Uh-oh GM Fail

[SVT666]

Nearly 30 percent of GM?s 60-day money-back participants returned cars
11/24/2009, 7:38 AMBY MARK KLEIS


Since GM launched its marketing program that offered buyers the ability to take a special $500 cash incentive or be given the option to return the vehicle within 60 days, GM has sold 222,000 vehicles. Of the 222,000 vehicles sold, 653 customers opted for the money-back guarantee ability over the cash incentive, and of those 193 have returned their vehicles for their money back.

GM?s heavily advertised campaign has generated significant media buzz and blended well with its simultaneous campaign, ?May the best car win.?

What wasn?t heavily advertised however was the fact that the money-back guarantee program was only available for buyers that opted out of an optional $500 discount from the purchase price.

The $500 incentive returned a 99.7% take rate, with only 653 customers choosing the added security of the money-back guarantee over the extra cash. Of the 653 who opted for the ability to return their new GM vehicles for no charge, 193 handed the keys back in and walked away with their money back.

GM?s president of global product engineering, Mark Reuss, said, ?In several cases, returning customers traded up to another GM vehicle that has more features than the one originally purchased.?

Reuss also explained that GM has used this opportunity to have GM executives reach out to each returning customer with a personal phone call, asking for feedback. Reuss said that the calls provided GM with the ?best unfiltered consumer feedback? GM has ever obtained.

The original program has been extended though January 4, 2010.

[ifcar]

This is bad? Two thirds of the people who spent $500 because they weren't sure whether they wanted to keep their cars DIDN'T turn them back in, and most people didn't even think they'd have to worry about it. That's "fail"?

[giant_mtb]

.00087% of those 222,000 cars sold were returned.

Fail?  I disagree.

[SVT666]

30% returned their cars.  That's brutal.

[MX793]

30% returned their cars.  That's brutal.

30% of the very few who opted to even participate in the program.  The vast majority of buyers took the $500 discount instead and were committed to buying the car.  Odds are, those few that opted for the money-back deal instead of the $500 discount were mostly those who were largely uncertain about the vehicle to begin with and basically used the money-back option as an extended test drive.

[ifcar]

30% of the very few who opted to even participate in the program.  The vast majority of buyers took the $500 discount instead and were committed to buying the car.  Odds are, those few that opted for the money-back deal instead of the $500 discount were mostly those who were largely uncertain about the vehicle to begin with and basically used the money-back option as an extended test drive.

Expensive test drive -- they had to make something like two car payments.

[MX793]

Expensive test drive -- they had to make something like two car payments.

That assumes they kept it the full 60 days.  For all anybody knows, some may have returned it after a couple of weeks.

Also, it's a money back deal.  I presume that means they'd be reimbursed when they return it?

[565]

Expensive test drive -- they had to make something like two car payments.

But don't they get all their money back in the end?

If I had more time, I'd totally go there, buy a new Z06 or something.  Have fun with it for 60 days, burn alot of rubber.  Get all my money back.

Or another scenario.  I'm going to florida with family and friends for thanks giving break.  I go buy a Tahoe.  Drive down to florida and back, put alot of miles on the car,  return it to GM.

Sounds like an awesome plan.  Someone tell me why more people aren't doing this free joyride thing?
Other than something stupid like conscience.

[Payman]

I read a few days ago that there were only 7 or 8 returns thus far. In any case, this program has been pretty successful for GM. Over 222,000 cars sold during the program and less (maybe much less) than .001% return rate. I bet that's better than some car companies with no such program in place.

[Vinsanity]

But don't they get all their money back in the end?

If I had more time, I'd totally go there, buy a new Z06 or something.  Have fun with it for 60 days, burn alot of rubber.  Get all my money back.

Or another scenario.  I'm going to florida with family and friends for thanks giving break.  I go buy a Tahoe.  Drive down to florida and back, put alot of miles on the car,  return it to GM.

Sounds like an awesome plan.  Someone tell me why more people aren't doing this free joyride thing?
Other than something stupid like conscience.

Iffy's probably referring to the $500 opportunity cost. That's like one car payment on a $25k loan.

There's probably a few strings attached to the money back guarantee for sure. And I don't know if certain cars like the Z06 might be excluded.

[Payman]

Iffy's probably referring to the $500 opportunity cost. That's like one car payment on a $25k loan.

There's probably a few strings attached to the money back guarantee for sure. And I don't know if certain cars like the Z06 might be excluded.

Don't forget the typical $500 administration fee, dealer prep fee, delivery, and other charges when you sign on the dotted line that you probably don't get back.

[ifcar]

Don't forget the typical $500 administration fee, dealer prep fee, delivery, and other charges when you sign on the dotted line that you probably don't get back.

There are indeed a bunch of fees, and other restrictions:

http://consumereducation.suite101.com/article.cfm/60day_general_motors_car_return_policy_offer

[Payman]

This is a biggie:

"If a trade-in vehicle was involved, the trade-in will not be available to be returned to the customer."

[sportyaccordy]

So GM takes these cars back and loses a ton of money selling them used... and who gets to make up the gap? Thank you, *****

[Payman]

So GM takes these cars back and loses a ton of money selling them used... and who gets to make up the gap? Thank you, *****

Say the sticker price is $20,000, and with rebates and incentives, (but not the $500 option), he pays $17,500. He returns the car, and gets $17,500 back. GM reimburses the dealer for the $17,500, who then sells the slightly used car for $2500 off sticker... $17,500. Plus the dealer kept all the assocated charges, the admin fee, dealer prep, etc. I don't think any losses are anything significant.

[Minpin]

30% returned their cars.  That's brutal.

You misread the stats. Whoever wrote this is an obvious anti-GM troll. It's not 30% of all cars sold, it's 30% of the 653 out of 222,000 who opted for this program over the cash. Don't just read the headlines.....

[SVT666]

You misread the stats. Whoever wrote this is an obvious anti-GM troll. It's not 30% of all cars sold, it's 30% of the 653 out of 222,000 who opted for this program over the cash. Don't just read the headlines.....

The reason I said it's FAIL, is because of the headlines.  30% of buyers returned their cars, even though it was only 30% of 0.3% of all buyers.  It doesn't matter what the actual numbers is, it's the headlines that matter because that's all 99% of people read.

[Minpin]

The reason I said it's FAIL, is because of the headlines.  30% of buyers returned their cars, even though it was only 30% of 0.3% of all buyers.  It doesn't matter what the actual numbers is, it's the headlines that matter because that's all 99% of people read.

Ya ok.

[SVT666]

Ya ok.

I can't tell if you agree with me, or if you are being sarcastic.

[CALL_911]

You misread the stats. Whoever wrote this is an obvious anti-GM troll. It's not 30% of all cars sold, it's 30% of the 653 out of 222,000 who opted for this program over the cash. Don't just read the headlines.....

No kidding, this thread is stupid.

[giant_mtb]

The reason I said it's FAIL, is because of the headlines.  30% of buyers returned their cars, even though it was only 30% of 0.3% of all buyers.  It doesn't matter what the actual numbers is, it's the headlines that matter because that's all 99% of people read.

So it's a failure on GM's part because some doucherocket is manipulating the situation and trying to make GM sound bad when really it isn't a big fucking deal...?

[SVT666]

So it's a failure on GM's part because some doucherocket is manipulating the situation and trying to make GM sound bad when really it isn't a big fucking deal...?

It's a fail on GM's part because they had to see stuff like this coming.

[ifcar]

It's a fail on GM's part because they had to see stuff like this coming.

Stuff like what?

[GoCougs]

Regarding the program itself, suffice it to say that a program like this by definition lends itself to the indecisive, so the target return rate (i.e., the "success" rate) was sure to be not small.

Regarding the program in general, it has contributed to sales to some extent both by getting people in the door and by elevating goodwill of the customer base in general (albeit hard to quantify).

In short, HEMI666 here paid attention to the headlines, not the data or context, and got has thus gotten rightly called out.

[WookieOnRitalin]

It's a fail on GM's part because they had to see stuff like this coming.

Hemi. It is completely possible to turn even the best of news and make a negative spin on it. Case and point, in April 2006, the media spun a study published in the British Medical Journal. The headlines read, "Fish Oil Supplements Have No Effect on Heart Disease or Cancer."

What they were using as the basis for this claim was a quote stating, "Long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fats do not have a clear effect on total mortality, combined with cardiovascular events or cancer."

When asked later, the doctor who did the actual study on Fish oil supplementation had this to say, "We did not report that long chain omega-3 does not offer any protection from heart disease and that omega-3 fats have no effect on total mortality, combined cardiovascular events, or cancer OR that omega 3 fats are no benefit. This is not what we found or what we reported."

The study actually found looking through the data that Fish oil supplementation reduced total mortality by 13 percent in study participants.

So the media, took a piece of the study, misquoted it, and then spun it. What are the chances are that there are powers around that are trying to totally discredit the advantage of fish oil supplementation? By doing so, they take a positive study and reversed the actual conclusions of the study to serve a specific agenda.

This happens all the time in a variety of fields and subjects. One of my favorite quotes is from Babylon 5 (yes, I am a nerd) and it goes, "Understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth."

I do not know how it happens, but apparently as you get older and more concerned about the world you become more ingrained in your opinions. Apparently, those opinions/bias are more important to a person than embracing reality. I guess those opinions give you a sense of purpose/confidence/belonging. If something were to discredit that opinion/bias, people are more inclined to try to discredit the disceditors in turn. "Oh well, they do not know what they are talking about. They are wrong. I know better."

Perhaps it becomes a part of someone's identity as an individual. Without that confidence in one's self, they might have an identity crisis. If you were told all your life that black people were evil, murdering thieves, then that is what you might end up believing. Then suddenly, someone tells you that you are wrong. Black people are people with the same rights and freedoms that you have. They are your equal. This seems contradictory to the previous statement that all black people are evil, murdering thieves. Suddenly, you have telling you that you have been wrong all your life. What you believe is wrong. That individual might equate that into the fact that he or she is wrong. That is a difficult concept to accept for someone. So what he or she might do in response is go out to prove that black people are venomous, murdering creatures who do not have respect for other people.

You can take this and put it in the context for a multitude of positions including the opinion that gay people are leading to the destruction of the social-moral order. Ignoring the fact that homosexuals have greatly contributed to society for thousands of years. Got a problem? Blame it on someone else. Seems to be an American tradition. It's the government or the Jews or the immigrants or the minorities.

Anything can be spun. The press can spin anything it likes. Any person who is educated should know better. Behind every line of text is subtext. Some of the leading authorities in any media outlet can be proven to be hypocritical ESPECIALLY most car magazines.

The truth is out there. You just have to go out and discover it for yourself. Do not let someone else convince you that something is true or not. I do not like Toyotas. I base that opinion on the fact that I do not like their styling and driving Camrys, Corollas, Matrices, Avalons, Echoes, xA, xB, and xDs have been some of the dullest experiences in my life. On the flip side, I think the that Rav4 and the tC are excellent vehicles that have a lot of positives. Within an opinion, I guess there is room for maneuvering. If anything, I would love Toyota to prove me wrong. But then again, I am no expert and I also have no right to tell someone that their Toyota is a piece of garbage or that they are a dull person because they bought a dull car (in my eyes). Again, there is always subtext.

I guess I could conclude that the truth is a relative thing. I know of only two universal truths. Gravity and death. You are and will become a victim to both. It is a reality that will exist now until the end of time. Outside of that, you have to deal with the opinions/bias of the public at large who will take the truth and corrupt it to serve their own personal needs.  

[Catman]

 

[Raza]

I guess I could conclude that the truth is a relative thing. I know of only two universal truths. Gravity and death. You are and will become a victim to both. It is a reality that will exist now until the end of time. Outside of that, you have to deal with the opinions/bias of the public at large who will take the truth and corrupt it to serve their own personal needs.  

I accept neither of those things.

[J86]

Gravity...always keepin' ya down...

[AutobahnSHO]

I'm actually surprised that the return rate wasn't higher.
BUT, I guess once you have money invested it would be silly to throw away all the fees and whatnot..

[the Teuton]

What the headline should have read as: "30 percent of indecisive car buyers are indecisive."