You can use arrow keys to navigate in the map.
Then those who have more wealth could purchase vast amounts of organs and retain them in storage. Therefore, those with more wealth would have control over the supply and demand of organs. The poor man's survival would ultimately be at the discretion of the wealthy. Sounds like a horror film.
Severe violation of human rights.
it would reduce the wait time of those in need of organs, save countless lives, and provide assistance to families of deceased loved ones by paying them for their loved ones' organs.
It would push companies to research for artificial organs to dominate the market
-> organs would become cheaper, assessable for everyone
It would compell people in desperate conditions to sell their organs.
This isn't a bad thing, because if someone wishes to sell an organ, that is okay.
It is an entirely non-consensual practice that would effectively force those living in poverty to surrender their internal tissues at steadily lesser prices.
The practice would be consensual, as the premise lists a free market of organs. No person would be forced to sell organs without their consent. Additionally, the above argument implies that it is less moral to give an option to alleviate poverty than to continue living in poverty without the option.
This means that only the rich would be able to get organs easily. These who are poor without much money will have a much harder time, and may die because of it.