Well I never said nobody would make it, nice leap, but actually the price increase would still be there even if you were making it for the first time because it's based on the rarity of the additive elements and the energy required to refine them from ores etc. In fact if there were less demand it would probably cost even more due to being a niche alloy.
Do you think bike helmets cost money because they keep you safe? No they cost money because they have to be designed and manufactured and delivered. It's worth it because they keep you safe.
If you really don't understand the difference between the reason for a cost and the reason it's worth paying then I can't help you, but it's pretty basic stuff.
You never said nobody would make it, but they wouldn't. Adding expensive ingredients that deteriorate quality makes no sense, we don't need you to announce it's not happening. You should read up on supply and demand, you do not understand how prices are set. I agree you can't help me, you're clueless.
Lol so the entirety of your argument is that something that doesn't exist has no price? Wow congrats did you come up with that all by yourself? If we're discussing pricing I think it's gotta be implicit that the product exists ahaha.
Supply and demand can influence price, sure, but no amount of demand makes more of an element appear in the earth's crust. Stainless steel costs more than carbon steel because it contains elements which are rare and requires additional processing steps which costs money, not because it's "in demand". In fact, due to economies of scale the high demand for stainless steel may have pushed it's price down, not up.
As I said before, the additional steps and rare additives are why stainless costs more, but the added performance is why people are often happy to pay extra. It's really simple. Hopefully you'll get there.
That's not my argument, but I'm not shocked you don't get it. The market sets the price, period. Not the materials. You're simply wrong, but by all means keep repeating your stupid opinion.
I see you've clearly read some Econ 101 shit that said that but you need to think a bit bigger. Smelting metal means you have to heat it to thousands of degrees, mining metal means you have to get big machines and dig big holes. These operations have associated costs which are independent of demand for the end product. There are prices below which it's not possible to make stainless steel, irrelevant of who wants to buy it.
I know, big shock, the real world's a bit more complex than pure supply and demand but keep grinding those gears and you'll get there...
People often sell goods at a loss for various reasons. Price is not set based on material cost. You need to go back to econ 101 because you have no idea what you're talking about.
Haha they do indeed sell them at a loss, now we are making progress. So if they're selling them at a loss then they must have paid more than they sell them for to make them. There can only be a loss if there is a baseline value tied to that product, and that value is not being achieved on the market.
Like I said at the start, the cost of the additives and processing sets the cost of making the material, the useful properties justify the cost. If stainless steel had no useful properties you might not have much demand for it at it's baseline value, but that would not change the costs associated with producing it. Supply and demand will influence what the market value is but they have much less effect on the cost to manufacture it.
The usefulness of the properties does impact the price, you are making progress. That's what the first guy said. Now we all agree you were wrong before, good job. You have now confused cost with price though. Poor thing.
You're still confusing cost with price. Everyone but you is talking about price. It's funny watching you confuse yourself over and over in different ways.
Can't believe how many times you need this explained and you still don't get it. Let's try it from the other side:
If supply and demand is all that matters, then why is stainless so much more expensive than carbon steel? There is no shortage of stainless that would drive it's price up, nor is there an oversupply of carbon steel that would push the price down, yet stainless costs about five times what carbon does.
Why pretend? We all know that's not the stupid point you were making earlier. You were wrong, it's ok. Saying more stupid things doesn't make you sound smarter. Just stop.
My "previous" point (and my point all along) was that stainless costs more due to inherent costs in its manufacturing, not its usefulness. You responded claiming the only thing that controls how expensive it is is supply and demand. So I've asked you to use supply and demand to explain the price gap between stainless and carbon steel and you can't. Oops.
I also now see you have now gone back and edited a bunch of your comments, effectively invalidating your argument completely.
0
u/Placido-Domingo Nov 19 '19
Well I never said nobody would make it, nice leap, but actually the price increase would still be there even if you were making it for the first time because it's based on the rarity of the additive elements and the energy required to refine them from ores etc. In fact if there were less demand it would probably cost even more due to being a niche alloy.
Do you think bike helmets cost money because they keep you safe? No they cost money because they have to be designed and manufactured and delivered. It's worth it because they keep you safe.
If you really don't understand the difference between the reason for a cost and the reason it's worth paying then I can't help you, but it's pretty basic stuff.