Dealers Closing
 

Bunch of Dodge Dealer closed up around Seattle.
Pierre who was trying to sell Challenger for $95k
Lynnwood who was about $75k
BBC who screwed me.
Chrysler came and removed cars....crazy.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Hey Mike, yeah I drove by Lynwwod Dodge on the way to Costco yesterday and wondered why all the cars had disappeared. They were the ones as you remember who wanted to sell a Black SRT8 for a little over MSRP. Never saw that sucker move and now it certainly has.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

I think Town & Country has it now...LOL
Wonder where the $95k Bill Pierre special went?

RE: Dealers Closing
 

You"re saying Bill Pierre and BBC both closed up shop? Not good... anyone else up in the Seattle area??

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Do you think it was from poor sales and they closed up or did Chrysler close them

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Both!!

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Geeee.....I wonder if "Market Pricing" played a part (if even just a small one) in some of the dealerships going away......

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Were these places strictly Dodge dealers or Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep? If they were just Dodge dealers, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Chrysler said several months ago that they were going to consolidate dealerships to handle either Chrysler and Dodge or all three brands. I know one place in San Antonio, Gunn Dodge, suddenly closed up shop and another down the street a ways that had been Mission Chrysler/Jeep has now become Mission Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Around here I would say it is 50/50 if they cover all 3 or just 2. Any new ones have been all 3. Also the bigger ones that had only sold 2 now have all 3. With alot of th3m going for 4 with KIA.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

The one in my hometown closed, but they first opened in 2004 and I never thought for a second that they would stay in business to begin with. The town was barely large enough to justify a GM and Ford dealership, and I doubt that having that fancy new building built was really practical when the other dealerships had much smaller, more practical sizes for years and did fine with what they had.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

It really is all about consolidating their dealerships to Chryler/Jeep/Dodge and not stand alones, all of which the three here is Seattle were. The dealership I have my SRT on order, they have recently moved from a stand alone, Dwayne Lanes Dodge, and moved under their Chrysler/Jeep dealership, Dwayne Lanes Dodge/Chryler/Jeep, a mile or so down the road. Now if they can only survive merger talks. Long live the MOPAR Gang!

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Well frankly, I don't see why a dealership shouldn't be allowed to make their own call on that. For example, I think it would be an extremely stupid idea to threaten a dealership where we have bought a couple cars from that has been in business since 1914! For those of you who don't know this, that predates Jeep and Chrysler. Now they sell Dodge and Chrysler; however, they do not sell Jeep and considering how popular they are and how fast they sold Challengers, Chrysler would be foolish to threaten to shut them down, just because they do not believe it would be in their own best interest to sell Jeeps as well. It would be a blow to Dodge heritage to threaten to shut down an original Dodge dealership.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

A dealer told me that it's just a way of "standardizing" the dealer network...of course this dealer was already a Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealership.....

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Well, I can understand that. I just don't think it is a wise strategy is all. Some areas that have a lot of snow and mountains are probably not going to be looking at owning many Chryslers as much as they would want to have Jeeps and Dodges. Some areas that are paved and in warm climates, year-around are likely not to need as many Jeep dealers. I trust the owners of the dealership more than I trust the corporate level. It's simple logic that if a dealer knew there was a market for these other models in their area, who wouldn't go ahead and offer these models anyways. I believe the ones that don't have them choose not to have them because they have figured out that there is insufficient demand to justify offering it.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Find this on the NADA site....

NADA Estimates 700 New Car Dealerships Will Shut Down In 2008
The Financiapocalypse is threatening to nearly double new car showrooms expected to go out of business in 2008 versus 2007 like Bill Heard Chevrolet. The National Automobile Dealer's Association estimates as many as 700 will go under before the ball drops in Times Square in just over two months. Dealers are being squeezed by reduced sales on one end and a lack of cost-effective financing for floor plans and inventory on the other. The increase in closures presents Detroit automakers with something of a crisitunity: Burdened with excess dealer capacity, Ford, Chrysler and GM could all stand to shed several hundred showrooms apiece. But with each closure, fewer cars get sold, and the Detroit Three can't afford to lose a single sale right now.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

This is why I think this is a bad idea.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

While I see what you are saying RLSH in needing every sale, its the ability to be effective and effecient in the process. Get this on Toyota vs GM. While GM continues to sell more cars, they do so with many more dealerships. Sure Toyota is feeling the pinch right now and wont take over the number one slot from GM, but they still are better at selling than GM.

As of Aug 1st:
GM maintained 6,776 Dealers and had sold 1,822,575 vehicles, or about 269 /dealer
Toyota maintained 1,234 dealers and had sold 1,437,509 vehicles, or about 1,165/dealer

So while GM/Ford/Chryler need every sale, building, marketing , and selling high quality vehicles has to be done more effectively by the three.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Apparently Lithia in Wenatchee has been sold to another dealership...

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Yes; however, there is a factor that has not been taken into consideration. Part of the reason why GM has so many dealerships is because they also have them located into more rural areas. The advantage of keeping them in the rural areas is it maintains a loyal customer base. Even if people purchase their GM product at a larger dealership, they will choose one over a Toyota simply because they have a dealership in town. Believe me, I've studied this. As soon as GM leaves the town, they will say, "If GM doesn't care enough about me, I'll go buy a Toyota instead." The problem isn't the dealerships, it is the models they have produced. Even though GM has some of the best models currently on the market. Years of horrible efforts such as the FWD Grand Ams, Malibu (all before this model), Alero, Achieva, Cutlass Calasis, Cutlass Ciera, FWD Cutlass Supreme, Lumina, Aurora, Sunbird, Sunfire, Cavalier, and quality problems in their truck line is why GM is having trouble bouncing back.

For Chrysler not educating their customers about the need to flush the transmission fluid every 30K and inform them about only using their transmission fluid was the first strike. The head issues with the early Neon based engines and 2.7L oil sludge problem was the second strike. The way Daimler destroyed their product line-up is the third strike.

For Ford, the problems they had for years with the Essex engine, AXOD, SHO V8, 2.5L, teething issues of the Modular, drop in Cologne quality in the SOHC transfer destroyed their reputation for quality. Letting cars like the Taurus which were good when they first came out, turn into a car only fleets wanted destroyed their image. Keeping the Crown Vic forever without updating did this as well. Putting a bad effort in the Contour didn't help.

Toyota's time is coming when their mistakes will start erode their reputation.

RE: Dealers Closing
 

It’s amazing to he how the “Big Three” just don’t seem to be listening to the marketplace…just look at all the excitement and the spotlight the new Challenger bought to Chrysler….and the same with the Camaro/GM (there’s no accounting for taste), and even the new models of the Mustang, for Ford…………..Maybe if Detroit offered what the consumer really wanted they wouldn't be in the position they are in today….Now, I realize that the three vehicles above could be considered “limited” in their appeal when judged against the overall marketplace….but it’s a start…..Detroit, open up your ears and start offering what people want…not what you want to build (if it’s not already to late)

RE: Dealers Closing
 

Well, the problem is distinguishing what people like and what they will buy. Tons of enthusiants were excited over the G8 replacing the Grand Prix, yet sales are far fewer than the long running Grand Prix. The other issue is GM has finally managed to match much of their competition and in some cases set the benchmark. The new Malibu is the most fuel efficient of the non-hybrid segment of the enormous mid-sized car segment, finally has a desirable design on the interior and is no uglier on the exterior than the top players, the issue is after 11 years of having one of the worst offerings in that segment, people are not about to pass up on a Japanese model that they have grown to trust for something that appears that it might be a bit better out of fear of being burned again. That is what GM has to overcome and it is going to take time. They have to put an effort like what they put into the Malibu into all models before people begin to think of GM in a more positive light.

Another thing is GM left some of these segments because they were unprofitable and were hurting other model sales. The Camaro & Firebird sales combined were less than half of the sales of the Mustang, and the Camaro was damaging the sales of the Corvette as they featured the same engine with the same output despite their attempts to try to cover that up. Now what GM should have done instead of completely dropping the car is they should have looked at the Camaro and discovered why people were buying the slower & less of a good deal Mustang over the Camaro. The issue I believe was the factor was that the cars were very dated in comfort, ride quality, and interior technology. After reading reviews and looking at photos, the F-cars looked very generic compared to the Mustang. The seats looked like they hadn't changed since the 80s. The dash looked uninspiring. The colors & tones of certain things such as the radio buttons were a better fit for Buick than for a sporty car. The gauge cluster was unspiring, lacked a performance image, and was just plain dull. The exterior hadn't changed in forever and needed to be changed. The ride quality was generally an area that was criticized as well. These things might sound petty and "why would a muscle car enthusiast care about any of this all that matters is performance" is a normal response. The truth is the people who bought the Camaro & Firebird were the type of people who didn't care about these things and were GM fans, but the people who bought the Mustang were the people who cared about these elements. What GM should have done instead of dropping both cars is they should have dropped the Camaro as it was the one threatening the Corvette and kept the Firebird going. This would have been a halo car for Pontiac and being that not all Pontiac dealers are Chevrolet dealers and not all Chevrolet dealers are Pontiac dealers would have helped to prevent cannibalizing sales of the Vette. This way all their marketing and R&D would go into one car where they could try to take on Fords only offering. Although it is true that they would loose some sales of Camaro fans, most would transfer over, and frankly Pontiac needed the Firebird more than Chevrolet needed the Camaro.

Another thing we must remember is the one model cannot make a manufacturer succeed. Ford has had their Mustang and F-series for years and they are not doing all that well. It takes a the whole fleet to make it work.