Originally Posted by
r.e.
Have you looked at the actual prices? I don't regard an increase in the price of 10 sheets of 8x10 T-Max 400 from US$100 to $170 as "just the way it works". At the moment, at least, HP5+ is $10/sheet less. That may be spare change to you, but I daresay that some people, indeed most, would have a different view.
My point was that Kodak Alaris is effectively inviting its customers to change suppliers. I don't quite get how a 70% price increase can be interpreted as benignly as you suggest. Do you really regard this as normal, and anyone who questions it, to use your word, as a "moaner"?
A 70% price increase is 12 times the current pandemic-induced inflation rate in OECD member countries.
I'd also like to address this sentence in your post: "There is no "signaling" to each other." As it happens, antitrust law (competition law outside the U.S.) is one of the few things that I know something about. "Price signalling" is a technical term. You appear to have decided that I'm alleging that there's a price-fixing scheme in the works, which is where that term is relevant. I have no idea how you got that from what I wrote. I simply raised the question of how Ilford will respond to Kodak Alaris's price hikes.
I didn't say, nor imply, anything whatever about price signalling and price fixing. As a matter of common sense, Ilford will be thinking about the fact that it prices 8x10 HP5+ 400 at $7.12 a sheet and Kodak Alaris is now pricing T-Max 400 at $17 a sheet. Also as a matter of common sense, people who shoot 8x10 ISO 400 B&W will be thinking about whether they want to spend $10/sheet more (240% more) for T-Max 400.
I happen to be making that decision now. I guess that I'm one of the people that you've branded as moaners. What I think is that you don't even know what the prices are, despite the fact that I put them right in front of you.
Bookmarks