This is illegal in many states.
The “pro” argument for it is that it keeps more money intra State rather than sending it upstream to the parent company’s home country / State.
The con is that you’re shafting consumers and eliminating true competition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/03/18...
That's not really how walmart works. They don't jack up prices in local areas after the businesses go away. They just operate on much smaller margins and sell cheaper versions of things which is what gives them so much staying power.
https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/13/business/company-news-wal...
Searching "Walmart predatory pricing" returns quite a lot of results.
But let's not forget owning a car in europe is vastly more expensive and also far less needed for a lot of people. (especially those living in large cities with public transportation).
Im in my mid twenties and don't own a car, neither do most of my peers.
The ones who do all buy older, second or third hand vechicles which are easier to maintain and also cheaper. (toyota/volvo for instance). Most people seem to be mostly concerned with the primary function of a car, which is getting someone from A to B. Other functions seem to be less "useful" for most people i know.
Also, driving distances are vastly shorter for a majority of europeans.
Luxury cars seem to be mainly gained by using either a private lease contract or getting one on a company's expanse for bussiness purposes.
Ultimately though, the nature of manufacturing determines almost everything in automotive. For manufacturers to be competitive they have to highly efficient assembly lines, which means a nearly constant output of vehicles per month from a typical plant. Supply is constant, and But demand is seasonal, and responds to various factors, many of them regional, and some of them hyper-regional (a hail storm for instance). Manufacturer’s need to be able to keep vehicles from stockpiling outside of the factory, and they work with dealers to do this through various incentives, loans, and programs.
Dealerships provide a measure of adaptiveness, because each dealer has his or her own lines of credit and capital, relationships with local city councils, charities, and media, and local knowledge of real estate in a way that would be difficult for a vertically integrated system to manage. Successful dealers are treated well, and unsuccessful ones are muscled out if they aren’t doing their job of moving units in their region.
If you dig around on the forums where Tesla bears hang out you can see photos of parking lots full of newly built cars with nowhere to go, and how hard of a time they are having managing a slightly higher rate of production.
Manufacturers with large offline presence would have inflated staff numbers, higher labor costs, massive real estate presence and are harder to operate in case of a downturn.
Having some well-resourced locals willing to take up those risks seemed like a win-win at the time.
You don't need a real estate agent to buy a home. Do they make it easier for some folks? Yes, but you definitely pay for that convenience. You always have the option of doing it yourself (again, which saves a lot of money). Buying a car should be the same way. If you need help selecting a car (or whatever it is that dealers do), pay extra for the service. For everyone else, buying direct from the manufacturer makes more sense.
Trade-ins, used cars, service and maintenance are the margin drivers.
If you go through TrueCar, or any of their white-labeled sites (Costco Auto, Amex Cars, Overstock Cars), you're more or less buying direct.
Because local dealerships are well connected politically.