My favorite as well. I've found myself in discussion with many on this logic for some time but rarely does it go mainstream. On a logical stance, all these moves represent honesty and no BS. Similar to when General Motors launched the Saturn line of cars with flat pricing. We owned a few in my family growing up and I remember my dad telling me one of the biggest reasons he bought it was because he knew no one else paid a dime less than he did for the same car.
That's a very good point. Four-square (the car sales strategy BS not the site) is one of the most dishonest tactics ever devised to subvert the buying process. Why should I have to deal with a gauntlet of crap that has been tilted so much in the favor of the seller due to decades of salesmanship trial and error? The basis of a good deal is mutual benefit, which can't be reached without honesty.
In addition to the four-square article above, Edmunds has the fascinating account of a writer who went undercover as a car salesman. It includes the four-square technique, and tons more:
I've brought a financial calculator to these kinds of negotiations before, that cut through a degree of BS. Those guys are pros though, they found other things to work on and in part, succeeded.
"Similar to when General Motors launched the Saturn line of cars with flat pricing"
And we all know now how well THAT worked out. Haggling, whether successful or not, gives the impression to the customer that they are in control and are 'saving' money.
In the early days people loved the flat pricing and no haggling, and their Saturns. It wasn't until 96-97 when Saturn became just another Lego set GM marque, complete with haggling, that it all went down hill.
My guess would be they will haggle if the buyer wants to haggle. They aren't going to give up a sale. But, I've never shopped CarMax so I don't really know.
I had a roommate years ago that worked as a salesman at CarMax. He had about the authority to haggle as the kid taking your order at McDonalds. I think the volume is so high that if you don't want it at the marked price, someone tomorrow will. Of course, that was years ago at one lot. YMMV.
What do you mean by flat pricing? That everyone travelling between two cities pays the same fare? Because that certainly doesn't (or shouldn't) happen anywhere. Airline tickets are substanially different from standard goods (be that cars, clothing or whatever else)
Why shouldn't it happen anywhere? What makes airline tickets so different? I think you're confusing the fact that airlines have gotten their operations so screwed up that they have to resort to crazy, opaque pricing with some idea that it's necessary.
I mean, sure, fuel prices go up and down, so it's not like prices should remain static from even day-to-day, but doesn't it strike you as absolutely weird that two people on the same flight may have paid wildly different fares?
For airlines travelling to China: Demand is different depending on whether it is close to Chinese New Year or not. Chinese people travel far from their homes to work and every Chinese New Year they return home to celebrate. There are going to be so much more demand then than most other months. As the demand changes but supply remains relatively constant, the price must change to accommodate.
I wasn't making the argument that prices should remain static regardless of demand, day of the week, or any other factor.
My point was that the airlines have created a pricing system so opaque that it can actually become a deterrent to travel. Why do people sitting next to each other on the same flight pay wildly different fares?
It's the same with clothing. Demand for fashion is extremely fickle, but the supply is relatively fixed- the stores order their inventory ahead of time and what they don't sell they have to put on clearance, send to TJMaxx, etc. And like flights, that trendy four-button blazer has a "shelf-life."
