it's also an undoubtable fact that when you have 120 film in your camera with less exposures, you shoot less frames than when you have more exposures available. With 220, you also have to shoot more before you can change the film to your camera (if you don't have multiple backs). This makes you use more film.
You may be correct but that is probably not enough to convince a manufacturer to produce a product in 220 as well as 120 (and it's fewer frames, not less frames!).
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
Sure they could do it if they wanted to. But Ilford's objective is to make a profit, not to make film. Making and selling film is the vehicle they use to make a profit.
Why don't we petition the government to purchase them a confectioning machine to support our art use of film?
I agree entirely Kodak exists to make a profit for their shareholders too, and they know their business or the company wouldn't have lasted so long, and they obviously don't think it's in their commercial interest to manufacture it.
I just picked up a pack Portra 400VC in 200. It will be my first 220 experience. We'll see how it goes.
I think i can safely predict (assuming you already know and like the emulsion - i can't predict whether you will or not else) how it will go: you will notice that you have to change film less.
Also that you have to carry fewer rolls of film.