Stingray Corvette Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
That's Good News for the Forum!
I hope all the Deposit List members gets their orders in before MacMulkin takes Any units for Inventory.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
18,670 Posts
Some additional information from MacMulkin:

MacMulkin started their 2015 Z06 deposit list in October, 2012 -- saying to that person and subsequent ones on that deposit list, "do not even know if their will be a 2015 Z06, but if you want to leave a deposit, will honor MSRP." As more than a few have asked me this weekend via PM when I got on that list, I became #2 on June 1, 2013, and given that same qualifiers. Tommy continued that list, and when we talked on January 8, 2014, had eight (8) on his Z06 deposit list. Tommy said, when we talked that day, as the Z06 Reveal was already announced for they following Monday, "expect as soon as folks see the Z06, our phones will start ringing off the hook." It did exactly that, and later that month, or very early February, Tommy decided to close his deposit list because "I do not know how many Z06's I will get, but do not want to overcommit and not be able to delivery Z06's to customers who have placed a deposit."

He added that having closed that deposit list, I "will create a CONTACT list. That contact list will not involve taking deposits, and will neither commit to those folks on that second/contact list, either pricing, or that I will be able to get them a 2015 Z06." As we know, the contact list grew to 250+ folks and MacMulkin, two weeks ago, was told that they have an allocation for 175 Z06's.

Those who were on MacMulkin's initial Z06 deposit list who were told MSRP (and that never changed), and will be getting their orders placed, at list starting on September 18th, with MacMulkin staff contacting those individuals between now and then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
I just tried placing an order at MSRP with MacMulkin. My contact information was taken and I was told that PREVIOUS MacMulkin customers would be allowed to place an order first; that my order would not be taken until they felt confident that all old customers that wanted to place an order had done so....???....They would then contact me if any allocations were left. I asked how many orders had been taken so far and the salesman said "that I do not know." So much for ordering at MSRP with MacMulkin for me, unless its at the end of the model year which will come with a hefty price increase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
817 Posts
I am glad both for the dealership and its customers.

It seems like the dealership realized they goofed and pretty quickly made a course correction. Perhaps it doesn't completely exonerate them, but it is a HUGE step in the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
Not going to sing any praise

As I posted in a different thread, I believe in their right to offer cars for sale at any price they wish.

On the other hand, after reading comments from others, it is my understanding that those who placed orders with them for MSRP were led to believe that, not only were they going to be able to purchase their car from them at MSRP, but also that there would be only one list, and they would not be skipped over (have to wait longer to receive their car). So, not only was price important, but the delivery schedule was as well.

Based on that, their move to then offer multiple lists is something which I feel is not complete transparency in business practices from the beginning.

Also, even though they caved in when pressure was added, it says something to me. If I have to twist someone's arm to get them to follow through with an agreement (or timing of that agreement) it says to me what is lying under the friendly surface.

It also says to me that it took arm twisting from many folks to get this fixed. If something were to go wrong in an individual transaction, I would not have the power of many people helping me push. I would have to go it alone. That is not a place I would want to be in as an individual.

As such, if I were a newbie shopping for a dealer, I would choose someone else other than them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LT1xL82 and CUSA

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,672 Posts
...it is my understanding that those who placed orders with them for MSRP were led to believe that, not only were they going to be able to purchase their car from them at MSRP, but also that there would be only one list, and they would not be skipped over (have to wait longer to receive their car). So, not only was price important, but the delivery schedule was as well.

Based on that, their move to then offer multiple lists is something which I feel is not complete transparency in business practices from the beginning.
It helps to solidify the whole "used car salesman" image, to the detriment of the honest ones.

It also says to me that it took arm twisting from many folks to get this fixed. If something were to go wrong in an individual transaction, I would not have the power of many people helping me push. I would have to go it alone. That is not a place I would want to be in as an individual.

As such, if I were a newbie shopping for a dealer, I would choose someone else other than them.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few attorneys on the original "list". They know the legal system, contract law, and breach of contract litigation. Lawsuits likely were threatened, along with much negative publicity.

The legal costs alone (ignoring punitive damages) would have easily exceed whatever $5000/car gain they would have received. The negative publicity? I don't think you can put a price on the long term cost of that.

Thankfully, for all involved, the situation has apparently been resolved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Based on what John explained and the other posts in this string, I am a little confused about how MacMulkin was anything but honest. So they started a list....took deposits....and realized that they needed to close the deposit list to ensure they did not overcommit. Then, based on a lack of knowledge on what their allocation would be, started a second list but did not require a deposit since it was unknown to them how deep into that list they could get. Sor far....no problem that I can see. Now if MacMulkin starts knocking people off their deposit list because of "other" customers (like long-standing customers who have waited to make a deposit) then that would be a flagrant foul.

I did not see anything here that seems to indicate that MacMulkin would charge beyond MSRP....however, they are not locked in in case GM decides to increase the MSRP. This was basically the same situation that i was in with respect to my Z-51 order.

I actually think MacMulkin would be further in the wrong if they just took your $2,000 and placed you on their list....and while they would abide by the list, their list would clearly outstrip their allocation. Maybe I am confused here, but I just do not see how MacMulkin has not been "transparent". Stopping their first list seemed like a fair action.

While I am not on any Z06 list nor plan on buying one, I have ordered my 2015 Z51 from MacMulkin and they have been tremendously transparent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,541 Posts
It helps to solidify the whole "used car salesman" image, to the detriment of the honest ones.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few attorneys on the original "list". They know the legal system, contract law, and breach of contract litigation. Lawsuits likely were threatened, along with much negative publicity.

The legal costs alone (ignoring punitive damages) would have easily exceed whatever $5000/car gain they would have received. The negative publicity? I don't think you can put a price on the long term cost of that.

Thankfully, for all involved, the situation has apparently been resolved.
What "used car salesman image" are you talking about? This incident has not changed my view of any other dealership or salesman. For example, I still have the highest regards for Mike at Criswell. Every business is responsible only for their choices.

Although this particular issue has been resolved, just the fact that it was tried makes me look deeper and think maybe it should not be quickly dismissed. How might that mentality resurface in a different set of circumstances? Those are things which I would consider, especially in light that the change in direction only occurred after mass protests, and knowing I would never have that amount of clout on my own.

I am sure that MacMulkin is a great dealership when a transaction goes off without a hitch, and I am sure that is what happens the vast majority of the time. I know many people have happily received cars from there, with zero issues in every way. However, most everyone looks like an angel when the road is simple. I feel like I learn a lot based on actions displayed when things aren't so cut and dried. In my opinion, that is when you learn more about someone.

Anyway, this will be my last post on the subject, as I personally have no "skin in this game" one way or the other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
This is over with a good ending, I think you might not have seen what caused the initial uproar. Read through a few of the threads on this and the other forum and you will see where the lack of transparency raised its head big-time.

Based on what John explained and the other posts in this string, I am a little confused about how MacMulkin was anything but honest. So they started a list....took deposits....and realized that they needed to close the deposit list to ensure they did not overcommit. Then, based on a lack of knowledge on what their allocation would be, started a second list but did not require a deposit since it was unknown to them how deep into that list they could get. Sor far....no problem that I can see. Now if MacMulkin starts knocking people off their deposit list because of "other" customers (like long-standing customers who have waited to make a deposit) then that would be a flagrant foul.

I did not see anything here that seems to indicate that MacMulkin would charge beyond MSRP....however, they are not locked in in case GM decides to increase the MSRP. This was basically the same situation that i was in with respect to my Z-51 order.

I actually think MacMulkin would be further in the wrong if they just took your $2,000 and placed you on their list....and while they would abide by the list, their list would clearly outstrip their allocation. Maybe I am confused here, but I just do not see how MacMulkin has not been "transparent". Stopping their first list seemed like a fair action.

While I am not on any Z06 list nor plan on buying one, I have ordered my 2015 Z51 from MacMulkin and they have been tremendously transparent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I think MacMulkin is being very informative and honest in my case. Those are two characteristics that unfortunately are not as prevalent in the car business as I would hope for. FWIW I am also a past customer and glad to be back, as my first transaction with them (2011 ZR1) went off as well as I have ever had. No nickel/dime. No BS. That is one reason I am back. Other reason is they are getting a huge allocation.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top