p.1 #2 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Yup, I mentioned Kodak/Alaris was cutting prices on a bunch of their films.
It seems they were taking advantage of "inflation" to jack up prices as far as they could to see who would still bite.
And now, they saw the result of that... short term view vs the long game. The problem with, how shall I say, gouging like that is that it may permanently have lost customers who quit their film because it became too expensive.
p.1 #3 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
So if they cut Tri-X 400 to $6.99 I'll buy a whole bunch and shoot fresh film. So far I'm not seeing the lowered prices pass through though -- B&H still has it for $9.99.
So are they going to do it with anything else, or is the rumored price reduction only for Tri-X 400?
p.1 #4 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
coralnut wrote:
So if they cut Tri-X 400 to $6.99 I'll buy a whole bunch and shoot fresh film. So far I'm not seeing the lowered prices pass through though -- B&H still has it for $9.99.
So are they going to do it with anything else, or is the rumored price reduction only for Tri-X 400?
I don't think that photo stores will lower current prices for Tri-X since they also bought it for an uptick in pricing from their supplier. We will likely see prices coming down when the suppliers of film for photo stores also lower the prices in bulk.
Looks like Kodak Alaris observed a loss of demand after they cranked up prices higher and higher. $10 for a 35 mm roll of film with 36 frames is just insane IMO.
p.1 #6 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
When your competitor Ilford sells HP5 for $7.79 -which many prefer over TriX - it’s really hard to justify asking 40% more for your film. And Kentmere 400 which I love, is only $5.79
p.1 #9 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
I have only shot TMY because the negs looked good scanned with my LS8000 and LS9000. I don’t have those film scanners anymore so am curious to try TX in 120.
p.1 #10 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Desmolicious wrote:
When your competitor Ilford sells HP5 for $7.79 -which many prefer over TriX - it’s really hard to justify asking 40% more for your film. And Kentmere 400 which I love, is only $5.79
Price competition is the name of the game when demand for your product has fallen like it has for B&W film. When your competitors realize that the competition for their film isn't another brand of film, it's digital media -- which costs nothing per roll -- then they have to compete by lowering price margins. When your film competitors lower prices you can't raise prices just because your name is Kodak. You have to compete in the real world.
p.1 #12 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
AFAIK it is not a 'sale' it's a 'catalog price reduction', which means that the prices should be permanent for the year. It's just a question of if/when the middlemen who get cheaper prices from the manufacturer are willing to pass the price reductions along to customers.
Maybe we will see some of the other film sources lower their prices before B&H does, as some of them were already beating B&H on price before the new year price reduction by Kodak.
p.1 #14 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Thanks John, I was wondering what B&H's peak pricing was. I think the most I paid was around $11.50 a couple years ago, but it turns out I had gone a couple years without buying Tr-X from B&H.
The going rate at other stores around NYC is $12 to $15 (). Hopefully we will see reductions, but I know of at least one store that raised their price AFTER the Kodak announcement.
p.1 #15 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Still a buck more than HP5+ at B&H, but a nice reduction for those who shoot a lot of Tri-X. I switced to HP5+ a few years ago because it lies so much flatter.
p.1 #16 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
It’s interesting to see that the two films are now closer than they ever have been, in terms of US prices, with only a ~10% difference. I’ve been shooting film for about 6 years, and HP5 has always had a noticeable price advantage, with differences as high as 30-40% from the same retailer.
p.1 #17 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
John Wolf wrote:
Still a buck more than HP5+ at B&H, but a nice reduction for those who shoot a lot of Tri-X. I switced to HP5+ a few years ago because it lies so much flatter.
Stop shopping B&H when you can get it cheaper here
p.1 #19 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
John Wolf wrote:
Just got ten HP5+ rolls from them for $77.90. Tri-X would have been $99.40.
No doubt chicken feed for you color film users, but I’ll take it.
John
And that is after Kodak cut their prices! Let's not kid ourselves, HP5 is made in England so you can't use cheap resources etc as an excuse for why it is that much less than TriX.
"Kodak" was seeing how far they could gouge their customers, especially when a year ago they were asking $12/roll!
p.1 #20 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Its not for everyone, but invest in a bulk loader and some cassettes (initial $50+$20).
Buy bulk roll HP5 ($116) at 20 rolls ($5.80/roll), T-Max 400 ($170) at 20 rolls ($8.50/roll).
). Hopefully we will see reductions, but I know of at least one store that raised their price AFTER the Kodak announcement.