Formerly About Applied Materials Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials

AMAT 301.11

+6.9%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Gottfried who wrote (58263)	1/1/2002 3:02:15 PM
From: robert b furman	Read Replies (1) of 70976

Hi G, (OFF TOPIC) Keep in mind - I'm a dealer so this is from my perspective.I've certainly met consumers with the opposite attitude - so here it goes. The advertising add on the statement is a passthru.The manufacturers add this to the invoice and then credit an accruel account which is debited after they pay (usually TV) advertising bills.I was outraged when the facory(GM) strongarmed all dealers into this posture.In the past it was a voluntary thing.Now in many franchises it is a cram job. Dealers have to floor the expense until the vehicle is sold and never have the money.It is only used up when an advertisement is run.Most situations require the ad to use canned footage and comply with ad specs that "build brand image" and in my opinion do very little for enhancing a franchisee's image. In most cases, it is a cost of the vehicle that must be passed on to the consumer.When these were first implemented they came out of the dealers markup,enhance the manufacturers cash flow,and result in a higher advertising presence without increasing the MSRP of the vehicle. In short they suck but are crammed down the dealers throat- they in turn recover it from the consumer when sold.It is in my opinion, to view the advertising expense as a legitimate cost to the dealer-since they never get the money that is reserved for ads. Edmunds and others do not show advertising because they vary by manufacturer and they vary by ADI (Area of Dominant Influence)Local TV broadcasting viewer areas. There probably are some dealers that abuse or misrepresent the advertising. I'm in with GM at 1 %,I know of some (BUICK) dealers that do 2 %.(MSRP minus transportation cost). In short - Don't feel bad paying for it - all buyers of a brand do.Still sucks though doesn't it. I personally think manufacturers should focus on building the best product and scrap all the advertising expenses. If you build the best the world will beat a path to you. If you don't you have to reduce the price,have give aways yada yada yada. If GM just keeps coming out with great products and scrapped the advertising built into the products - they'd kill the domestics and get that lost market share back.That would require the unwinding of a huge bureaucracies and marketing egg heads around the world would fall from the wall - never to be put back together again. Hope you enjoy that ride. Bob You should have a grace period in which to buy that ESA.Become aware of its time period before you have to pay a surcharge - some impose that.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next