, Alaska, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, South Carolina, The Dakotas, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming will not receive Fiat/Alfa dealerships. Meanwhile, the AFP reports that Chrysler plans to sell 50,000 Fiat 500s in 2011 alone, meaning each of the 165 stores will sell an average of 303 units per year.
Just days after Mahindra’s diesel-powered compact pickups were approved by the EPA for sale in the US, the Indian automaker apparently canceled its distributor agreement with Global Vehicles according to the message above that was posted to Mahindra’s Media site. Global Vehicles has had a deal to distribute Mahindra pickup and SUV models in the US since 2006, and has signed up 350 dealers to sell the Indian imports. Recently cracks in the relationship surfaced when GV sued Mahindra alleging that the manufacturer was delaying homologation for the US market. GV claims to have spent $35m preparing for Mahindra’s US launch, and dealers were said to have paid $200k apiece to obtain franchises. Meanwhile, Automotive News [sub] notes
The statement by Mahindra hangs a question mark over the 300 to 350 U.S. retailers who have signed franchise agreements directly with Global Vehicles, if the Alpharetta, Ga., company no longer is the distributor.
Nor is it clear that Mahindra has the power to terminate the agreement without a court fight.
The enthusiasm for the Fiat coming to the market has diminished. At first, it was something that would be mixed in… now [Fiat-Chrysler is] going to have to present a compelling story and product to back me investing at least $1 million to build a new showroom
Everyone loves the Fiat 500, but Chrysler’s dealers aren’t exactly thrilled that they have to build brand new showrooms to sell the Italian (er, Mexican) subcompact, as witnessed by the quote above in the WSJ [sub]. Another dealer adds that he knows enough troubled MINI and Smart stores to be spooked by the prospect of dropping hundreds of thousands of dollars on what will clearly be a niche offering. Yet another calls it an “excellent opportunity,” but Chrysler needs to find 200 qualified dealers to make Fiat’s American adventure a reality. The credit and car markets, gas prices and Fiat’s less-than-stellar American-market legacy all conspire against the scheme. To say nothing of the poor historical precedents for Chrysler’s ballooning brand portfolio. But as usual, CEO Sergio Marchionne has it all figured out…
Well, the debate over the viability of the Chevy Volt has been well and truly joined, as political and auto writers around the web spent the last week weighing in on the issue. Needless to say, a scan of these opinions shows that my NY Times Op-Ed has drawn a wide variety of reactions, ranging from complete agreement to utter contempt. But, in a phenomenon that seems all-too common on the internet these days, very few commentaries on my opinion (positive and negative alike) bring more detail or nuance to the issue. Which is too bad, because I’d be the last person to argue that I’m capable of doing complete justice to an issue as complex as the Volt in only 900 words. The variables and unforeseeable consequences floating around the Volt’s future are so vast and varied, no writer could possibly hope to cover them all. And one such problem didn’t even emerge until the day after I wrote the Times Op-Ed: dealer markups on the Volt. (Read More…)
Sales numbers for the US market in July should drop today, and based on an early analyst survey, the market’s only recovered to a 12m SAAR at best. Estimates aside though, it’s beginning to look more and more like the US market for new cars is approaching a “new normal.” How so? Automotive News [sub]’s Jesse Snyder figures it’s
Because discipline is breaking out all over– at manufacturers, suppliers and dealerships.
Even Snyder’s headline captures the mood of cautious realism that’s suddenly taken hold of the auto industry: though the market appears to have moved towards 12m annual units in July, Snyder’s analysis is headlined Life at 11 million U.S. sales. (Read More…)
Have we scrutinized all the issues behind what they’re doing? Not really. My feeling is that a manufacturer-owned store as a business model violates the spirit of the state law here. But not a single person is complaining about it, and it’s kind of a back-burner thing for us. I imagine that if we start getting complaints from our membership, we would move it up to a front-burner thing
Tim Jackson, President of the Colorado Automobile Dealer Association tells Automotive News [sub] that Tesla’s non-franchise dealership in Colorado is not a long-term strategy, despite the company’s avowed desire to do without dealers. Well, franchised dealers, anyway (state law allows one OEM-owned dealership, and lots of EV tax breaks). Tesla admits (in its prospectus, no less) that wanting to own its own dealers will cause problems in Texas, but in the unlikely event that Tesla becomes a viable automaker, it’s easy to imagine a number of states putting up barriers to the franchise-free strategy. Especially since what we do know about Tesla’s dealer model plan is… highly irregular.
Recent Comments