Having looked at points 1-6 made by Simon Galley which I am not denying are part of any products costs, I cannot reconcile this with the correct statement made by pdeeh that it is possible to buy from the U.S. cheaper than from the U.K. certainly for some products even after taking all charges into account.
Simon gives an interesting analogy with car prices between the U.S. and Europe and it was this mention of car prices that sparked my memory about the massive car price differences in the late 80s between some European markets and the U.K.
When questioned about this car manufacturers cited a list of cost similar to Simon's and it appeared that the differences were fully justified until someone decided to try importing cars from the cheaper markets and did so successfully and more cheaply. Re-importing then became a minor industry in itself and any customer could order a car this way and even after paying the middleman's fees still bought more cheaply.
At that point car manufacturers who had said they couldn't reduce prices then did so - at least to the point where it wasn't worth the trouble and hassle to import.
I fear we are charged what the market will bear and unless and until I see a convincing argument to the contrary, this will continue to be my belief
There is an old top gear bit where jeremy clarckson goes to miami to check out total cost of importing a car to the UK and shows the huge savings (mid 80's), however - today most cars, for most large markets are made locally to each market, so all that talk about shipping and duties is not relevant. I guess in a world where Kodak had various plants around the world this also could have had an impact...
Originally Posted by pentaxuser
I remember that about 10 years ago, an ilford importer in a country to remain unnamed, due to bad management had failed to adjust his prices to new list prices from ilford, over a very very long period of time. When the import of ilford went into new hands there was a 100% or more spike in pricing. This was mostly due to the new importer having to restock on all new material, with current prices, where all stock up until then was either bought at lower price, or just sold at a loss or very small margin. To the end customer this hurt real bad, and i think ilford have no control over this type of situation, which sounds very similar to what the OP is talking about and what the price change in Japan reflects.
Are you not recycling any of the chemicals back into the main storage tank? The tetenal 1L kit is suitable for recycling of chems up to a certain point. That's of course how the 1L kit is able to do 12-16 135 rolls. If I were you I'd really look at reusing the chems after dumping back into the tank for atleast twice the sheets you're doing now.
Originally Posted by Mark_S
Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.
I probably could use the chemicals more than one shot, but I know that I get reproducible results doing what I am doing, and I am willing to pay a little extra for that. By far the largest 'cost' for this hobby is my time, not the film or the chemicals. Most of what I shoot and process is B&W where the chemical cost is essentially 0. I made the comment about colour film to point out that even with the recent price increases, ilford B&W film is good value for money - especially when you factor in that they look like they have a plan which will allow them to continue supporting me with materials for years to come.
Originally Posted by clayne