Episode 54: How are Dealer Allocations Earned & How Will it Affect Your Order

[NJ Pinelands]

Tim, I know it isn’t your decision, but Ford should just build these as the orders come in, as long as parts are available. They also need to have something in their computer system that would send out notifications to salesmen/customers that an order was partially entered, but not completed. Who knows how many thousands of people are out there still waiting for their Maverick that never reached the very end of the entry process.

Sponsored

 

[Jozell]

Join the club.

I'm sure there are lots of us in the club.

 

[Jozell]

Huh, this actually makes sense. I don't agree with the business goals of it, but I see how this would make sense in Ford's old school business fashion.

I think Ford really needs to go higher when designing things like this. Focusing on the how often doesn't answer the why. It seems their Why is more catered to keeping dealers happy than keeping ford customers happy.

While this formula might make sense for dealer stock, it is badly strategized for custom orders.

I completely agree. It would be nice if the customers weren't being punished for not knowing about this system and choosing a local dealer that's small.

 

[AnnieWaits]

Is this new allocation model going to penalize folks with 2022 orders who don't get built and reorder for 2023 (those are supposed to get built before other 2023s)?

 

[Jozell]

Is this new allocation model going to penalize folks with 2022 orders who don't get built and reorder for 2023 (those are supposed to get built before other 2023s)?

Not sure, the Ford allocation system prioritizes large volume dealer so much that it feels pretty scary for people at smaller dealers. We're seeing large dealers getting October and November orders built and then there's still some July 21 guys still waiting.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

Huh, this actually makes sense. I don't agree with the business goals of it, but I see how this would make sense in Ford's old school business fashion.

I think Ford really needs to go higher when designing things like this. Focusing on the how often doesn't answer the why. It seems their Why is more catered to keeping dealers happy than keeping ford customers happy.

While this formula might make sense for dealer stock, it is badly strategized for custom orders.

I don't see it making sense for customers. If Ford don't wants to piss off more potential buyers they need a less complicated way of servicing dealers while not punishing potential buyers. This process seems weighed in the favor of large dealers and to favor more populated areas in bigger states IMHO....amazng they can define the allocation but not the process for rollover orders.

 

[UnTruck]

So how does one figure out how many allocations each dealer gets? Might be helpful for 2023 ordering...

 

[DavesMav]

The more I reflect on all of this, the more I really wish the allocation model would just not apply at all to retail orders. The allocation process makes some sense to me for allocating dealer STOCK orders, but not so much in terms of customer RETAIL orders.

A person should be able to select their dealer of choice, place the order with that dealer and reasonably expect Ford to build that vehicle in approximately the order that it was received, assuming all parts are available. The allocation lottery just has no place on the retail order side of things. It could all be so simple @Ford Motor Company

 

[paneubert]

A person should be able to select their dealer of choice, place the order with that dealer and reasonably expect Ford to build that vehicle in approximately the order that it was received, assuming all parts are available. The allocation lottery just has no place on the retail order side of things.

But that doesn't work well in practice when you realize a "large" dealer might put in 30 orders per day, while a small dealer might put in 3. If the large dealer put them in in the morning and the small dealer in the afternoon, the small dealer and customer will still be "penalized" due to needing to wait for those large dealer orders to schedule.

I know one local dealer to me cut off their 2023 Maverick "Pre-Orders" at 500. They have 500 ready to go on the day ordering opens..... Do you really want those 500 from that dealer all scheduled before the 3 from the small dealer who entered their orders later in the afternoon, or heaven forbid, on day 2 of orders being open?

 

[Jakb]

I don't see it making sense for customers. If Ford don't wants to piss off more potential buyers they need a less complicated way of servicing dealers while not punishing potential buyers. This process seems weighed in the favor of large dealers and to favor more populated areas in bigger states IMHO....amazng they can define the allocation but not the process for rollover orders.

Yeah that is the problem.

Ford's business model is very old school. It is focused on making sense for the dealers as they narrow mindedly focus their business on them. The old manufacturer philosophy was build things for the sales team, and the customers will come. Customers were an afterthought as the salesmen would dictate trends, wants and what should be built.

The issue is that in modern business practices you need to take your steps back and look at the whole picture. The industry has changed in the past 20 years and greatly changed in the past 5.

For most consumers the dealers are just a middle man, and one (for most folks) is a direct and authorized representative of Ford. No one cares that Dealer X doesn't actually work for ford, because a Ford dealer pissed them off so Ford pissed them off. Historically the consumer population was much more permissable to these relationships, much to their own detriment. But modern consumer practices expect companies to hold themselves accountable even if their product is being sold by third parties.

If you buy a Samsung dishwasher at Home Depot and it breaks down. Historically businesses assumed people would get mad at HD and Samsung would be left off the hook. It was wrong, but that was how business worked for decades. Now with social media, direct ordering, online shopping, reviews and more consumers have a much more direct relationship with the "manufacturer in the sky" than they used to. All because of this, consumers expect brands to stand behind their products, deliver and sales even if they delegate that to a middle man.

Ford's allocation model makes good sense for their business case. The problem isn't that the allocation model doesn't make sense. The problem is their business case is flawed.

 

[DavesMav]

But that doesn't work well in practice when you realize a "large" dealer might put in 30 orders per day, while a small dealer might put in 3. If the large dealer put them in in the morning and the small dealer in the afternoon, the small dealer and customer will still be "penalized" due to needing to wait for those large dealer orders to schedule.

I know one local dealer to me cut off their 2023 Maverick "Pre-Orders" at 500. They have 500 ready to go on the day ordering opens..... Do you really want those 500 from that dealer all scheduled before the 3 from the small dealer who entered their orders later in the afternoon, or heaven forbid, on day 2 of orders being open?

Well this is quite literally what Ford said they were doing, they even went as far as sharing thier plan publicly right here on this very forum:

Ford: Maverick orders are now scheduled in the order they are received | MaverickTruckClub

 

[paneubert]

Well this is quite literally what Ford said they were doing, they even went as far as sharing thier plan publicly right here on this very forum:

Ford: Maverick orders are now scheduled in the order they are received | MaverickTruckClub

But that is not what they are actually doing right now, not what they seemed to have been doing the last few months (not even in the weeks after they released that statement). Sticking to statements from the past in the face of fresher info that shows the opposite is happening is futile. No offense intended! I am actually "with" you when I wish there was some form of FIFO scheduling. But I don't think it is as simple as a pure FIFO system. Not just for the reason I wrote in my prior comment. But that is the big "elephant in the room" reason.

 

[DavesMav]

But that is not what they are actually doing right now, not what they seemed to have been doing the last few months (not even in the weeks after they released that statement). Sticking to statements from the past in the face of fresher info that shows the opposite is happening is futile. No offense intended! I am actually "with" you when I wish there was some form of FIFO scheduling. But I don't think it is as simple as a pure FIFO system. Not just for the reason I wrote in my prior comment. But that is the big "elephant in the room" reason.

If @Ford Motor Company never actually adapted a FIFO system, why did they make that post here? Or have they already fired that intern , just forgot to delete the post?

 

[dalola]

Seems to me there are some over-paid white collar folks at Ford trying to justify their salaries. This reminds me of something the gooberment would come up with to stock the welfare cheese lines....

As has been pointed out ad nauseam, despite Ford wishing to go full customer retail orders, they still have no clue how to do it simply & efficiently.

 

[paneubert]

If @Ford Motor Company never actually (insert any action you want to here), why did they make that post here?

That question can apply to a lot of things Ford has (or hasn't done).

There are tons of examples of people on here who show they have mirror image orders where the later order gets built and the earlier order sits unscheduled. EXACT same configuration. This cleary shows it is not a pure FIFO, but is at best regional or even more locally defined. Which is another way to say it is still done "by allocation".

Sponsored