Consider this idea: Shrink the days between committing capital and reusing it.

Automotive retailers understand turn. A vehicle sitting in inventory represents capital, carrying cost and risk. Move it faster, and the same capital can be deployed again.

We have spent decades applying that thinking to inventory. I believe we should start applying it to the transaction itself.

For the past several years, much of the industry’s technology conversation has focused on electric vehicles. More recently, artificial intelligence has dominated nearly every discussion. Both matter. But if we want to understand where technology creates economic value, a more basic question may be useful: Can we reduce the time between committing capital to a vehicle and putting that capital back to work?

That is the difference between inventory turn and capital turn.

An EV is still a vehicle

I have always viewed EVs somewhat differently than much of the industry. An EV is a vehicle.

That doesn’t mean the economics are identical. Battery condition, residual-value uncertainty, repair costs and consumer demand can affect valuation, financing, holding periods and capital risk.

But an EV still needs to be acquired, financed, transported, titled, sold and paid for. The same is true for an ICE vehicle or hybrid.

The underlying objective remains remarkably consistent: acquire the right vehicle at the right price, move it efficiently, sell it profitably and redeploy the capital.

The more interesting question is how technology can make that cycle safer and faster.

AI changes the speed of the decision

AI is already influencing valuation, pricing, merchandising, inventory management and transportation. Its impact on acquisition may be particularly interesting.

Imagine an AI agent analyzing vehicles in operation, used-vehicle registrations, local demand, inventory, historical turn, auction availability and current pricing. It identifies a vehicle the dealer needs and establishes an appropriate acquisition price.

Over time, that agent could operate within dealer-defined authority: bid up to an approved limit, identify an approved source of funds, book transportation with an authorized provider and initiate the steps required to complete the transaction. Human, lender and marketplace controls would still establish the boundaries.

That creates an important issue. Faster decisions require faster verification.

An automated buyer needs to know that the seller is legitimate, the underlying data can be trusted, the payment destination is authorized and the parties taking possession of the vehicle are who they claim to be.

AI can increase decision velocity. Without trusted data, identity and authorization, it can also accelerate bad decisions.

Trust has an operating cost

Vehicle shipment fraud provides a very real example.

A bad actor obtains transaction information, represents themselves through an email or PDF as an authorized driver, arrives to take possession and leaves with the vehicle. By the time the discrepancy is discovered, the asset may be gone and multiple parties are trying to determine responsibility.

The better answer is not simply another database of bad actors. It is making legitimate transactions independently verifiable.

A digital credential associated with a pickup could bind the driver’s verified identity to the carrier, transaction, VIN, authorization period and, where appropriate, location or handoff. The auction or releasing party can independently verify those attributes before transferring possession rather than relying solely on an email, document or phone call.

That distinction matters.

Trust should not mean, “I recognize your company name.” It should mean the relevant parties can verify who is participating, what they are authorized to do and which transaction that authority applies to.

Fraud prevention is the immediate benefit. Transaction efficiency is the larger opportunity.

Three clocks govern the transaction

Not all transaction time is created equal.

There are at least three clocks running after a dealer decides to acquire a vehicle.

The first is decision time: valuation, bidding and acquisition. AI has significant potential to compress this.

The second is physical and legal time: inspection, transportation, possession, title, liens and other requirements necessary to complete the transfer. This is often where significant operational friction exists, and no payment technology eliminates those requirements.

The third is money time: payment, settlement, floorplan payoff and ultimately the release of capital so it can be used again.

Improving capital turn requires understanding all three. Saving minutes on a payment rail accomplishes little if a title exception traps capital for several days. Likewise, improving transportation or title processing while funds remain unavailable introduces a different bottleneck.

The opportunity is to shrink the entire cycle.

Now follow the money

This is where stablecoins deserve considerably more attention from automotive executives.

The GENIUS Act established a U.S. regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, including requirements around permitted issuers, reserves, redemption and regulatory oversight.

That doesn’t mean stablecoins are ready to replace today’s wholesale automotive payment infrastructure. Adoption requires integration across issuers, financial institutions, auctions and marketplaces, dealers, lenders and ultimately the processes that release floorplan availability.

There are operational questions as well: redemption, AML requirements, exceptions, disputes, reconciliation and liquidity all have to work in the real world.

But the potential economic benefit is significant.

If regulated digital payment infrastructure eventually allows transactions to settle around the clock, the important innovation isn’t the stablecoin itself. It is what happens when settled funds translate into available capital that can be reused sooner.

That is where payment technology becomes a working-capital discussion.

From inventory turn to capital turn

Consider a dealer purchasing approximately $10 million in wholesale vehicles annually.

If improvements across the transaction cycle allow existing capital to be redeployed quickly enough to support the equivalent of one additional turn, that creates the potential for another $10 million in purchasing activity without a corresponding increase in the underlying capital commitment.

Two additional turns could create the capacity for another $20 million.

That is purchasing capacity, not profit.

Additional volume only creates value if the dealer can continue acquiring the right inventory at the right price and retail or wholesale demand can absorb it. Transportation, reconditioning, financing costs, loss rates and other expenses still matter.

But the economic opportunity is straightforward: if existing capital can support additional profitable transactions, the dealer has an opportunity to generate additional gross margin from substantially the same capital base.

That is velocity of money in terms automotive retailers already understand.

What would I test?

Rather than debate the future in theory, I would start small.

Take one defined wholesale lane—perhaps auction to dealer. Verify the identity and authority of the person taking possession of the vehicle. Digitally connect the transaction and VIN to that authorization. Establish a defined settlement process capable of same-day or T+0 settlement.

Then measure it.

How many hours pass between bid award and the dealer’s capital becoming available again? How many exceptions occur? How much manual intervention is required? Does stronger identity verification reduce fraud or improper releases?

Compare those results with today’s process.

If the economics improve, expand the test.

The opportunity is measured in days and dollars

AI can reduce decision time. Verifiable credentials can reduce identity and authorization risk. Better-connected transaction records can improve custody and accountability. Stablecoins and other digital payment infrastructure may reduce settlement time and accelerate capital reuse.

None of these technologies independently solves the transaction.

The opportunity comes from removing friction across the entire cycle.

Dealers have spent decades learning how to turn inventory faster because every additional day has a cost. The same discipline should now be applied to the capital supporting that inventory.

The next competitive advantage may not come from adding more capital.

It may come from making the capital already in the business work harder.

Brad Smith is president and CEO of Block Bridge, Inc. He is also among the experts set to appear during Used Car Week, which begins on Nov. 16 in San Diego.