Writing in the New York Times today, Micheline Maynard reminded me that everything GM is promising to do now–reinvent itself, forge a new relationship with the UAW, improve customer care, develop more fuel-efficient cars–it tried to do with Saturn.

Saturn met with some early success. Many people who would never buy another GM car bought a Saturn. It was essentially an independent company, with its own engineering, factory, flexible profit-sharing labor agreement, and customer-friendly no-haggle dealers.

Then GM didn’t invest in product improvements, and reversed nearly every step it had taken with Saturn. Except for the dealers–those continued their customer-pleasing ways.

With Saturn sales in a dive, GM pulled a page out of the Oldsmobile playbook, and gave the brand a fresh line-up of competitive vehicles. Unfortunately, customers did not respond.

Why not? First off, Saturns are no longer much different than other GM cars.

Second, while there are still some awful dealers, many have improved their practices, so Saturn no longer has the edge in customer satisfaction it once had.

Finally, and I suspect of greatest import, with other GM cars enjoying heavy discounts, Saturn’s no-haggle prices have been uncompetitive. It was one thing to have slightly high prices when the cars were unique. But when they’re not, people tend to buy the GM brand with the big discount.

And so, when asked to provide a viable business plan, GM has excluded Saturn from its core brands. There’s a good chance it will be sold or discontinued.

A shame, because if GM had applied what it learned at Saturn to the rest of GM, instead of making Saturn like the rest of GM, the corporation would not be on the verge of bankruptcy.