Why would dealers not receive a Bronco allocation for every order they convert?

[HoosierDaddy]

I do not know what Ford's production capability is for the Bronco, but they stated early on.....years ago.... that they expect to produce something in the order of 200,000 ANNUALLY.
Keep that in mind if your dealer tries to ADM you. It is NOT a limited run vehicle.....in 5 years there will be literally a million of these things running around.

Sponsored

 

[Boxer4]

It seems to me the opposite. The allocation formula is weighted 50% on reservations converted to orders. The more orders a dealer converts the more allocations they get.

In a way- maybe. So the convert to orders is not who can convert the largest numbers of orders but how a dealer’s conversion percentage stacks up against other dealers nationwide.
If the average rate of conversion is 50% and dealer “A” falls short at 40%, they could lose previous allocations.
I was provided this.

 

[Judge Rufus]

Except FoMoCo has to keep its dealer network happy, after all the dealer is the direct customer of FoMoCo no the consumer.

Besides, remember the golden rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules".

I agree with you...for now. But Ford, along with every other auto manufacturer, is going to challenge the dealer relationship over time lead by the example that Tesla has set. There are significant state and local legal hurdles to get over, but in the long run it will be more profitable for the manufacturer to direct sell to the consumer, and less expensive for the consumer.

 

[Lilj4425]

It all has to do with shipping logistics and costs. Ford is not going to stick one vehicle on a Semi and ship across the country just because somebody ordered their Bronco a few hours before somebody else.

 

[edgeflyer]

I'm with the OP, makes no flipping sense. FORD needs to start with FEs, then the Reservation list in order and build as many as they can and send them out to whatever dealer THAT Reservation holder happens to have picked.

This isn't Seinfeld Ford.. a Reservation means a Reservation... not, well it depends on which dealers we like more.

Yep and Ford flat out lied and changed the rules. There will be people getting Bronco's that think it looks cool and are week 3 reservation holders getting Bronco's in front of week 1 reservations that are Bronco or off-road enthusiasts that have waited years to submit that order. Seems to be par for the course for people in power these days. Lies lies lies.

 

[ZackDanger]

In a way- maybe. So the convert to orders is not who can convert the largest numbers of orders but how a dealer’s conversion percentage stacks up against other dealers nationwide.
If the average rate of conversion is 50% and dealer “A” falls short at 40%, they could lose previous allocations.
I was provided this.

My understanding is that it’s based on total number of orders. Because only reservation holders prior to sept 18 are the ones that count towards the orders... there’s two aspects to a dealer maximizing their allocations:

1. Attract more (pre Sept 18) reservations
2. Turn more of them into orders.

I haven’t heard anything about weighing conversion percentages against dealers to determine allocation... the way I understand it, with everything else being equal, a dealer with 50 reservations and 100% conversion will score the same as a dealer with 100 reservations and 50% conversion.


In that way, large dealers could score orders (allocation) by attracting more people, and smaller dealers could score orders (allocation) by attracting more likely buyers.

Though because pre-sept 18 orders are a finite amount, one could make the case that conversion is more important business tactic than attracting reservations... assuming that generally speaking most Bronco reservation holders are going to be generally spread out to their normal local dealer... so a dealer that does a better job at converting will get a better allocation relative to their initial reservation numbers compared to another dealer.

And if you’re a clever dealer, you try to aim for both.

::EDIT::

Reading back on my post I’m not sure whether I actually said anything... and I might even be more confused than before.

Whoops.

 

[jxc]

I'm thinking that the dealers will convert 100% of all orders regardless of the reservation holder's choice. Change the order specifications after the order is placed to what the customer wants (if they still want the Bronco). All the reservations that are abandoned after conversion become dealer stock for retail.

Also, it'll increase their allocations for the next year by having as many conversions as possible, regardless or reservation holder actually buying the vehicle.

Ford has indicated that dealers who don't fulfill converted reservations to the original reservation holder will be penalized with reduced allocations going forward. This was by design to prevent dealers from creating a ton of 'fake' reservations for their own use/stock and to prevent unwanted reservations from being picked up by the dealers to do what you are describing. My understanding is that there will be some level of orders that for some reason are not completed by the reservation holder, but if there are too many at a dealership the allocation curbs kick in.

 

[Boxer4]

My understanding is that it’s based on total number of orders. Because only reservation holders prior to sept 18 are the ones that count towards the orders... there’s two aspects to a dealer maximizing their allocations:

1. Attract more (pre Sept 18) reservations
2. Turn more of them into orders.

I haven’t heard anything about weighing conversion percentages against dealers to determine allocation... the way I understand it, with everything else being equal, a dealer with 50 reservations and 100% conversion will score the same as a dealer with 100 reservations and 50% conversion.


In that way, large dealers could score orders (allocation) by attracting more people, and smaller dealers could score orders (allocation) by attracting more likely buyers.

Though because pre-sept 18 orders are a finite amount, one could make the case that conversion is more important business tactic than attracting reservations... assuming that generally speaking most Bronco reservation holders are going to be generally spread out to their normal local dealer... so a dealer that does a better job at converting will get a better allocation relative to their initial reservation numbers compared to another dealer.

And if you’re a clever dealer, you try to aim for both.

From what I understand the preliminary allocations are close. What drives a dealer‘s final allocations is the their conversion percentage rate. Success and its reward is by beating the national conversion average.
So how could the preliminary numbers have been close without a single order converted? The formula allows for any reasonable placeholder rate. The real rate is not important for it to give the the preliminary allocations.
If the actual national rate is lower, it applies equally.

 

[lowmpg]

Heck nobody really knows anything until they lock the book on orders. If they find out that they only have 50k orders on hand, then everyone will get one, if they find out they have 100k orders converted, well they just can't build that many.

 

[Drex]

Ford decided that it was better than more dealers get some Bronco's to sell to their personal reservation holders, no matter when they reserved, than to do an approximate first come, first served system for all the reservation holders.

To illustrate; After most of the people had paid $100 to get into a single line to order, they changed the rules and quietly let dealers know (very quietly and only to the dealers, don't forget, they did not tell the customers directly and only addressed it after it was out to the forums, most reservations holders still do not know about the change.) they were making a line at every dealer and then limited the number of people in each line that they would serve this year. Had they just gone with the single line concept, early people (the ones that paid $100 to get in line to order first) would get served in (approx) order and customers would understand and respect the built in fairness of that if they had to wait. Again, outside this and probably the BN forum, nobody has been directly informed.

Now, some dealers are happier and while some of the people who were near the front of the line will still get waited on first, some will be told they have to wait for people who got in line behind them to get served (at other dealers, but it is still real). (aside from the commodity restrictions).

If the person at Ford who made this baffling decision were to go to the grocery store on a Saturday and see what happens when someone at the deli is waited on before someone else who was there first, I think they might have a better clue as to why this is going to infuriate people as the real life examples start becoming known during delivery time (I guess it will start in May during estimate time). My prediction is that they will teach it in business classes as a case study in idiocy for decades to come.

 

[ZackDanger]

Ford decided that it was better than more dealers get some Bronco's to sell to their personal reservation holders, no matter when they reserved, than to do an approximate first come, first served system for all the reservation holders.

To illustrate; After most of the people had paid $100 to get into a single line to order, they changed the rules and quietly let dealers know (very quietly and only to the dealers, don't forget, they did not tell the customers directly and only addressed it after it was out to the forums, most reservations holders still do not know about the change.) they were making a line at every dealer and then limited the number of people in each line that they would serve this year. Had they just gone with the single line concept, early people (the ones that paid $100 to get in line to order first) would get served in (approx) order and customers would understand and respect the built in fairness of that if they had to wait. Again, outside this and probably the BN forum, nobody has been directly informed.

Now, some dealers are happier and while some of the people who were near the front of the line will still get waited on first, some will be told they have to wait for people who got in line behind them to get served (at other dealers, but it is still real). (aside from the commodity restrictions).

If the person at Ford who made this baffling decision were to go to the grocery store on a Saturday and see what happens when someone at the deli is waited on before someone else who was there first, I think they might have a better clue as to why this is going to infuriate people as the real life examples start becoming known during delivery time (I guess it will start in May during estimate time). My prediction is that they will teach it in business classes as a case study in idiocy for decades to come.

Unless there was a dealer in some part of the country that was cut off from civilization, and their customers didn't learn about the reservation process until weeks later... and that dealer has thousands of reservations that will convert to orders...

...I suspect that in the end, considering part availability, general scheduling, transportation grouping, etc etc etc... generally speaking we wont even notice "on the ground" any practicable difference between deliveries under this method vs deliveries under a strict timestamp order.

$0.02

 

[da_jokker]

Exactly... if the dealers want to cry let them. Go sell Jeeps.

If ford has customers, dealers will come. This wasn't about the dealers... this was about some select dealers pulling back door strings and BS under table deals.

I dont expect Ford to put a single Bronco on a truck and send thousands off in different directions. But you're telling me that can do regional instead of individual dealers.

I have at least 5 dealers all within 30-45 minutes of me. Your saying my July reservation doesn't beat a later one simply because of which dealer I happened to pick. BS

Ok... done ranting.

 

[NotApplicable]

Because there isn’t infinite manufacturing capacity

Sponsored