Here in my small town I can get fresh Kodak-and Fuji-made films for $ 1.
They are rebranded though.
Right that only proves my point, if they can afford to sell it to someone else at a price where the rebrander of film can still make a profit on a $1 film, then Kodak and Fuji are certainly price gouging the market...
Actually, that post was intended by me to be a bigger-picture post that encompassed all types of film, and the constant clamor for ever-cheaper prices no matter what the eventual cost or outcome.
While I am sensitive to the relative nature of terms such as "cheap" and "expensive" as applied to each individual photographer's financial situation, I also realize that those terms, and their ripple effects, apply to the manufacturing side of the transaction as well.
What we may complain about as being too expensive, to the manufacturing side may be as rock-bottom cheap as they can go. Any cheaper, and they suffer a real risk of crashing and burning. And then we end up with no film at all.
Regardless of whether one liked their film products or not, Mirko's point was: Think Efke...
I get this, and I don't buy rebranded (I did a trade for some recently but that wasn't because I wanted the film as much as I wanted to get rid of the stuff I had. Lol) but I certainly think for color films, they've gone a bit batty.
...given that UK Poundland can sell Kodak and Agfa 35mm color neg at £1 per roll (= $1.50 ) presumably at a worthwhile profit, it would seem there would be a reasonable return.
The Poundland stock will almost certainly have been sold at a loss to the manufacturer, (Agfa is rebranded Fujicolor 200). It was only available because, presumably, Agfa want out of colour print film and needed to dispose of the remainder to free up expensive storage space. When the supply of 36 exposure film runs out, as it seems to have already done, it's most unlikely we'll see any more. There are a few 24 exposure films left and when that's gone, I'd bet on that being it for cheap film. Poundland will be making a healthy profit but film isn't core business to them, they've simply seen a temporary opportunity.
Ilford would be crazy to get into colour film. If it's not profitable for a company like Fuji who have the infrastructure, expertise and manpower in place, it certainly isn't going to be viable for a profit driven company like Harman Ilford to build from scratch. It's more likely that colour negative stock will disappear completely if the current producers pull out. The best chance for its survival is if an operation like Lomography guarantee substantial orders to keep production rolling. An Impossible Project style operation on colour negative film is exceedingly unlikely because of the scale of investment required. All in all, it's not looking good for colour negative or positive film in the medium to long term.
Oh, and the young versus old thing... A Young bull and an Old bull are standing at the top of a hill looking down at a herd of cows...
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2