2021 July 18: Ed Wallace's Post-Purchase Assistance Is Strictly Pay-To-Play

In the July 17, 2021 edition of Wheels, a listener wrote to Ed Wallace regarding a problem with a dealer who is not one of his sponsors.

♫ Wallace refused to provide any guidance on how to resolve the issue and retorts that he did not send the listener to that dealer. When the listener persists and asks for general advice, Ed Wallace refused by stating that I don't want to get involved.

Wallace tries to excuse his conduct by saying there could be legal ramifications. Wallace then weaves a narrative that listeners expect him to contact the non-sponsor dealers on their behalf, which is something that didn't happen in real life (Sound familiar? See the 2021 JULY 05 entry) .

It is fiction that Wallace cannot craft a brief, useful response that would not put himself in legal jeopardy. It is a fiction that guidance-seeking listeners expect anything more from this former car salesman than for Wallace to use his experience with car sales to provide an informed opinion.

As he explicitly states, Ed Wallace is not there to help a listener who did not solicit his sponsor. The listener must have first paid the sponsor, so that the sponsor then pays Wallace via advertising dollars. Does this pay-to-play policy apply only to assistance with post-purchase problems? Does who sponsors Wallace affect his vehicle recommendations? While I can remember Wallace recently recommending vehicles from Lexus, Acura and BMW, I cannot recall the last time Wallace recommended a Mercedes vehicle to a caller on Wheels. Is this exclusion because Wallace lacks having a Mercedes dealer as a sponsor?

hit counter