Car salesmen need to go....
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I don't think you read the story correctly. Dealer A offered a better price than Dealer B on a vehicle located at Dealer C. Because Dealer B knew that Dealer A might offer a better price they arranged to have the car delivered to them from Dealer C. Effectively performing an end-run around the customer. That's shady.
Now it's a completely different story if the customer and Dealer B agreed on a price, and then the Dealer A got involved after the fact after which the customer felt she was entitled to the price by Dealer A.
The difficult thing for me is judging whether or not the salesman is being honest. I don't have the time nor the patience to BS around. Years ago my wife was looking at a replacement for her SLK and we wandered onto a Mercedes lot to look at a specific vehicle. The salesperson was a new hire from a Cadillac dealer in FLA. He was cordial et al, but as soon as we started talking numbers his demeanor changed. He went full on aggressive "sales-mode". I was like, "Relax son this is Mercedes Benz not Cadillac and we're going to think about it". We eventually end up with the car at the price we wanted with the assistance of another salesperson (Older guy). We found out that the new guy was no longer at the dealership about 4 months later.
That is EXACTLY what happened, thanks for simplifying. And i have no issue with Salesmen, far from it since i was one for some time and my overall experience with vehicle salesmen has been positive. But my friend is far from pretentious like Ignatius states or thinks, nor is my agreeing to disagree a cop out. It's more like, not wanting to participate in another 3 pages of this.
Here's the deal, if your friend the customer didn't start off with the intention of jacking the two dealerships around they could have just taken the better offer and bought the car in a simplified process without the other dealership knowing. According to you THEY CHOOSE to inform the "bad salesman" of what they intended to do with another dealership and frankly I credit the "bad salesman" for securing the vehicle before the other dealership did.
I will agree to not go on with this but to suggest that the customer is a victim of circumstances out of their control is the height of absurdity. Again how you can construe a salesman doing their job in securing a vehicle to sell as making it difficult for a customer to purchase the same vehicle elsewhere, to call it unethical is among the most ignorant things I have heard in a while.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I don't think you read the story correctly. Dealer A offered a better price than Dealer B on a vehicle located at Dealer C. Because Dealer B knew that Dealer A might offer a better price they arranged to have the car delivered to them from Dealer C. Effectively performing an end-run around the customer. That's shady.
Now it's a completely different story if the customer and Dealer B agreed on a price, and then the Dealer A got involved after the fact after which the customer felt she was entitled to the price by Dealer A.
The difficult thing for me is judging whether or not the salesman is being honest. I don't have the time nor the patience to BS around. Years ago my wife was looking at a replacement for her SLK and we wandered onto a Mercedes lot to look at a specific vehicle. The salesperson was a new hire from a Cadillac dealer in FLA. He was cordial et al, but as soon as we started talking numbers his demeanor changed. He went full on aggressive "sales-mode". I was like, "Relax son this is Mercedes Benz not Cadillac and we're going to think about it". We eventually end up with the car at the price we wanted with the assistance of another salesperson (Older guy). We found out that the new guy was no longer at the dealership about 4 months later.
That is EXACTLY what happened, thanks for simplifying. And i have no issue with Salesmen, far from it since i was one for some time and my overall experience with vehicle salesmen has been positive. But my friend is far from pretentious like Ignatius states or thinks, nor is my agreeing to disagree a cop out. It's more like, not wanting to participate in another 3 pages of this.
Here's the deal, if your friend the customer didn't start off with the intention of jacking the two dealerships around they could have just taken the better offer and bought the car in a simplified process without the other dealership knowing. According to you THEY CHOOSE to inform the "bad salesman" of what they intended to do with another dealership and frankly I credit the "bad salesman" for securing the vehicle before the other dealership did.
I will agree to not go on with this but to suggest that the customer is a victim of circumstances out of their control is the height of absurdity. Again how you can construe a salesman doing their job in securing a vehicle to sell as making it difficult for a customer to purchase the same vehicle elsewhere, to call it unethical is among the most ignorant things I have heard in a while.
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical because some
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical because some
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical? Again you cannot sell what you don't have and cannot get, last year Subaru dealerships in my region were fighting tooth and nail to get Touring Ascents and Foresters and I personally arranged several dealer trades for vehicles knowing that as a result my store I would be the only one with a particular combination vehicle in the region for months. I remember one white over brown Touring Forester I had two people fighting over and it came down to first come first serve business meaning that the first person fully committed to acquiring the vehicle took it home. There were none others like it in a 500 mile radius, that is how the car business works and there is nothing unethical about it.
The "bad salesman" took the initiative to secure the car knowing that it would likely lead to a sale, there is nothing unethical about that. It is how the car business works, you can't sell what you don't have and cannot obtain otherwise.
Perhaps if the customer would have focused on simply purchasing the car rather than trying to play games between two competing businesses she would not have to get desperate enough to gripe about the circumstance she created for herself. Furthermore she tried to play games with MB corporate, is she committed to buying the car or not is what I would have thought? She was only committed to buying the car from the dealership that did not have it and could not get it because she jerked around the business that did acquire it for her. It is unfortunate that MB caved capitulated and stole an intelligent salesman's business away.
These sob stories about someone trying to outsmart someone else only to find themselves ending up in an unfavorable position are pathetic. Let's give them nothing but the benefit of the doubt though
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical? Again you cannot sell what you don't have and cannot get, last year Subaru dealerships in my region were fighting tooth and nail to get Touring Ascents and Foresters and I personally arranged several dealer trades for vehicles knowing that as a result my store I would be the only one with a particular combination vehicle in the region for months. I remember one white over brown Touring Forester I had two people fighting over and it came down to first come first serve business meaning that the first person fully committed to acquiring the vehicle took it home. There were none others like it in a 500 mile radius, that is how the car business works and there is nothing unethical about it.
The "bad salesman" took the initiative to secure the car knowing that it would likely lead to a sale, there is nothing unethical about that. It is how the car business works, you can't sell what you don't have and cannot obtain otherwise.
Perhaps if the customer would have focused on simply purchasing the car rather than trying to play games between two competing businesses she would not have to get desperate enough to gripe about the circumstance she created for herself. Furthermore she tried to play games with MB corporate, is she committed to buying the car or not is what I would have thought? She was only committed to buying the car from the dealership that did not have it and could not get it because she jerked around the business that did acquire it for her. It is unfortunate that MB caved capitulated and stole an intelligent salesman's business away.
These sob stories about someone trying to outsmart someone else only to find themselves ending up in an unfavorable position are pathetic. Let's give them nothing but the benefit of the doubt though
Originally Posted by Ignatius
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical? Again you cannot sell what you don't have and cannot get, last year Subaru dealerships in my region were fighting tooth and nail to get Touring Ascents and Foresters and I personally arranged several dealer trades for vehicles knowing that as a result my store I would be the only one with a particular combination vehicle in the region for months. I remember one white over brown Touring Forester I had two people fighting over and it came down to first come first serve business meaning that the first person fully committed to acquiring the vehicle took it home. There were none others like it in a 500 mile radius, that is how the car business works and there is nothing unethical about it.
Dealer trades are a super common part of the industry. When my mom needed a new car in 2014 she did the build a car thing on Ford's webpage. She was very specific that she wanted a Fusion Titanium EcoBoost, AWD, Dark Side paint, heated/cool seats, heated steering wheel, the 2 spoke 19" wheels, with NAV. She printed it out and I went up to the GM and told him what items were and weren't negotiable. We found one in the state at a dealer in the LA area. They agreed to trade it with us. I drove down with someone else, handed them a check, and they gave me the car. Then all the paperwork was done at my dealer. It was being purchased under D plan so there was no negotiation necessary. The salesman that has been here since the place was built and my mom absolutely loves, showed her how to use everything and she has loved the car ever since.
So dealer-to-dealer vehicle acquisitions are unethical? Again you cannot sell what you don't have and cannot get, last year Subaru dealerships in my region were fighting tooth and nail to get Touring Ascents and Foresters and I personally arranged several dealer trades for vehicles knowing that as a result my store I would be the only one with a particular combination vehicle in the region for months. I remember one white over brown Touring Forester I had two people fighting over and it came down to first come first serve business meaning that the first person fully committed to acquiring the vehicle took it home. There were none others like it in a 500 mile radius, that is how the car business works and there is nothing unethical about it.
Dealer trades are a super common part of the industry. When my mom needed a new car in 2014 she did the build a car thing on Ford's webpage. She was very specific that she wanted a Fusion Titanium EcoBoost, AWD, Dark Side paint, heated/cool seats, heated steering wheel, the 2 spoke 19" wheels, with NAV. She printed it out and I went up to the GM and told him what items were and weren't negotiable. We found one in the state at a dealer in the LA area. They agreed to trade it with us. I drove down with someone else, handed them a check, and they gave me the car. Then all the paperwork was done at my dealer. It was being purchased under D plan so there was no negotiation necessary. The salesman that has been here since the place was built and my mom absolutely loves, showed her how to use everything and she has loved the car ever since.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Yes, my friend has rave reviews of the Salesman she purchased the car from and will be referring business to him whenever possible. It all worked out well. Glad for her.
Ref 3rd post up:
Well said, but I do not compare your situation of picking up a highly desirable car to the MB salesman's situation of picking up a specific car for a specific customer where he knew he was competing with another dealership on price. In your case, if the dealer with a highly desirable car in limited supply was willing to dealer trade to your dealership, more power to you. You are justified in charging what the market would bear for it.
IMO good salesmen get a lot of repeat business. The "bad" MB one in this story seems to like to burn bridges.
Well said, but I do not compare your situation of picking up a highly desirable car to the MB salesman's situation of picking up a specific car for a specific customer where he knew he was competing with another dealership on price. In your case, if the dealer with a highly desirable car in limited supply was willing to dealer trade to your dealership, more power to you. You are justified in charging what the market would bear for it.
IMO good salesmen get a lot of repeat business. The "bad" MB one in this story seems to like to burn bridges.
Last edited:
I still laugh about the story a friend told about the guy who negotiated with a green pea on a hot selling Mazdaspeed. The dealer was asking MSRP but the green pea hadn't received the memo- and inked a deal that was over $1000 less than the going market price for that model. The sales manager was going to honor the deal but prior to delivery the buyer calls up and tells the SM that he's talked with some "expert" friends and he's decided that the dealer is screwing him over; he wants an even better price or the deal is off. Needless to say, the SM gladly agreed to ashcan the sales contract. After shopping the price a bit the shrewd buyer returned expecting the SM to honor the original deal- and became irate when the SM refused.
Poetic justice.
Poetic justice.
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO good salesmen get a lot of repeat business. The "bad" MB one in this story seems to like to burn bridges.
My parents know a Subaru salesman and I follow his co-worker on Instagram - they work at the same dealership and they are both passionate about the product and care about their customers. From my days working at a dealership 10-11 years ago, I still see some of those salespeople there when I stop if I need some Honda stuff. Good salespeople aren't there hustling people in the showroom or the lot, they work by referral or word of mouth.
I had a chat with an Uber driver who used to be a salesman at one of the former Del Grande dealerships in the Bay Area. He told me there was quite a bit of shady stuff happening, he left because of the drama going on. Usually, if there is drama at the top of a dealership group, it involves adultery, the GM/GSM fudging the books or not hitting targets or some other scandal. Turned out the head of Del Grande was cheating on his wife and also holding back pay to his employees. Kinda the same thing that happened to Michael Stead, also in the Bay Area. Stead had a small empire on Mercedes, Cadillac, Porsche, GMC and Ford in the suburbs of Oakland.
IMO good salesmen get a lot of repeat business. The "bad" MB one in this story seems to like to burn bridges.
My parents know a Subaru salesman and I follow his co-worker on Instagram - they work at the same dealership and they are both passionate about the product and care about their customers. From my days working at a dealership 10-11 years ago, I still see some of those salespeople there when I stop if I need some Honda stuff. Good salespeople aren't there hustling people in the showroom or the lot, they work by referral or word of mouth.
I had a chat with an Uber driver who used to be a salesman at one of the former Del Grande dealerships in the Bay Area. He told me there was quite a bit of shady stuff happening, he left because of the drama going on. Usually, if there is drama at the top of a dealership group, it involves adultery, the GM/GSM fudging the books or not hitting targets or some other scandal. Turned out the head of Del Grande was cheating on his wife and also holding back pay to his employees. Kinda the same thing that happened to Michael Stead, also in the Bay Area. Stead had a small empire on Mercedes, Cadillac, Porsche, GMC and Ford in the suburbs of Oakland.
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
Most car salesmen have ethics similar to any other con man.
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
Most car salesmen have ethics similar to any other con man.
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
Most car salesmen have ethics similar to any other con man.
Insinuate that I am a con man all you want, I am being reduced to defending common sense because it appears that some don't understand basic principles of business and refuse to lay responsibility at the feet of someone for committing to actions of their own admitted volition.
My main issue was with the fact that Mercedes Benz confiscated a vehicle legally owned by one dealership so it could be sold at another dealership because a customer stomped their feet over not wanting to pay the price to buy it from the dealership that took the initiative to take legal posession of it.
Let me set up a scenario for you, you walk into a car dealership wanting one specific vehicle and there is literally only one available anywhere and YOU REFUSE to pay the price to buy it from who has it and wishes to retain it so that THEY can sell it. So the salesman at the dealership who does not have the car say, "I don't have the car you want and I can't get it BUT IF I HAD IT I would sell it to you for $X,xxx.xx less than who does have it!" Would you feel like that is a stupid thing to say?
This is not a matter of ethics as much as it is proprietary, MB has an interest in making sure their products and services get sold but a dealership purchases the products to sell them on their terms agreed upon by the dealership and the customer. That is common business practice, I am certain MB agrees with that because that is the business model they have used for decades.
All of this was brought on because a customer wanted to make things as difficult as possible for themselves and the businesses involved through the customer's actions only to make a big deal of the circumstances they created for themselves. Due to the fact that this is a salesman bashing thread apparently the customer MUST be given the benefit of the doubt without question and the salesman being bashed must be demonized.
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
IMO the fact you consider it ethical says a lot more about you than it does about the person you call ignorant. Apparently Mercedes feels the same way.
Most car salesmen have ethics similar to any other con man.
Insinuate that I am a con man all you want, I am being reduced to defending common sense because it appears that some don't understand basic principles of business and refuse to lay responsibility at the feet of someone for committing to actions of their own admitted volition.
My main issue was with the fact that Mercedes Benz confiscated a vehicle legally owned by one dealership so it could be sold at another dealership because a customer stomped their feet over not wanting to pay the price to buy it from the dealership that took the initiative to take legal posession of it.
Let me set up a scenario for you, you walk into a car dealership wanting one specific vehicle and there is literally only one available anywhere and YOU REFUSE to pay the price to buy it from who has it and wishes to retain it so that THEY can sell it. So the salesman at the dealership who does not have the car say, "I don't have the car you want and I can't get it BUT IF I HAD IT I would sell it to you for $X,xxx.xx less than who does have it!" Would you feel like that is a stupid thing to say?
This is not a matter of ethics as much as it is proprietary, MB has an interest in making sure their products and services get sold but a dealership purchases the products to sell them on their terms agreed upon by the dealership and the customer. That is common business practice, I am certain MB agrees with that because that is the business model they have used for decades.
All of this was brought on because a customer wanted to make things as difficult as possible for themselves and the businesses involved through the customer's actions only to make a big deal of the circumstances they created for themselves. Due to the fact that this is a salesman bashing thread apparently the customer MUST be given the benefit of the doubt without question and the salesman being bashed must be demonized.
With all due respect, I'd say that there's a difference between doing business as usual and being ethical. Technically nothing illegal was done, it's just considered a dirty trick by the salesman and it backfired. The money belongs to the customer and the salesman was trying to get the most out of her. Normal business practice. The customer tried to pit two dealerships against each other to get the best price. As others seem to feel, this was a dirty trick by the salesman, but not illegal. This was an attempt by the salesman to either leverage the sale or find some other buyer who wants that particular model. Customer complained to corporate and was shopping another brand. So ultimately the leveraging of the consumer worked.
Originally Posted by Wolf359
With all due respect, I'd say that there's a difference between doing business as usual and being ethical. Technically nothing illegal was done, it's just considered a dirty trick by the salesman and it backfired. The money belongs to the customer and the salesman was trying to get the most out of her. Normal business practice. The customer tried to pit two dealerships against each other to get the best price. As others seem to feel, this was a dirty trick by the salesman, but not illegal. This was an attempt by the salesman to either leverage the sale or find some other buyer who wants that particular model. Customer complained to corporate and was shopping another brand. So ultimately the leveraging of the consumer worked.
The money belongs to the customer but the car legally belonged to the dealership employing the "bad salesman" not to Mercedes Benz. I truly hope that the "bad salesman" and his dealership were compensated by MB as a result of MB's confiscation of a vehicle the dealership legally owned.
Let me give you an example of something I was involved in that is directly related. I had a customer last year that contacted me about getting a specific Subaru Ascent, in a particular color combination and option package. There was only one vehicle available within any reasonable distance to acquire such a vehicle. He talked me up about how he was working with other dealerships to get the "best price" and in my "unethical con man" business mind what it came down to was who was going to be the one to acquire the vehicle for him because like I keep saying, you can't sell what you don't have an cannot acquire otherwise. So this guy is going on and on about getting the "best price" with me and I relate to him that the priority is him making a commitment to purchase first and foremost because if you are not committed to purchasing the price doesn't matter. You can talk up a car salesman, corporate representative, etc all you want but in the instance where there is only ONE specific vehicle available obtaining the vehicle is the mandate to make the sale.
So after the customer came to an understanding of what I would work with him to accomplish I put in a call to the dealership to work out the acquisition. I have worked with them before and know that they have two managers that work with vehicle acquisitions. I speak to one of them and he is 100% fine with trading me the vehicle but, as per the business code, he has to make sure that it is available to be traded. He lets me know after a brief hold that someone else traded for the car with the other manager just before I called. In the instance this happens, in dealing with Subaru, the dealership acquiring the vehicle has legal possession of the vehicle as soon as the dealership ceding the vehicle approves the transaction. Perhaps Mercedes Benz is different in how they do things nowadays, I cannot say for certain.
Did I cry foul? Did I contact Subaru at the corporate level and pitch a fit saying that I was going to do my business with another brand if they didn't give me possession of the vehicle that I had been seeking to acquire? NO! I recognized that this is just the nature of the business, it is not illegal, it is not unethical. Perhaps some other salesperson outmaneuvered me and sold that vehicle to my customer? Perhaps some completely unrelated circumstance prevailed? All I know is that I had been deprived of a vehicle to sell and that someone else was going to sell that vehicle. Perhaps it was an unethical salesperson and they ended up selling that car to my customer at a much higher price that I would have, perhaps the customer complained to Subaru corporate and pleaded to buy the vehicle from me and me alone, perhaps the salesperson who sold the car is now selling MB vehicles and was involved in the "unethical" circumstance we're discussing.
With all due respect, I'd say that there's a difference between doing business as usual and being ethical. Technically nothing illegal was done, it's just considered a dirty trick by the salesman and it backfired. The money belongs to the customer and the salesman was trying to get the most out of her. Normal business practice. The customer tried to pit two dealerships against each other to get the best price. As others seem to feel, this was a dirty trick by the salesman, but not illegal. This was an attempt by the salesman to either leverage the sale or find some other buyer who wants that particular model. Customer complained to corporate and was shopping another brand. So ultimately the leveraging of the consumer worked.
The money belongs to the customer but the car legally belonged to the dealership employing the "bad salesman" not to Mercedes Benz. I truly hope that the "bad salesman" and his dealership were compensated by MB as a result of MB's confiscation of a vehicle the dealership legally owned.
Let me give you an example of something I was involved in that is directly related. I had a customer last year that contacted me about getting a specific Subaru Ascent, in a particular color combination and option package. There was only one vehicle available within any reasonable distance to acquire such a vehicle. He talked me up about how he was working with other dealerships to get the "best price" and in my "unethical con man" business mind what it came down to was who was going to be the one to acquire the vehicle for him because like I keep saying, you can't sell what you don't have an cannot acquire otherwise. So this guy is going on and on about getting the "best price" with me and I relate to him that the priority is him making a commitment to purchase first and foremost because if you are not committed to purchasing the price doesn't matter. You can talk up a car salesman, corporate representative, etc all you want but in the instance where there is only ONE specific vehicle available obtaining the vehicle is the mandate to make the sale.
So after the customer came to an understanding of what I would work with him to accomplish I put in a call to the dealership to work out the acquisition. I have worked with them before and know that they have two managers that work with vehicle acquisitions. I speak to one of them and he is 100% fine with trading me the vehicle but, as per the business code, he has to make sure that it is available to be traded. He lets me know after a brief hold that someone else traded for the car with the other manager just before I called. In the instance this happens, in dealing with Subaru, the dealership acquiring the vehicle has legal possession of the vehicle as soon as the dealership ceding the vehicle approves the transaction. Perhaps Mercedes Benz is different in how they do things nowadays, I cannot say for certain.
Did I cry foul? Did I contact Subaru at the corporate level and pitch a fit saying that I was going to do my business with another brand if they didn't give me possession of the vehicle that I had been seeking to acquire? NO! I recognized that this is just the nature of the business, it is not illegal, it is not unethical. Perhaps some other salesperson outmaneuvered me and sold that vehicle to my customer? Perhaps some completely unrelated circumstance prevailed? All I know is that I had been deprived of a vehicle to sell and that someone else was going to sell that vehicle. Perhaps it was an unethical salesperson and they ended up selling that car to my customer at a much higher price that I would have, perhaps the customer complained to Subaru corporate and pleaded to buy the vehicle from me and me alone, perhaps the salesperson who sold the car is now selling MB vehicles and was involved in the "unethical" circumstance we're discussing.
The line between ethical and unethical can be a little blurry, especially when you're too close to the deal and just look at it as a business transaction. It basically involves intent. If you're doing it as the normal course of business, that's one thing, but if your intent is to do an end run around another dealer because you know that by doing so you're going to block out another dealer and you'll end up making the sale, then that's why everyone here is saying it's unethical. I will agree that there's some slight fault with the customer in their method, when you're looking for the best deal, you can't be stuck on one particular configuration. In deal hunting, you can't let too many people know about it otherwise someone else will try to snap up the deal.
In the scenario you've outline, as the salesperson, you don't have any basis to complain, in that business someone outmaneuvered you. The customer is free to complain anytime, they're not bound by the same set of rules/ethics that you would expect a business to adhere to. Maybe MB called up that dealer and asked if they really had a customer for that car. If they didn't maybe they thought it was best to sell it to that one customer instead of them going to another brand. Cars after all are commodities even though there are many variations.
In the scenario you've outline, as the salesperson, you don't have any basis to complain, in that business someone outmaneuvered you. The customer is free to complain anytime, they're not bound by the same set of rules/ethics that you would expect a business to adhere to. Maybe MB called up that dealer and asked if they really had a customer for that car. If they didn't maybe they thought it was best to sell it to that one customer instead of them going to another brand. Cars after all are commodities even though there are many variations.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 5,294
I was on the customer end of one of these dealerships trade vehicles deals in June when shopping trucks. At the time, I had very narrow and specific wants on layout and options of either a Chev Colorado or GMC Canyon. At the same dealership we'd bought her GMC Terrain from two months prior, they found one, count 'em one GMC Canyon setup how I wanted and it was three states away to the south. They wanted me to sign and commit to a deal with a price above my liking, with the caveat that it could come in lower but they don't even know of the other dealer will trade them plus transporter expense is only estimated. I chose to walk away, which I'm glad I did not because of that experience but because I found out I could get a new full size truck for less money than that a mid-size, given the incentives and discounts going on at that particular window in time. At the time I walked I was slightly irked because I felt like since we'd just bought a new car from them couple months before, and because we remained in a very good financial position to buy again, that they simply could have offered a better deal than they did at that time. But again, every time I see a Colorado or Canyon on the road I think to myself that I'm glad that deal fell through and I was able to go big instead.
Originally Posted by Ignatius
Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I don't think you read the story correctly. Dealer A offered a better price than Dealer B on a vehicle located at Dealer C. Because Dealer B knew that Dealer A might offer a better price they arranged to have the car delivered to them from Dealer C. Effectively performing an end-run around the customer. That's shady.
Now it's a completely different story if the customer and Dealer B agreed on a price, and then the Dealer A got involved after the fact after which the customer felt she was entitled to the price by Dealer A.
The difficult thing for me is judging whether or not the salesman is being honest. I don't have the time nor the patience to BS around. Years ago my wife was looking at a replacement for her SLK and we wandered onto a Mercedes lot to look at a specific vehicle. The salesperson was a new hire from a Cadillac dealer in FLA. He was cordial et al, but as soon as we started talking numbers his demeanor changed. He went full on aggressive "sales-mode". I was like, "Relax son this is Mercedes Benz not Cadillac and we're going to think about it". We eventually end up with the car at the price we wanted with the assistance of another salesperson (Older guy). We found out that the new guy was no longer at the dealership about 4 months later.
That is EXACTLY what happened, thanks for simplifying. And i have no issue with Salesmen, far from it since i was one for some time and my overall experience with vehicle salesmen has been positive. But my friend is far from pretentious like Ignatius states or thinks, nor is my agreeing to disagree a cop out. It's more like, not wanting to participate in another 3 pages of this.
Here's the deal, if your friend the customer didn't start off with the intention of jacking the two dealerships around they could have just taken the better offer and bought the car in a simplified process without the other dealership knowing. According to you THEY CHOOSE to inform the "bad salesman" of what they intended to do with another dealership and frankly I credit the "bad salesman" for securing the vehicle before the other dealership did.
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I don't think you read the story correctly. Dealer A offered a better price than Dealer B on a vehicle located at Dealer C. Because Dealer B knew that Dealer A might offer a better price they arranged to have the car delivered to them from Dealer C. Effectively performing an end-run around the customer. That's shady.
Now it's a completely different story if the customer and Dealer B agreed on a price, and then the Dealer A got involved after the fact after which the customer felt she was entitled to the price by Dealer A.
The difficult thing for me is judging whether or not the salesman is being honest. I don't have the time nor the patience to BS around. Years ago my wife was looking at a replacement for her SLK and we wandered onto a Mercedes lot to look at a specific vehicle. The salesperson was a new hire from a Cadillac dealer in FLA. He was cordial et al, but as soon as we started talking numbers his demeanor changed. He went full on aggressive "sales-mode". I was like, "Relax son this is Mercedes Benz not Cadillac and we're going to think about it". We eventually end up with the car at the price we wanted with the assistance of another salesperson (Older guy). We found out that the new guy was no longer at the dealership about 4 months later.
That is EXACTLY what happened, thanks for simplifying. And i have no issue with Salesmen, far from it since i was one for some time and my overall experience with vehicle salesmen has been positive. But my friend is far from pretentious like Ignatius states or thinks, nor is my agreeing to disagree a cop out. It's more like, not wanting to participate in another 3 pages of this.
Here's the deal, if your friend the customer didn't start off with the intention of jacking the two dealerships around they could have just taken the better offer and bought the car in a simplified process without the other dealership knowing. According to you THEY CHOOSE to inform the "bad salesman" of what they intended to do with another dealership and frankly I credit the "bad salesman" for securing the vehicle before the other dealership did.
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
How did the "bad salesman" jack anyone around? They probably agreed on the sale price as a requisite to the vehicle acquisition, I would surmise that the customer made it clear that no matter what she was going to shop that price, and as a result the salesman/manager/dealership elected to acquire the car so that they could guarantee themselves the opportunity to sell said car which IS what they are in business to do.
If their intent was truly unethical, by the standards of what has been espoused in this thread, it is predicated by the fact of what the customer choose to tell this dealership. Namely that she wanted this one single car but refused to commit to purchase until she was arbitrarily satisfied by some conditions that some dealership might offer. That is wasting someone's time and livlihood with deliberate intent, that is jacking someone around by acting in bad faith.
The first priority is securing the vehicle, if there is no vehicle to be sold the price does not matter. I have seen too many deals fall apart due to a customer's insistence on "negotiation" and most often someone else who takes initiative ends up buying the car. The sense of urgency is usually lacking due to a sense of entitlement, that car is theirs until its not because their priority is having their arbitrary demands met on their terms not obtaining the car first and foremost.
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
How did the "bad salesman" jack anyone around? They probably agreed on the sale price as a requisite to the vehicle acquisition, I would surmise that the customer made it clear that no matter what she was going to shop that price, and as a result the salesman/manager/dealership elected to acquire the car so that they could guarantee themselves the opportunity to sell said car which IS what they are in business to do.
If their intent was truly unethical, by the standards of what has been espoused in this thread, it is predicated by the fact of what the customer choose to tell this dealership. Namely that she wanted this one single car but refused to commit to purchase until she was arbitrarily satisfied by some conditions that some dealership might offer. That is wasting someone's time and livlihood with deliberate intent, that is jacking someone around by acting in bad faith.
The first priority is securing the vehicle, if there is no vehicle to be sold the price does not matter. I have seen too many deals fall apart due to a customer's insistence on "negotiation" and most often someone else who takes initiative ends up buying the car. The sense of urgency is usually lacking due to a sense of entitlement, that car is theirs until its not because their priority is having their arbitrary demands met on their terms not obtaining the car first and foremost.
I wanted to say that I believe much of the frustration that people may have with my comments as well as my frustrations in feeling like I am being reduced to defending common sense are due to a refusal by some to acknowledge PREDICTABLE OUTCOMES.
Take for example something I absolutely hate hearing people say, the phrase "accidental pregnancy." Two people engage in sexual intercourse and "accidentally" get pregnant??? The last time I checked it has been known throughout the entirety of human existence that pregnancy is a predictable result of sexual intercourse and certainly no accident.
So don't be or even act surprised when you go into a car dealership and someone wants to sell you a car. If you lead them to believe that you even MIGHT buy a car from them don't be or even act surprised that they might do everything in their power to get you the car you expressed an interest in buying from them. Even if you tell them that you are going to go somewhere else to do the exact same thing with someone else that you did with them, don't be or even act surprised if they take the initiative to accomplish what needs to be accomplished to ensure that they are the one that gets the sale. It is a predictable result of YOUR actions, it is just as predictable as the fact that having sexual intercourse may result in pregnancy. Neither is guaranteed but both are predictable outcomes.
Take for example something I absolutely hate hearing people say, the phrase "accidental pregnancy." Two people engage in sexual intercourse and "accidentally" get pregnant??? The last time I checked it has been known throughout the entirety of human existence that pregnancy is a predictable result of sexual intercourse and certainly no accident.
So don't be or even act surprised when you go into a car dealership and someone wants to sell you a car. If you lead them to believe that you even MIGHT buy a car from them don't be or even act surprised that they might do everything in their power to get you the car you expressed an interest in buying from them. Even if you tell them that you are going to go somewhere else to do the exact same thing with someone else that you did with them, don't be or even act surprised if they take the initiative to accomplish what needs to be accomplished to ensure that they are the one that gets the sale. It is a predictable result of YOUR actions, it is just as predictable as the fact that having sexual intercourse may result in pregnancy. Neither is guaranteed but both are predictable outcomes.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Ignatius
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
How did the "bad salesman" jack anyone around? They probably agreed on the sale price as a requisite to the vehicle acquisition, I would surmise that the customer made it clear that no matter what she was going to shop that price, and as a result the salesman/manager/dealership elected to acquire the car so that they could guarantee themselves the opportunity to sell said car which IS what they are in business to do.
If their intent was truly unethical, by the standards of what has been espoused in this thread, it is predicated by the fact of what the customer choose to tell this dealership. Namely that she wanted this one single car but refused to commit to purchase until she was arbitrarily satisfied by some conditions that some dealership might offer. That is wasting someone's time and livlihood with deliberate intent, that is jacking someone around by acting in bad faith.
The first priority is securing the vehicle, if there is no vehicle to be sold the price does not matter. I have seen too many deals fall apart due to a customer's insistence on "negotiation" and most often someone else who takes initiative ends up buying the car. The sense of urgency is usually lacking due to a sense of entitlement, that car is theirs until its not because their priority is having their arbitrary demands met on their terms not obtaining the car first and foremost.
Nonsense. Consumer demands are only arbitrary to you the seller. Your goal is to make a profit by fulfilling customer demand. If you choose not to fulfill their demands then you are wasting your own time. IMO it sounds like you're annoyed with the process of selling cars so perhaps it's time for a career change.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Wow...Talk about being spiteful. That's some serious 9th grade mentality. So it's perfectly fine for salesperson to jack around customers but not the other way around? Tell you what if someone did that sort of BS in the BMW community that salesperson would be blacklisted in the BMW forums in no time.
How did the "bad salesman" jack anyone around? They probably agreed on the sale price as a requisite to the vehicle acquisition, I would surmise that the customer made it clear that no matter what she was going to shop that price, and as a result the salesman/manager/dealership elected to acquire the car so that they could guarantee themselves the opportunity to sell said car which IS what they are in business to do.
If their intent was truly unethical, by the standards of what has been espoused in this thread, it is predicated by the fact of what the customer choose to tell this dealership. Namely that she wanted this one single car but refused to commit to purchase until she was arbitrarily satisfied by some conditions that some dealership might offer. That is wasting someone's time and livlihood with deliberate intent, that is jacking someone around by acting in bad faith.
The first priority is securing the vehicle, if there is no vehicle to be sold the price does not matter. I have seen too many deals fall apart due to a customer's insistence on "negotiation" and most often someone else who takes initiative ends up buying the car. The sense of urgency is usually lacking due to a sense of entitlement, that car is theirs until its not because their priority is having their arbitrary demands met on their terms not obtaining the car first and foremost.
Nonsense. Consumer demands are only arbitrary to you the seller. Your goal is to make a profit by fulfilling customer demand. If you choose not to fulfill their demands then you are wasting your own time. IMO it sounds like you're annoyed with the process of selling cars so perhaps it's time for a career change.
Last edited:
- Status
