Did Saturn go out of business because of their sales structure or because GM as a mother company was bankrupt and had to cut something?
Why would they cut something that was massively profitable? Oh wait, it wasn't as profitable as the Chevy dealers with their negotiation pricing selling the exact same cars with different badges. Saturn was actually unprofitable entirely.
Toyota's Scion also does single price sales, just like Saturn did and they seem to be doing fine. Pontiac was also cut from GM's line up and they didn't have single price sales.
Pontiac sold the same re-badged cars as Chevy did, so it was a total duplicate minus some plastic pieces. They also didn't have the exclusive dealership deals that Saturn did. Not even remotely the same thing.
How's Scion doing by the way? Oh, this: "In late 2013, Toyota announced that Toyota dealers can drop the flagging Scion marque without penalty." It's a niche, toy brand for a major dealership. They aren't relying on the profits to succeed.
What source do you have that this system wouldn't be an effective method?
How about the fact that car dealerships are some of the most greedy businesses ever (see their fights with Tesla over DTC sales). If it was more effective to sell them regularly, why would they NOT do it? Obviously they're efficient and happy screwing people and making millions. If you hold your ideals that ridiculously high, why not start a fixed-price car dealership yourself and get rich?
In fact, there is no other product sold to consumers in this day and age that involves negotiation anymore, so if anything, the evolution of the marketplace prefers that system. I would also posit, that since cars are not unique, like say real estate, there is no excuse for negotiated pricing at all.
I guess you've never negotiated a utility bill with Comcast or Verizon like hundreds of thousands of others? Consumers can also negotiate consumer credit cards (ever wanted more credit limit or lower rates?). Also why are you arguing that negotiated pricing shouldn't exist when your point before was that
Let's face it, the whole reason we have the system we do is because of antiquated dealership laws and the lobbying power from those dealers keeping us that way.
Again, you were trying to argue that they could make the same amount of money doing it the way ever other market does. Why are you stepping back and saying that it's the dealers fault for keeping that way? If they were in control and it was better to do things a different way, why WOULDN'T they do it?