Reconsider Your Reconditioning – Thoughts from Two Experts

by dpollak on 02/22/2010 · 22 comments

I’ve had two experiences in the last 24 hours that has me really fired up on the issue of reconditioning.  First, yesterday afternoon I spoke with one of the most successful high-volume/profit used car dealers in the country.  He told me that he averages less than $500 per vehicle reconditioning.  I might add that he reluctantly admits to still charging retail labor rates.  That’s right, less than $500 per vehicle using retail labor rates. 

This stands in stark contrast to what I see most dealers charging, between $650 and $1,250 per car.  Unless you’re really in the business of rebuilding used vehicles for retail, as a general rule, what in the world is going on?  As my friend explained to me, he can do a safety inspection and even get new rubber and brake pads on a car for less than $500.  Shouldn’t this be the norm for most cars?

How does he do this for less than $500 per car?  Well, as he explains it to me, the big cost is usually in parts, items like tires and brake pads.  He told me that most parts departments want to use the OEM supplied tires and brake pads.  These are obviously high dollar items.  My friend told me that his parts manager goes out to the after market and procures quality low-cost substitutes, applies the same mark-up, and delivers the parts to the vehicle substantially below the cost of the OEM alternative. 

While I would not advocate circumventing any manufacturer’s certified requirements of using OEM parts, nor would I discourage certification on most eligible vehicles, I think that this approach should be the norm for all other vehicles. 

The second experience was this morning when I read an article from industry expert David Ruggles on the subject of reconditioning.  Completely independently, David sent me an article that he is submitting to Ward’s Dealer Business on this subject.  David brilliantly makes the observation that performing excessive reconditioning produces many irrational consequences.  One of the greatest evils is that used car managers and buyers can’t justify paying current wholesale market rates for badly needed used vehicle inventory.  In light of the highly compressed margin environment, the expectation of $650 to $1,250 reconditioning makes it impossible to justify just about any purchase.  It’s really no wonder that most used car managers have the perception that they can’t buy used cars for prices that allow them to make money. 

So, even if we don’t want to have the discussion about charging less than retail labor rates, could we at least come to terms with the fact that we probably can’t justify spending $650 to $1,250 to recondition used vehicles on average?  Shouldn’t these amounts be reserved for only certified cars, and the occasional exception case?  Every day I become more convinced that the old practices of reconditioning are just not fitting the realities of today’s used car market.

  • chadvanness

    Dale…we are a dealer still charging retail for recon and packing our used vehilces. It seems to be working for us. 2009 volume was up 30%, gross up 21%, and net up 250% using a velocity approach. I am having a hard time believing a change in recon prices would increase our success. How will redcuing recon margins increase total store gross and net? How do you determine parts and labor rates for a used vehicle department?

    Thank you,

    Chad VanNess
    Vaughn Automotive

  • Anonymous

    Dale and David, what about the actual recon time per car. How would you calculate the cost for every extra day that a car is in recon? Recon costs are known because there is a process but it appears that the actual time is a guess so it is only managed by exception.

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Chad,

    Thank you for your comment and congratulations on your success. I would like to believe that dealers could continue the practice of liberal reconditioning and generous packs. I just don't understand how it squares with the reality that today there is an increasingly narrow margin between wholesale and retail pricing. In other words, it would be helpful to know where your used car manager/buyers find vehicles that they can buy cheap enough to accommodate large reconditioning costs and packs. Further, how are your sales people able to make enough commissionable gross profit to be satisfied? Are they having success passing these costs on to consumers on the lot? Do your retail prices on the web, which bear the burden of large reconditioning and packs plus profit, attract savvy internet shoppers? Your thoughts on these points would be appreciated.

    Thanks
    Dale

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Dennis,

    Thanks for your comment. There is no question that when things don't get done as quickly as they need to get done, or get done in the necessary quality manner, this equates to leaks of profit. There has always been a lot of these types of dysfunctions in dealership sales environments, however today there are two major differences.

    First, there are many more tasks that need to be performed in order to get a car ready for both the virtual and physical front line. Consequently the opportunity for things to go wrong are exponentially greater. Second, since used car investment dollars don't generate lucky profits like they used to, unless you can figure out a way to tack on a few extra days to the calendar, the only way to make the same amount of money is to speed up the process. If we thought that 60 days to sale was an acceptable period when used car dollars generated a lot of lucky profits, then we need to get ourselves reconciled to 30 or 40 being the new 60.

    Thanks for your thoughts.
    Dale

  • http://YesWeCanAuto.com/ Gary Campbell

    Great Article, I am a $1456 per unit dealer. I am working on lowering my per unit reconditioning. The problem is customers expect a new car for used cars prices. With this Economy and Bank advances those days are over.

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Gary,

    I was taught by my father years ago that every dollar of proper reconditioning would return a dollar and a half. Consequently, I grew up in an environment that put a high priority on reconditioning vehicles to perfect or near perfect condition. Outside of certified vehicles, I really don't think that the internet sales environment allows you to invest as heavily in reconditioning and still be able to draw traffic. Of course, we're talking about shades of gray here. The obvious things need to be taken care of, but all of those other things that mean less should be considered very carefully.

    Dale

  • chadvanness

    Our average price to market is 92% and cost to market is 76% this data is off of vAuto home page. We have 89 units in stock are tracking to sell 64 units. I believe that we will sell with an end of the month push sell 70-75 units this month.

    The front gross has decreased quite a bit. Compensation is a concern but we our sales people understand that if we didn’t take a velocity approach we would be selling 40 used cars per month. They get additional compensation based on volume of units not dollars per unit.

    Our appraisal look to book runs 50+% each month and has for the past 6 months.

    We price all of our vehicles online and on the lot. We don't hide from our prices…Auto Trader DPV 2.6% and Cars.com DPV 4.4%.

    Our sales managers are paid on the packs and on 1/2 of the internal gross.

    This is an overview of our operation…

    What would be the benefit to us on reducing packs and recons margins?

    If we were to reduce recon margins how do you determine a fair margin for the fixed operation in the store?

    Your input will be greatly appreciated.

    Regards,

    Chad VanNess

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Chad,

    Wow, thanks for the insight. You really do have the velocity model working. Specifically the way you pay your sales people/managers is progressive. Velocity compensation programs are among the most common questions. I imagine that your approach will draw a fair amount of interest here on the blog and elsewhere. I hope you wouldn't mind fielding some questions from other velocity dealers.

    Regarding your questions as to what benefits might accrue from reducing your pack and recon margins, I suppose you could possibly increase the turn even more. There is, however a balance to be achieved between turn and gross, and it seems that you've managed to find it. I'm not sure that I would advise you to change a thing in light of your success with the velocity model, it's quite impressive. I would be interested in receiving insights from others.

    Dale

  • chadvanness

    Dale,

    Your input is appreciated.

    Do you have formula/recommendation for recon pricing?

    My number is 641-682-4574 if anyone has questions.

    Regards,

    Chad

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Chad,

    Keith K. – give Chad a call, would you?

    Dale

  • redmond

    Dale, how many dealers use reconditioning as an opportunity to 'pack' the service tickets and use the extra money as an opportunity for dealer income? I deal with this issue on all my used vehicles – under $15K purchase price – $150 dealer pack on RO; over $15K purchase price – $350 dealer pack on RO. This practice by the dealer (who I've worked with for 22 years) has helped me always be thinking about driving the cost of the inventory down to under 15K on a per vehicle cost. Let me know what you're thoughts are on “hidden” dealer packs. Thanks, and continue to enjoy the blog.

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Robin,

    Thank you so much for your note. Until now, I've never heard of an outright pack on a reconditioning RO, but apparently there's a first for everything. I continue to believe that retail reconditioning rates are a form of a pack. I don't care what anyone says, every day I see the negative effects that packs have on critical decision making. Buyers don't acquire cars that need to be bought, managers don't take deals that should be taken and salesmen walk around cars that should be sold. Unfortunately, these actions are not itemized on anyone's financial statement, but rather they simply cause sub-standard results. It's really easy for a dealer to say, “look how much extra money I've made from the packs”, but they can't see how much it's cost them.

    Now that you've got me on a rant, let me also say that applying pack money to write down cars, cover up wholesale loss or other similar applications only serve to mask mistakes and perpetuate poor management or the lack of discipline. The affect of these techniques also have costs that are not itemized on financial statements. The bottom line is I don't think that the cost of packs gets passed on to customers any longer, but rather only gets diffused back into the operation.
    Dale

  • denniscardinale

    Wow-is this is a common problem, with two major falacies supporting it!
    IIt stems from the mistaken belief that the profit derived from the back end is 70% of the expenditure (on a captive customer, the UCM, no less) and therefore helps the bottom line profitability of the store. The loss on wholesaled, overpriced units is somehow left out of the equation.
    The second fallacy is that “used cars are sold from cost” and regardless of level of recon and packs the gross profit will be the same. Probably true in the past but when every consumer has high speed internet access to info including price I don't believe it holds water today.

  • Mike

    Hi Dale, I find your article on reconditioning very interesting. I do have a couple of questions though; 1. Have you ever worked in the back end of the store? 2. Do you have statistics on these dealers that are spending very little on recon???… As in what is there gross averages as compared to other dealers in their group??? and…how many cars are they selling more in their group??? I am came from the school of….”The customer pays for the recon which nets more bottom line gross for the dealer” There is alot of statisical information that supports that theory. Now, with that said, I do believe that as times change, so do we which is why I am asking you if you have statiscal ifno that would back up what you are saying. Am I thinking the “Old school” way?

  • http://www.dalepollak.com Dale Pollak

    Mike,

    Thank you so much for the note. Yes, I've spent years working in fixed operations departments. My dad was a dealer, and my first job was spraying solvents and steam cleaning engine blocks before they could be returned for core credit. I had many jobs in the parts department, body shop and service drive. The only major position in fixed ops that I honestly lacked was Service Manager/Fixed Ops Director. I wish that I could have filled these rolls, because they certainly would have pulled all of the pieces together, including the overall financial responsibility. In spite of missing this important position, I GM'd a store for 14 years that I owned with my father. I think that I have a pretty good understanding of the dynamics.

    It is true that we used to pass on all of our costs, including packs to customers. The times, however, have changed. Customers are much smarter about the market value of vehicles and what they should pay. The opportunity to pass these costs along as we used to is less every day.

    The result of the packs and excessive costs, however, cause people in the variable departments to make unwise decisions. I witness them every day. Appraisers don't think that they can hit a car for what it's worth because they're fearful of what they'll own it for when it ends up on the front line. This goes for buyers at the auction as well. Further, desk managers often pass on deals that they should take because they're fearful of being scrutinized for low gross. Sales people walk around cars that they should show, but won't because they can't make any commissionable gross profit based on the packs and excessive costs.

    As I've stated in previous communications, none of these consequences are reported directly on any line of the financial statement. They just get worked into the final numbers without itemization and consequently no one thinks much about it. You said it yourself, the whole strategy of packs and high reconditioning costs hinges on the lynchpin assumption that they can be passed on to customers. If this assumption is wrong, and I believe that it is, the profit of the Fixed Ops department will extinguish the flames of variable operations. The only remaining justification is that lower commissions are paid on fixed versus variable profitability. While this might be true, it is a case of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies. I'd be interested in your and other's thoughts.

    Thanks
    Dale

  • Omied

    Does the $500/unit in recon stand for simple safety stuff such as brakes/tires, or is that safety and PDR/dent removal, bumper touch-up, etc…?

  • David Ruggles

    For a dealer who specializes in late model CPO caliber pre-owned vehicles it seems logical that average recon would average less than a dealer who’s inventory mix is concentrated in the area where vehicles to be offered for sale have to be “made” via recon. In my case, I would sometimes purchase rougher vehicles, including vehicles in need of paint work, to “feed” the shop during times when customer pay work was slow. Consequently, my average recon would run higher during that time period. In this day and age I would probably do less of that as I would take advantage of emarketing to boost service department traffic during slow periods.

    In my case, I charged 67% of retail for internal labor and cost plus 25% on parts. I did not mark up sublet. My average recon was much higher than average despite the lower recon rate because we really went over vehicles offered for retail, something that would have been limited had I been “over charging” myself for recon. This made for happier buyers and less stress on our service contract account. We averaged over 60% service contract penetration.

    My objective was to average at least a one to one ratio of pre-owned sales to new, if not two to one. I just don’t see how an “unbalanced” recon rate formula works in this day and age of margins compressed by this new age of the Internet. Further, we all know we are looking at a pre-owned inventory shortage for the next few years. The kinds of vehicles that a dealer can acquire in the near future, to maintain healthy gross profit production from the pre-owned department, will be far from lot ready. You do the math.

    But the bottom line is even before the Internet, having a balanced recon approach allowed me flexibility to take advantages of opportunities I otherwise couldn’t have.

  • David Ruggles

    For a dealer who specializes in late model CPO caliber pre-owned vehicles it seems logical that average recon would average less than a dealer who's inventory mix is concentrated in the area where vehicles to be offered for sale have to be “made” via recon. In my case, I would sometimes purchase rougher vehicles, including vehicles in need of paint work, to “feed” the shop during times when customer pay work was slow. Consequently, my average recon would run higher during that time period. In this day and age I would probably do less of that as I would take advantage of emarketing to boost service department traffic during slow periods.

    In my case, I charged 67% of retail for internal labor and cost plus 25% on parts. I did not mark up sublet. My average recon was much higher than average despite the lower recon rate because we really went over vehicles offered for retail, something that would have been limited had I been “over charging” myself for recon. This made for happier buyers and less stress on our service contract account. We averaged over 60% service contract penetration.

    My objective was to average at least a one to one ratio of pre-owned sales to new, if not two to one. I just don't see how an “unbalanced” recon rate formula works in this day and age of margins compressed by this new age of the Internet. Further, we all know we are looking at a pre-owned inventory shortage for the next few years. The kinds of vehicles that a dealer can acquire in the near future, to maintain healthy gross profit production from the pre-owned department, will be far from lot ready. You do the math.

    But the bottom line is even before the Internet, having a balanced recon approach allowed me flexibility to take advantages of opportunities I otherwise couldn't have.

  • David Ruggles

    Speaking of rants…. Once I start I can’t stop. As I read everyone’s very thoughtful comments and contributions, I don’t see what I refer to as a “balanced” recon formula as a way to necessarily reduce average recon, but to allow more recon for the money which tends to cause vehicles to sell even faster. It allows for more aggressive appraisals. it allows inventory buyers to buy vehicles they would otherwise have to walk away from. For those who feel that everything has to be measured, this won’t square with you. What you should have and could have had but didn’t get is hard to measure. This doesn’t work like your lost sales report in the parts department.

    One of my pet peeves…. selling wholesale packages to wholesalers. When you sell at auction, each vehicle stands on its own. Wholesale at the auction and only at the auction with the rare exception of vehicles traded for on a “buy bid.” There is nothing worse than packaging good units in with bad units to make the package look like a better deal than it is. It is also difficult to measure lost opportunities of good fresh “grossable” units included in a package of dogs. If you aren’t showing a loss in your wholesale account, you aren’t aggressive enough. Of course, “packed” recon adds additional pressure on the wholesale account and tends to drive bad practices like wholesale packaging.

    I apologize if I’ve opened pandora’s box.

  • David Ruggles

    Speaking of rants…. Once I start I can't stop. As I read everyone's very thoughtful comments and contributions, I don't see what I refer to as a “balanced” recon formula as a way to necessarily reduce average recon, but to allow more recon for the money which tends to cause vehicles to sell even faster. It allows for more aggressive appraisals. it allows inventory buyers to buy vehicles they would otherwise have to walk away from. For those who feel that everything has to be measured, this won't square with you. What you should have and could have had but didn't get is hard to measure. This doesn't work like your lost sales report in the parts department.

    One of my pet peeves…. selling wholesale packages to wholesalers. When you sell at auction, each vehicle stands on its own. Wholesale at the auction and only at the auction with the rare exception of vehicles traded for on a “buy bid.” There is nothing worse than packaging good units in with bad units to make the package look like a better deal than it is. It is also difficult to measure lost opportunities of good fresh “grossable” units included in a package of dogs. If you aren't showing a loss in your wholesale account, you aren't aggressive enough. Of course, “packed” recon adds additional pressure on the wholesale account and tends to drive bad practices like wholesale packaging.

    I apologize if I've opened pandora's box.

  • David Ruggles

    And you, Mr. Cardinale, have told it like it is!

  • David Ruggles

    And you, Mr. Cardinale, have told it like it is!

Previous post:

Next post: