5 ms·

$19/month gets me 2-3 dealers competing, and $49/month gets me 3-5 dealers competing. I think, at the very least, the 2 values should not have a chance of bein

by sev 16y ago

$19/month gets me 2-3 dealers competing, and $49/month gets me 3-5 dealers competing. I think, at the very least, the 2 values should not have a chance of being equal. The $19/month agreement gets a better deal even, because 1/2 the time they get to receive their maximum # of dealers (assuming equal probabilities) and the $49/month one gets their max only 1/3 of the time. And even they can receive their minimum which would be the max of the lower level plan! That's annoying. Changing it to something like: $19/month 2-4 dealers competing, and $49/month 5-7 dealers competing makes more sense.

myoung8 16y ago
That's assuming that you can actually get 5-7 dealers to compete :) There are few things to take into account: 1. We're working with real dealers behind the scenes, calling them if we have to. We don't use automated systems (not because it's impossible, but because it leads to a poor consumer experience). So there's a cost aspect to it. 2. Since dealers can see each others' offers, there's some competitive dynamics at play here too. The nth dealer to join often thinks that s/he has a worse chance of winning the deal because other dealers got there first. The effect varies proportionally (possibly exponentially) with the number of dealers participating. We don't want to promise 5-7 dealers if we can only realistically get 3-5. 3. We split-tested the value propositions for our plans, especially around # of dealers. What we've got now seems to work pretty well in terms of driving people to pick the plan we want them to pick (Plus). 4. We've found that with 3-5 dealers, buyers generally reach the local (in terms of geography) minimum w.r.t to the price of the car. Adding another 2 dealers doesn't get the buyer much and only wastes the dealers' time. That said, we will continue to monitor this and test it. Thanks for your feedback!
- mhb 16y ago
  The nth dealer to join often thinks that s/he has a worse chance of winning the deal because other dealers got there first Maybe you do this, but would it work better if you told them that you wouldn't provide the customer with the offers before some time (day or two?)?

by sev 16y ago

myoung8 16y ago

That's assuming that you can actually get 5-7 dealers to compete :) There are few things to take into account: 1. We're working with real dealers behind the scenes, calling them if we have to. We don't use automated systems (not because it's impossible, but because it leads to a poor consumer experience). So there's a cost aspect to it. 2. Since dealers can see each others' offers, there's some competitive dynamics at play here too. The nth dealer to join often thinks that s/he has a worse chance of winning the deal because other dealers got there first. The effect varies proportionally (possibly exponentially) with the number of dealers participating. We don't want to promise 5-7 dealers if we can only realistically get 3-5. 3. We split-tested the value propositions for our plans, especially around # of dealers. What we've got now seems to work pretty well in terms of driving people to pick the plan we want them to pick (Plus). 4. We've found that with 3-5 dealers, buyers generally reach the local (in terms of geography) minimum w.r.t to the price of the car. Adding another 2 dealers doesn't get the buyer much and only wastes the dealers' time. That said, we will continue to monitor this and test it. Thanks for your feedback!

mhb 16y ago
The nth dealer to join often thinks that s/he has a worse chance of winning the deal because other dealers got there first Maybe you do this, but would it work better if you told them that you wouldn't provide the customer with the offers before some time (day or two?)?