You'd think Audi, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz, with all their technology wizardry, would have unleashed online technology to build first-class websites. Guess again. As best as we can tell, there's virtually no link between technology savvy on four wheels and tech savvy in websites. That's according to the results of the semi-annual Manufacturer Web Site Evaluation Study by J.D. Power & Associates, which surveyed 11,000 would-be buyers. Honda was tops this time around with a score of 863 out of a possible 1,000. Among those techie German automakers, only Porsche at No. 2 and Volkswagen (No. 20) made the top 20. Mercedes-Benz was just above average, BMW was just below, and Audi was No. 32 out of 36 brands.
In fact, there seems to be little correlation between quality of website and country of original, car quality, sales increases, brand excitement, or level of tech savvy in the car brands. The top 10 comprises five Japanese brands (but don't they seem to win most every J.D. Power survey?), two U.S. brands with big-time sales woes (Jeep, Dodge), one German brand, one British/German brand (Mini), and one Korean brand (Kia, not up-and-coming Hyundai). Then there's cachet and funky brand appeal: Among brands with a lot of sizzle, you've got Mini at No. 3, Scion at No. 35, and Smart dead last at No. 36. Go figure.
A Power exec, Arianne Walker, points out the obvious, that "Providing a satisfying Web site experience greatly increases the likelihood that a new-vehicle shopper will visit the showroom for a test drive, which creates a solid opportunity for manufacturers to increase dealer traffic." Well, yes. She adds that dealers who redesign their sites just to move inventory tend to have lower satisfaction scores when they focus on what's called "lower-funnel-purchase-activities" such as, such as "build a vehicle," "get a quote" and "find a dealer," because she says, they leave a lot of shopper questions unanswered.
Since it's easier to redesign a web site (a couple months) than create a new car (18 months minimum, more like 36), it's no surprise that web site scores rise and fall quickly. The top brand a year ago, Kia, is No. 8 this year, while No. 2 Ford is No. 15 now, and No. 3 Mazda is No. 14 this time. You think they would have left well enough alone, if Power's survey is an accurate indicator of what works for automakers.
Manufacturer Web Site Evaluation Study (J.D. Power & Associates, June 2009)
1. Honda, 883
2. Porsche, 862
3. Mini, 861
4. Infiniti, 860
4. Jeep, 860
6. Nissan, 858
7. Dodge, 856
8. Kia, 855.
9. Acura, 854
10. Mitsubishi, 850
11. Lexus, 849
12. Toyota. 848
13. Lincoln, 847
14. Mazda, 846
15. Ford, 845
16. Land Rover, 845
17. Chrysler, 844
18. Saab, 842
19. Suzuki, 841
20. Mercury, 840
20. Volkswagen, 840
22. Mercedes-Benz, 839
23. Cadillac, 837
23. Volvo, 837
-- Industry Average, 836
24. Chevrolet, 832
25. BMW, 829
26. Hummer, 829
27. Jaguar, 827
28. Hyundai, 821
29. GMC, 817
30. Pontiac, 812
31. Subaru, 810
32. Audi, 803
33. Saturn, 800
34. Buick, 790
35. Scion, 781
36. Smart, 770
Mixx It
Digg It
Stumble
More...
June 25, 2009 10:33 PM
Your article posits the question as to why more automakers don't expend more time effort and resources on their company web sites, then states:
"there seems to be little correlation between quality of website and country of original, car quality, sales increases, brand excitement".
Exactly. If it doesn't make any difference, then why even bother? Personlly, the only features I used were the build-your-own pages. That's because I took the time and already did my homework well in advance. My research was already complete, and the only question remaining was "How much is this going to cost, built out the way I want it?" With an occasional "How much more for the lower spoiler?". At this point, the web site for me, as for some automakers apparently, was largely an afterthought, and justifiably so.