Marketing Executives Council - Automotive Aftermarket Suppliers

advertisement
AASA
Marketing Executives
Council
June 24, 2010
Marketing Executives Council
Mission
To advance the automotive aftermarket supplier
industry through collaborative marketing and
communication solutions.
Purpose
Forum for aftermarket supplier marketing executives
to collaborate in helping improve the state and
image of the North American manufacturer base.
The Council will serve a major role in helping AASA
communicate to key audiences and develop
communication strategies and action items.
Marketing Executives Council
Agenda
Welcome & Introductions – Barry Harris
Anti-Trust Guidelines – Sarah Bruno
Know Your Parts –
- Update since last MEC meeting – Brian Tarnacki
- Quantify / survey results – Jack Cameron
- Brief history on Supplier Image Initiative – Brian Altenberger
- Supplier Evaluation Standards – Denny Welvaert
Lunch - :30 minutes
Know Your Parts - continued
- 3rd Party Certification – Steve Handschuh, Jack Cameron
- Logo/Trademark – Brian Tarnacki
State of the Industry – Steve Handschuh (time permitting)
Break
Web Metrics: Measuring Effectiveness – Al Haberstroh, MontAd
Council Updates (time permitting)
Marketing Executives Council
Anti-trust Guidelines
It is the unqualified policy of the Automotive Aftermarket Suppliers
Association to conduct its operations in strict compliance with the
antitrust laws of the United States.
AASA's antitrust policy prohibits any discussions which constitute or imply
an agreement or understanding concerning: 1) prices, discounts, or
terms or conditions of sale; 2) profits or profit margins or cost data; 3)
market shares, sales territories or markets; 4) allocation of customers
or territories; 5) selection, rejection or termination of customers or
suppliers; 6) restricting the territory or markets in which a company may
resell products; 7) restricting the customers to whom a company may
sell; or 8) any matter which is inconsistent with the proposition that
each manufacturer, wholesaler and distributor must exercise its
independent business judgment in pricing its services or products,
dealing with its customers and suppliers and choosing markets in which
it will compete.
Marketing Executives Council
Know Your Parts Update
•
•
•
•
New web domain name www.AASAKnowYourParts.com
Stand-alone website being developed
Logo trademarked and registered application
MontAd pro bono work
– Web Articles
• “The Parts in Your Car Make a Difference”
• “What’s in a Name: Generic vs. Brand Name Auto Parts”
• “When it Comes to Auto Repairs, She’s in the Driver’s Seat”
• Member Participation – 23 companies signed on
• Quantify / Product Samples - Survey
Marketing Executives Council
First member ad to
feature the Know
Your Parts
campaign.
Many thanks to
4-SEASONS and
Kevin Burton for
showing us the
way.
Marketing Executives Council
Know Your Parts Update
• Quantifying and Demonstrating the Problem
– Recommended by several breakout groups last MEC
– Survey Developed to help quantify scope of problem
• 10 questions looking for estimates to create anecdotal data
i.e. – “A survey of AASA members suggests the problem is…”
• Survey sent to MEC on April 20 – only 2 responses
• Reminder sent May 5 plus to all AASA – to date 9 responses
– Sample requests, also recommended at last MEC
– Included in the survey cover letter above
• Products and/or literature comparing low quality to premium
• Received 2 products and 2 comparisons to date
Marketing Executives Council
Question 1
Question 2
What do you
About how much
estimate your
does your
company’s lost sales company spend
of motor vehicle
annually on
component parts
product research
(OE and
and development
aftermarket) that including new
can be attributed to product,
short line, lowcontinuous
quality, low-cost
improvement,
suppliers?
etc?
11%
9%
Avg
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
About how much
does your
company spend
annually on
technical support
including in-field,
hotline, troubleshooting and
engineering
support?
Question 6
About how much
does your
company spend
annually on
product and
quality testing?
About how much
does your
company spend
annually on
customer and
technician
training
programs?
About how much
does your
company invest
annually in
obtaining and
protecting
patents,
copyrights and
trademarks?
4%
2%
4%
2%
7%
10%
10%
5%
10%
2%
5%
2%
5%
1%
5%
2%
2%
1%
1%
6%
12%
4%
1%
1%
1%
5%
1%
1%
1%
2%
15%
10%
1%
10%
6%
1%
5%
2%
1%
5%
2%
0%
2%
2%
Ind
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
2%
20%
25%
10%
5%
10%
5%
20%
5%
Marketing Executives Council
Question 7
About how much has your
company invested in
obtaining and protecting
patents, copyrights and
trademarks in total since
the inception of your
company?
Average
Question 8
Question 9
Question 10
Please list the quality
standards employed, or
certifications earned, by your
company.
Have you seen,
perceived or tracked a
decline in sales of “A”
popularity products as
compared to previously
considered slow moving
parts?
$3,402,158,333
--
89% Yes
Do you have any
private label
customers who do
not purchase, or
purchase too few
of, what should be
your most popular
or fastest moving
line items?
56% Yes
$2,500,000
$200,000,000
ISO, TS-1649
TS16949 / ISO9001
TS16494
ISO9000
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Individual
1
2
3
4
5
$200,000,000
6
7
8
9
$450,000
$10,000,000
$20,000,000,000
ISO QS TS
ISO, QS
iso,ts,jsox, +++++
ISO9001, QS9000, HQS9000,
TS14001, TS16949, Six Sigma
Marketing Executives Council
Know Your Parts Update
• Historical Timeline
• 2006: Exploratory meeting held of marketing executives to
discuss issues of supplier image, trade shows and collaboration
• 2007: MEC formed and held four quarterly meetings
– Standards of Excellence agreed as way to recognize full service suppliers
– Set primary target as Repair Professionals, secondary Channel Partners
– Open criteria for all suppliers, AASA members get reduced fee
• 2008: Business Case for Seal of Supplier Excellence
–
–
–
–
Detailed document including governance, fees, etc., standards defined
Code of Ethics that each supplier submits, maintained by 3rd party
Presented to AASA BOG, rejected and told to develop marketing solution
Developed creative brief, request for quote and solicited bids from firms
• 2009: Development of a Industry Awareness Marketing Campaign
– Three finalists presented concepts, all with steep price tags
– Market Research project funded to support campaign
– Know Your Parts launched at AAPEX
Marketing Executives Council
Supplier Evaluation
Standards Concept
Denny Welvaert, AASA Immediate Past Chairman
Marketing Executives Council
June 24, 2010
KNOW YOUR PARTS
(How Does a Buyer Know the Parts)

Bill Rhodes – CEO of AutoZone
◦ “We have 70,000 AutoZoners and not 1 engineer.
How do we know if the parts are good?”
◦ “In addition to specific concerns regarding safety on
performance of specific products sold through our
industry, a broader concern was highlighted. That
the entire automotive aftermarket’s reputation
could be at risk.”
13


AASA “Know Your Parts” campaign was
brought up as a positive example of an
awareness improvement effort.
Kathleen Schmatz was asked to review with
her AAIA team to evaluate if AAIA should
embark on a comprehensive evaluation.
14
SAY WHAT?
15
 AASA
is a manufacturer centric
organization and we owe it to our
customers to show them how to
evaluate product performance and
quality.
16

Independent Certifications
◦ AASA
◦ UL
◦ Even SAE
17


Is the certification testing truly indicative
of part performance in the field?
Even SAE is not specific to a particular
vehicle need.
◦ Generic guide for materials or base level
performance
◦ No OEM or Tier 1 will give the latest technical
data to the Industry.
 SAE
 Any other method

Certification will not get the support of
the higher tech manufacturers.
18


So what do we do?
How do we solve the question of, “Will the
parts work?”
19


Real proof of performance is not assured via
a UL certification.
Proof of performance is supported by
“Paying” customers that buy the product after
validation.
◦ Part Testing
◦ Vehicle Testing
◦ Manufacturing process on-going quality
“Lets Piggy back on the Automotive Industries
Capabilities”
20

Develop a decision tree that can be provided
to resellers.
◦ Ask the right questions
◦ Make informed decisions
21
Flowchart
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Yes
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
No
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
Example text
This is an example
text
22

OE’s have Supplier Quality Assurance
Departments (SQA)
◦ Technical people but not experts in all products or
technologies.
◦ Develop a process to assure that manufacturer’s
meet acceptable level of quality.
23

Resellers do not have the best ability to make
informed decisions on:
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦


Product Technology
Product Quality
New Part Introduction
Application Engineering
Cataloging
Coverage
Don’t know how they make decisions on those
criteria.
Currently, resellers make informed decisions on:
◦ Price
◦ Terms
◦ Delivery
24

Product performance determined by the OE
Design Engineer.
◦ Real World Testing
◦ Form, fit and function

Basic product design is done by the
manufacturer’s engineers.
◦ Basic Product Design and Engineering
◦ Test prototype parts in the lab on a test stand
◦ Test prototype parts on an engine or a vehicle
25








Springdale Tech Center
Occupied in 2 phases of consolidation from ’07 – ’09.
Brown-field, 10 year lease, with ongoing investments.
35,000 ft2, split physically as 40% Rigid & 60% flexible.
Synergies of flexible and rigid products in one site.
TS16949 Certified jointly with North American mfg. sites.
Fully capitalized for all customer testing. It runs all year, 24 / 7.
Locally houses 30 Full Time Employees.
◦ Certifications include PEs, 6σ Black belts, Green belts and more.
◦ Engineers, Designers, Technicians, Chemists, Machinist & Metallurgy.
26

OE’s require a rigorous prove out procedure
on a new part launch.
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
PPAP Process
Production Tools
Production Machines
Production rates and quantities
Statistical process control of current characteristics
to show ,”Process Capability”
27

Factory must be certified by independent
auditing firm.
◦ QS 14001

OEM SQA department certifies the factory
◦ Ford Q1
28

OEM’s require their suppliers to have a
disciplined standardized problem solving
regimen.
◦
◦
◦
◦

Root cause identification
Containment action
Corrective action
Institutionalizing the fix
Ford’s 8D process
29


Not much except, price, terms and delivery.
Not surprising that the Aftermarket part has a
“reputation” for lower quality than an OEM
part.
30

Aftermarket has a wide range of parts
available from a number of different
manufacturers. This results in the potential
for extreme differences in product
performance and product quality.
How Does A Reseller Know What To Choose?
31

Role play using extreme examples.
◦ Company A – A global manufacturer of OE and
Aftermarket product supplying many OE’s in Europe,
N.A. and Asia
 Factories and Tech Centers in many countries.
 Engineers, Tech people, Sales and Marketing, and
Distribution capability
◦ Company B – A regional redistributor with ties to low
cost country manufacturer. It has no factories and few
Tech people. It has Distribution, Purchasing, Product
Management and Selling capabilities.

They offer similar product categories.
32

Question 1:
◦ How do you design parts for the Aftermarket?

Company A:
◦ We utilize our OE technology to design both the
parts we manufacture for OE and the ones we don’t
for the Aftermarket application.

Company B:
◦ We buy the most popular parts, 80/20 rule, offered
in the Aftermarket, send them to our LCC
manufacturer contact and tell them to duplicate
them but don’t violate any patents.
33

Question 2:
◦ How do you add new parts to line?

Company A:
◦ Being an OE supplier, we know what parts we are
designing for the OE application and have an
Aftermarket version ready. On parts we are not the OE
supplier, we buy the part from service to test it for
function and design it using our technology.

Company B:
◦ We wait for the part to be sold in the Aftermarket. If it
is high volume we add it to the line, 80/20 rule, by
sending it to our LCC manufacturer and asking them to
duplicate it. If it is slow moving, we don’t add it.
34

Question 3:
◦ How do you assure ongoing product quality for
Aftermarket parts?

Company A:
◦ Our factories are all QS14001 certified. We are also
Ford Q1, Chrysler Penta Star, etc. We do periodic
audits to test individual parts per the production
assurance plan. We use statistical process control
and are 6 sigma capable in all processes.

Company B:
◦ Our supplier tells us they are high quality and it is up
to them to make the parts right.
35

Question 4:

Company A:

Company B:
◦ How do you develop your catalog data?
◦ Our application engineers survey all the vehicles launched
every year by working with dealerships, fleets and OE service
and develop a data base of every vehicle and engine
combination and understand what part goes on which vehicle.
We use vehicle registration data to determine when enough
vehicles are on the road to add the part to the line. Our
catalog reflects that information.
◦ We wait for our competitors catalogs to come available and use
that data in conjunction with our LCC reverse engineering
approach. We follow the 80/20 rule and select the information
appropriate to our line from our competitors catalogs and print
that information with some slight change to the part number to
make it look like our own.
36


Pretty tongue in cheek exercise but it is
closer to the truth than we would like it to be.
How does a “Full Service” supplier compete
with a manufacturer that buys and resells
only or a manufacturer that doesn’t employ
any of the afore mentioned techniques but
offers an Aftermarket line?
37


Not implying that a company that is not OE
can’t make good quality parts for the
Aftermarket.
Not implying that all OE suppliers use that
technology in the Aftermarket.
38


Offering a list of questions to be asked to
help the reseller make an informed decision.
Decision tree and appropriate questions to
help the reseller address:
◦ Product design
◦ Aftermarket product offering
 Parts already made for OE
 Non-OE source parts
◦
◦
◦
◦
Ongoing product quality
Application engineering
New part launch procedure
Catalog data
39

Review Aftermarket manufacturers for sales
mix.
◦ OEM Sales
◦ Aftermarket Sales

Draw some basic conclusions about those
companies capabilities to use sophisticated
OE technologies.
40

AASA Top 100
Automotive
Aftermarket
Suppliers Listing:
41
42

Manufacturers with significant OE sales.
Global
Automotive
Global
Aftermarket
N.A.
Aftermarket
Denso
$32B
$2.5B
$345M
Tenneco
$4.7B
$1B
$562M
Gates
$1.9B
$948M
$515M
Federal Mogul
$5.3B
$2.3B
$1.8B
43

Manufacturer without significant OE sales.
Global
Automotive
Global
Aftermarket
N.A.
Aftermarket
Affinia Group
$1.8B
$1.7B
$1.2B
Standard Motor
Products
$775M
$775M
$722M
Centric Parts
$185M
$185M
$185M
Motor Car Parts
of America
$134M
$134M
$134M
44

A different line of questions might come from
this data:
◦ What OE’s do you supply?
◦ Do you use the same specs and design criteria for
Aftermarket parts as OE parts?
◦ Do you build the Aftermarket parts in the same
factories as OE?
◦ Do you use the same equipment as OE?
◦ Do you use the same tools as OE?
45

Non-OE manufacturer questions should be different and
much more basic to explain capability.
◦ Where is your Tech Center
 How many people?
 How large?
 Describe technical equipment
◦ How many degreed engineers/chemists on staff?
 List degrees and people
◦ What design criteria and methodologies do you use in the
design of Aftermarket parts?
◦ Where is your factory?
 Size
 Headcount
 Factory certification rating, i.e., QS14001
◦ What test equipment do you use to validate your designs?
◦ Do you use a vehicle test fleet to validate parts in real world
conditions?
46

An OE supplier, most likely, has the ability to
supply parts with adequate product performance
and quality.
◦ It doesn’t mean that it will!

A non-OE supplier may have the ability to
supply parts with adequate product performance
and quality.
◦ Ability to design and manufacture with on-going
quality must be established.
◦ Does it use that ability to supply these parts to the
Aftermarket?
47


Being an OE Supplier helps understand
capability for product design, manufacturing
quality and problem solving.
Being an OE supplier provides no benefits for
the following:
◦
◦
◦
◦
Full line offering
Applications engineering
Timeliness of addition of new parts
Catalog data
48

Sample decision tree questions for all manufacturers
on application engineering and cataloging
◦ Do you have an application engineering group?
 Location of facility
 Number of people
 Degreed/non-Degreed
◦ Describe the application engineering process.
◦ Do you consolidate product designs? If so, how do you
assure form, fit and function?
◦ How do you determine when to add a part to the line?
◦ Do you have an internal catalog department?
◦ Are you PIES and e-Cat qualified?
49





Aftermarket needs high performing, good quality
parts or it will lose its business to the OES.
Aftermarket does not have an effective, organized
evaluation procedure to determine serviceability of
its parts.
Certification by outside agencies, i.e., UL, SAE or
Industry Associations will not gain the support of
the industry.
Manufacturers are best positioned to explain what is
critical in the design of parts
AASA is ideally positioned to provide a list of key
questions that can be provided to resellers to help
them make an informed decision
50
Supplier / Product
Certification Discussion
• The Know Your Parts campaign has caught a lot
of attention…
– Suppliers: Senior executives warming to the idea as a
way to combat off shore competition and direct imports
– Channel Partners, Repair Professionals and
Consumers: Want to know how to determine a premium
from a low quality product other than marketing claims
– International: Europe is launching a Know Your Parts
campaign. AIA Canada wants to.
• Know Your Parts is gaining traction, is it time to
reconsider 3rd party certification?
Marketing Executives Council
Know Your Parts Update
• Know Your Parts Logo / Trademark
– The phrase “Know Your Parts” will soon be a
registered trademark of AASA (not the logo)
– The current logo also contains the AASA logo:
• Limits global application
• Limits support from other trade associations
– The current logo is only 8 months old and was rushed
to market without a creative brief
• Question: Does the logo need to be changed?
– Creative Brief (handout)
Marketing Executives Council
KYP Logo Considerations
• Current logo was created to help launch the campaign at
AAPEX last year.
– Any continuity to this logo would be helpful but not mandatory.
• Red and black color will create a link to the AASA logo.
– AASA membership is a common thread through full service
suppliers supporting this initiative.
• The logo does not contain language that conveys that we are
referencing auto parts. Any visual cues to make that
connection would be helpful.
– The imagery should be higher tech, stylized, modern, etc. Do not
want to perpetuate the old stereotypes of our industry.
– Options without imagery are worth considering since logo is used
in context (member ads, AASA website, industry communications)
– Consideration of a tagline is also an option.
• Universally accepted and global in reach.
Marketing Executives Council
Current
Marketing Executives Council
Modified
Marketing Executives Council
Traditional Option
Marketing Executives Council
®
KNOW YOUR PARTS
A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF AASA
Stylized Option
Marketing Executives Council
Current
®
KNOW YOUR PARTS
A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF AASA
Modified
Marketing Executives Council
Stylized Option
Tagline Options:
“Quality Matters”
“Quality Auto Parts Matter”
“Quality Auto Parts Make a Difference”
“Do It Right the First Time”
Marketing Executives Council
Marketing Executives Council
June 24, 2010
Detroit, MI
Steve Handschuh
Automotive Aftermarket Suppliers Association
Topics to be Addressed
• AASA Supplier Barometer
• Key Issues for the 2010 U.S.
Automotive Aftermarket
• Vehicle Safety Initiatives
• “Know Your Parts”
AASA Aftermarket Supplier Barometer
Quarter 2, 2010
SUMMARY







Business conditions rebounded significantly this quarter.
Only 7% indicated that they are pessimistic about business conditions while
78% are optimistic. This is much better than the second quarter of last year,
when only 33% were optimistic about the outlook.
Price pressure has improved from last quarter with 37% reporting modest
price increases (vs. 26% in Q1) and only 7% reporting cuts (16% in Q1).
For the fifth straight month, sales have continued to grow, and an
unprecedented 81% reported some sales growth in the second quarter.
Accounts receivable activity is average for 78% of companies taking the
survey, but this quarter slow paying customers have apparently caught up,
and faster paying customers now outnumber them by almost 5 to 1.
Employment cuts were reported by just 4% of companies and 4% reduced
capacity. However, 51% reported making cuts in inventories compared to
21% reporting inventory cuts in the first quarter.
Average new order volume for the quarter was down for 10% of companies
participating compared to 41% in the second quarter 2009.
6
AASA Aftermarket Supplier
Barometer
Describe the general twelve-month outlook for your business.
Over the past month, has your opinion become:
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Significantly more
Pessimistic
Q1 09
Somewhat more
Pessimistic
Q2 09
Q3 09
Unchanged
Q4 09
Somewhat more
Optimistic
Q1 10
Q1
Q2 09
10
Significantly more
Optimistic
Q2 09
Q3 09
Q4 60
AASA Aftermarket Supplier
Barometer
How significant are these issues facing your company?
1= Not important 5 = Very important - Ranked by Quarter 2 2010
5
4
3
2
1
Q1 09
Q2 09
Q3 09
Q4 09
Q1 10
Q1
Q2 09
10
Q2 09
Q3 09
Q4
64 0
AASA Aftermarket Supplier
Barometer
How significant are these issues facing your company?
Second Quarter, 2009
Second Quarter, 2010
Weak Sales
4.23
Supplier margin erosion
4.12
World economic conditions
4.02
Availability/cost of raw materials
4.12
Healthcare costs
3.72
Healthcare costs
4.00
Supplier margin erosion
3.71
World economic conditions
3.68
Availability/cost of raw materials
3.56
Lack of Pricing Power
3.62
Lack of Pricing Power
3.52
Globalization
3.32
Availability/cost of credit
3.47
Product returns
3.20
Excess inventory
3.33
Excess inventory
3.12
Globalization
3.12
Weak Sales
2.93
Product returns
3.02
Availability/cost of credit
2.56
6
Key Factors Driving the 2010
US Automotive Aftermarket
•
•
•
•
•
•
Industry Rate of Growth
Dealership Closings
Vehicle Age
Miles Driven
Unemployment
Recession - Economic Outlook
U.S. Aftermarket Growth
•
•
•
•
•
•
2008
2009F
2010F
2011F
2012F
2013F
-2.0%
+1.8%
+3.1%
+3.3%
+4.0%
+5.0%
67
Size of the
U.S. Automotive Aftermarket
$250,000
Millions
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
*= AASA Forecast
Source: AASA Automotive Aftermarket Status Report
Primary Components of the U.S.
Automotive Aftermarket
Purchased Labor
25%
Aftermarket
Parts
54%
Tires
12%
Specialty
Equipment
9%
2007
2008
Source: AASA Automotive Aftermarket Status Report
Primary Channels of the U.S.
Automotive Aftermarket
OE Service
30%
2007
Independent
Aftermarket
70%
2008
Source: AASA Automotive Aftermarket Status Report and NADA Data
Dealer Closings
• As many as 3,000 by end of 2010
• Independent Aftermarket (IAM) Impact:
• Roughly $23 billion of wholesale parts
into IAM through OE dealers; $2-2.5
billion available due to closings
• As much as $5 billion in service
work available to the IAM
71
U.S. Light Vehicles in Use
245
240
235
230
Millions
225
220
Light
Vehicles in
Use in the
U.S.
215
210
205
200
195
2001
2002
Source: R.L. Polk & Co.
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
242,081,704 light vehicles in use in 2008
2008
U.S. Light Vehicle Population Growth
20,000,000
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
0
Total Lt. Veh. Sales
Source: Ward’s Automotive Reports and R.L. Polk
Scrappage
Average Age of Light Vehicles in
Use (Years)
9.6
9.4
9.2
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.2
8.0
2002
2003
Source: Registration Data © R.L. Polk & Company
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
U.S. Automotive Aftermarket by
Vehicle Age
$18,000,000,000
$16,000,000,000
$14,000,000,000
$12,000,000,000
$10,000,000,000
$8,000,000,000
$6,000,000,000
$4,000,000,000
$2,000,000,000
$0
Source: Maintenance Data - IMR Inc. and Registration Data - R.L. Polk
U.S. Automotive Aftermarket
Five Year Outlook
By Vehicle Age
$250,000
Millions
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
New to 5 Year
6 to 10 Year
Source: AASA Automotive Aftermarket Status Report
Over 10 Year
DIFM Repair/Maintenance Cost
by Vehicle Age
1050
950
850
750
650
550
450
350
Source: IMR Inc. Continuing Consumer Auto Maintenance Tracking Study
Vehicle Miles of Travel
3,100
3,050
3,000
(Billions of Miles)
2,950
2,900
2,850
2,800
Every 1% decline in miles driven reduces
aftermarket volume by approximately
$500 million
2,750
2,700
2,650
2,600
2,550
Source: US DOT
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
2,500
Economic Outlook
New Privately-Owned Housing Units Started
2,000
Thousands of units, seasonally adjusted annual rate.
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Unemployment Rate
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor
National Average Retail Price One Gallon of Regular Gasoline
All Formulations
$4.25
Every one penny change in prices at the
pump moves $1 Billion into or out of
vehicle owners’ pockets.
$4.00
$3.75
$3.50
$3.25
$3.00
$2.75
$2.50
$2.25
$2.00
$1.75
Source: Energy Information Administration
Jan-10
Nov-09
Sep-09
Jul-09
May-09
Mar-09
Jan-09
Nov-08
Sep-08
Jul-08
May-08
Mar-08
Jan-08
Nov-07
Sep-07
Jul-07
May-07
Mar-07
Jan-07
Nov-06
Sep-06
Jul-06
May-06
Mar-06
Jan-06
Nov-05
Sep-05
Jul-05
May-05
Mar-05
Jan-05
$1.50
Average Gasoline Expenditures
Percent of Median Household Income
8.5%
7.65%
8.0%
7.5%
6.71%
7.0%
6.5%
6.91%
6.0%
5.5%
5.07%
5.0%
4.5%
4.0%
5.27%
4.98%
4.44%
4.32%
4.93%
6.42%
4.77%
4.33%
4.63%
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
Indexed Aftermarket Comparable
SSS vs. Gas Prices
7.5%
$4.00
$3.80
6.0%
$3.60
$3.40
4.5%
3.0%
$3.00
$2.80
1.5%
$2.60
$2.40
0.0%
$2.20
-1.5%
$2.00
$1.80
-3.0%
$1.60
SSS - Parts Retailers
Source: BLS, Company filings, BB&T Capital Markets
SSS - Professional Installers
Avg. gasoline price
Q2'09
Q1'09
Q4'08
Q3'08
Q2'08
Q1'08
Q4'07
Q3'07
Q2'07
Q1'07
Q4'06
Q3'06
Q2'06
Q1'06
Q4'05
Q3'05
Q2'05
Q1'05
Q4'04
Q3'04
Q2'04
Q1'04
Q4'03
Q3'03
Q2'03
$1.40
Q1'03
-4.5%
Avg. gasoline price
Yr/Yr Change - SSS
$3.20
Average Number of Repair
Orders Each Month
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
Source: IMR Inc.
Issues Impacting Vehicle Repair
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Economy, unemployment=decrease in spending
Improved vehicle reliability and longer service
intervals
Owners relying on vehicle service reminders rather
than scheduled maintenance
Service model: break-down repairs vs. preventive
maintenance
Increasing vehicle complexity requiring increased
investments in tools, information and training
Competent and qualified technicians
Access to diagnostic and repair information
Remote vehicle diagnostics
Regulatory (environment, business) compliance
Increased focus on ROI
Vehicle Safety Initiatives
• In view of Toyota safety issues and
criticism of NHTSA, vehicle safety is going
to be a hot topic for some time to come
• Only 17 states still require mandatory
safety inspections
• Grassroots campaign to lobby US Congress
on the need for nationwide mandatory
safety inspections
Web Metrics:
Measuring Your Company’s
Effectiveness
Al Haberstroh
Erica Eischeid
Rita Siedlaczek
Marketing Executives Council
Web Metrics:
Measuring Effectiveness of
Digital Marketing
June 24, 2010
Digital Marketing
 It’s not about you!
 It’s about THEM!
Gaining an Understanding
of Your Customers
 How they search…
• Can they see you now?
 Why they search?
• What they are looking for in your products?
 What they think about you and your
competitors?
• Are you controlling the message or are you
being controlled?
 Insight anyone?
How Customers Search
 Words Matter
• Keywords and phrases are essential to
prospects finding you
• It isn’t always how you see yourself
Search – Keywords Matter
How Customers Search
 Are your customers searching for
Service Centers or Repair Shops?
Keyword
US Monthly Searches
auto repair shop
450000
auto repair shops
90500
transmission shop
60500
auto service center
27100
car body shop
22200
car repair shops
18100
car repair shop
18100
auto body repair shops
12100
automotive service center
6600
Search – Keywords Matter
How Do You Compare to
Your Competitors?
Are You Being Out-Flanked
and Out-Ranked?
How Businesses Measure Social
Media Success - B2B vs. B2C
Digital ROI
Measuring the TRAEL
 Traffic
 Rank
 Awareness
 Engagement
 Lead Generation
Online Traffic
 There are many ways to measure traffic and
evaluate site performance
• Alexa Rank, Compete, Google Page Rank, Etc.
AASA Content Marketing Results
AASA
Site Metrics
Date
Page Rank
(Google)
Traffic Rank
(Alexa)
2/3/2010
3
3,788,694
2/11/2010
3
3,418,751
2/26/2010
3
3,067,856
3/4/2010
3
2,722,006
3/10/2010
3
2,352,924
3/15/2010
3
1,920,835
3/23/2010
3
1,878,970
4/8/2010
4
1,749,131
4/13/2010
4
1,681,917
Online Traffic
 Does traffic matter that
much?
 Will web traffic really grow
my business?
Cost of Customer Acquisition
Traditional Marketing vs. Social Media
Use of Social Media for Business Information
– B to B Automotive Industry
Cost Per Lead: Social Media Marketing
Distribution of Content =
Links Backs and Web Traffic
Article: The Parts in Your Car Make a Different
Date
Google
Yahoo
Bing
3/15/2010
2,530
396
34
3/10/2010
2,150
403
25
3/4/2010
2,310
444
26
2/26/2010
1,620
186
27
2/11/2010
2,340
284
40
2/3/2010
1,620
169
31
1/28/2010
1
1
1
Delivering Content that
Customers are Searching For
 Create content that is keyword rich
with the words and phrases that
customers are using for search
Keyword
US Monthly Searches
car repair
823000
automotive repair
368000
brake repair
165000
collision repair
135000
auto repair service
90500
auto repairs
60500
vehicle repair
40500
automotive repairs
6600
auto body repairs
5400
AASA Article:
Auto Repair – She’s in the Driver’s Seat
Grabbing the Low Hanging Fruit
raybestos
AM
Retailer
268
egr valve
Keyword
Monthly Searches
Pages indexed
RS Ratio
90,500
506,000
6
867
246,000
1,710,000
7
2
201,000
1,710,000
9
brake caliper
1,358
246,000
2,250,000
9
exhaust manifold
1,014
301,000
3,080,000
10
master cylinder
5,789
368,000
4,140,000
11
brake pads
10,663
823,000
10,900,000
13
power steering pump
82
246,000
3,520,000
14
brake lines
226
135,000
2,460,000
18
brake hose
9,271
60,500
1,700,000
28
brake shoes
2,770
74,000
2,190,000
30
brake pad
4,378
368,000
13,800,000
38
brake master cylinder
54
90,500
7,180,000
79
transfer case
381
368,000
33,100,000
90
brake master
637
110,000
11,300,000
103
autometer
Search Ranking
 What is your rank for targeted key words?
Term
Date
Google Rank
“Power Steering Pump”
10/9/2009
37
“Power Steering Pump”
11/9/2009
32
“Power Steering Pump”
12/9/2009
25
“Power Steering Pump”
1/9/2010
17
“Power Steering Pump”
2/9/2010
12
“Power Steering Pump”
3/9/2010
11
“Power Steering Pump”
4/9/2010
1
Keyword Phrases
Keywords
Keywords
oxygen sensors
o2 sensors
oxygen sensor
lambda sensors
dissolved oxygen probe
o2 sensor
wideband o2
oxygen probe
bosch oxygen sensors
lambda sensor
wideband o2 gauge
o2 wideband
wideband o2 sensors
denso oxygen sensors
dissolved oxygen probes
ngk o2 sensors
denso o2 sensors
oxygen probes
discount oxygen sensors
bad oxygen sensors
universal oxygen sensors
replace oxygen sensors
ngk oxygen sensors
wideband o2 meter
air fuel sensor
a/f sensor
postcat sensor
Online Competition
93.00%
80.00%
100.00%
66.00%
66.00%
86.00%
66.00%
60.00%
73.00%
80.00%
40.00%
33.00%
40.00%
60.00%
53.00%
26.00%
46.00%
46.00%
46.00%
33.00%
46.00%
46.00%
46.00%
26.00%
53.00%
0.00%
0.00%
US Search Volume:
April
33100
27100
450000
590
1300
246000
12100
3600
1600
3600
880
12100
210
390
260
73
260
720
170
-1
320
720
140
140
22200
2400
-1
Global Monthly Search
Volume
49500
27100
550000
8100
1900
301000
18100
6600
2400
90500
880
18100
390
880
480
140
480
1300
210
260
480
880
210
210
18100
3600
-1
Awareness
 Who controls your brand message?
 Over 80% of application specific
aftermarket product searches wind up
on re-seller sites
Monitoring: What is the Level of Your
Online Brand Awareness
Motorsports Conversations by Series
Conversation by Keyword: Driver
NASCAR Conversation by Sentiment
Conversation Breakdown by Medium
Monitoring tools
Measuring Engagement
 How engaged are visitors to your site?
• Are they looking at multiple pages?
• How long are they spending on the site?
• Does your site have a high Bounce Rate?
Online Listening
 Are you listening?
 What is being said about you? About
your competitors?
 If you don’t listen, you can’t learn
 If you don’t listen, you can’t react
Online Listening
 Listening helps you measure the level of
engagement your brand has achieved
 Listening helps you react to negative
comments
 Listening allows you to answer questions
and follow-up on leads
 Listening allows you to take
advantage of opportunistic
conversations
Leads
 Valuable, but easy to measure?
• Product inquiries
• Direct Communication with your company
ROI Analytics
Traffic and Conversions by State
Region
Visits
Conversion Rate
California
116
8.62%
New York
93
12.90%
Florida
79
7.59%
Pennsylvania
54
12.96%
Illinois
53
1.89%
Michigan
North Carolina
51
51
0.00%
1.96%
Texas
43
0.00%
Ohio
38
15.79%
Georgia
36
8.33%
Traffic Source and Conversions
Source/Medium
Visits
Conversion Rate
online-sweepstakes.com
343
0.29%
direct traffic
306
12.42%
fye.com
119
16.81%
facebook.com
36
2.78%
sweepsadvantage.com
33
3.03%
Site Visitor
Browser Usage
Browser
Visits
Visits
553
55.08%
sweepstakeslovers.com
32
6.25%
Internet Explorer
bigbigforums.com
25
0.00%
Firefox
293
29.18%
freestufftimes.com
20
5.00%
Safari
83
8.27%
twilightexaminer.com
17
0.00%
Chrome
64
6.37%
Google / organic search
15
13.33%
Mozilla Compatible Agent
4
0.40%
foryourtwilight.com
for your twilight
for your twilight eclipse sweepstakes
http://www.foryourtwilight.com/
twilight web page
Keyword Search Terms
Social Media Marketing Success
 Of the companies who ranked in the top
20% of social media marketing users:
• 93% improved ability to generate customer
insights that drive new product/service
development
• 72% improved customer advocacy
Illumination!
Al Haberstroh
800-395-5430 / www.montad.com
[email protected] / @AlMontAd
Council Updates
• AAPEX
– Number of exhibitors up 121 (16%) year to date
– Number of booths sold up 688 (19%) year to date
– Booths sold to date 4225 exceeds total sold ‘09 of 3776
• Market Pulse
•
•
•
•
Q2 2009 = 32 respondents
Q3 2009 = 39 respondents
Q4 2009 = 20 respondents
Q1 2010 = (extended to June 25) 10 respondents to date
• Patent Marking Trolls
– Update by Arent Fox, Sarah Bruno
• Membership
– List of AASA prospect companies for MEC
Marketing Executives Council
Thank You!
Next Meeting
November 4 from 10:00 – 2:00 with working lunch
last day of AAPEX
Marketing Executives Council
Download