Hmm; no, I really disagree with this. The opaque car market does tend to increase revenues for dealers, but no one has explained how it incentivizes them to pr

Hmm; no, I really disagree with this. The opaque car market does tend to increase revenues for dealers, but no one has explained how it incentivizes them to provide a better product. How could it? Car purchasing may well be a multi-dimensional problem, and price only the most visible dimension; innovation could explain those other dimensions better (like TrueCar is doing for price). But why should opacity remain a part of this process? Every car may be a unique snowflake (really?), but the price should be a function not of the buyer's bargaining power, but the car options. The wrong incentives are unlikely to produce the right result; we know this from ECON101, why should markets for cars be exceptional? Did not like the self-promotion here. Finally: this article was not nearly opinionated enough. The article explains that the cars industry doesn't like TrueCar; but then it doesn't explain the argument against TrueCar. This is a common journalistic mistake; I'm happy to disagree civilly, but don't sacrifice the discussion to civility. If side X doesn't have a point, then just say so. In a debate, I'd rather have my points demolished than politely dropped. And readers are confused; I reread this article because I thought I had missed something...