FP4+ more in GBP than USD by a mile - How Possible?

[Tom Stanworth]

I recently noticed that FP4+ 5x4 25 shoot boxes are £35 to £40 in the UK (£35.06 Silverprint and 39.99 from Firstcall) and about $30 in the US ($28.95 from B&H and £29.99 at Adorama).

How is this possible and why are we paying close to double the price for a product made in the UK? Forget our 20% VAT being the explanation, because we are paying an extra 90% in the UK.

At this rate it is far cheaper to reimport from the US, which is absurd. It cannot possibly be due to logistical costs and economies of scale in the US.

What's the reason? I feel like we are being ripped off here, but will quickly adopt a smile if there is a sensible explanation!

 

[jun]

I recently noticed that FP4+ 5x4 25 shoot boxes are £35 to £40 in the UK (£35.06 Silverprint and 39.99 from Firstcall) and about $30 in the US ($28.95 from B&H and £29.99 at Adorama).

How is this possible and why are we paying close to double the price for a product made in the UK? Forget our 20% VAT being the explanation, because we are paying an extra 90% in the UK.

At this rate it is far cheaper to reimport from the US, which is absurd. It cannot possibly be due to logistical costs and economies of scale in the US.

What's the reason? I feel like we are being ripped off here, but will quickly adopt a smile if there is a sensible explanation!

Same is here in Japan.

There will be no reasonable and sensible explanation that we can agree.

For example, Fuji instant film FP-100C (3x4") in Japan (Shinjuku Yodobashi Camera) price is approximately 24.00 USD (excl. tax and others, 1.00 USD = 77.00 JPY).
Now for the same product in NY USA (B&H price) is 7.50 USD.

Why we Japanese are paying three (3) times the price for a Fuji product made in Japan?

What we can say is that the transportation cost itself is nil compared to other factors that determines the price of the product such as film (which is light and small, which can be also said to almost all photographic goods).
So some other factors will contribute and determine the price of such product (like distribution system, marketing etc).

 

[john_s]

In a word: Marketing.

I got sick of reading that Neopan was great because it was cheap, but here (Australia) it was the most expensive film in its class.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well, the Republicans would just blame Obama for the lower costs, so don't bother asking why in the US!

 

[pentaxuser]

This was discussed extensively in another post or was it posts?. It is clearly Harman policy to do this, You've just found another example of this pricing policy. Clearly the U.S. is its biggest market. Upset the U.S. customers and you might lose your main income stream. Upset the U.K customers and you might lose a little of your market or given the state of Kodak you might not lose any.

U.K. analoguers who haven't moved to digital are stuck with Hobson's choice.Well Harman certainly thinks so

If Kodak folds then it will be like the joke about the person suffering from depression: "To get better I was told to smile as things could get worse. So I smiled and things indeed did get worse"

If you happen to be overweight and starting a campaign about this blatantly unfair pricing policy will expend calories then continue as you will get lighter. However don't expect it to change Harman's position

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

FP4+ more in GBP than USD by a mile - How Possible?

Is that in Imperial Miles, US Statue Miles or Nautical Miles?

 

[Tom Stanworth]

Well its quite simple; they have lost a customer. I'm not paying £39/ $60 for 25 sheets of 5x4. Its a joke. It was not that long ago that it was £17 for a box, then £25 and now its just silly.

I can buy boxes of 5x7 FP4+ from the US, import it to the UK and it is still cheaper than fuelling a 5x4 camera at UK prices assuming I buy a handfull of boxes to spread postage. Alternatively I can buy a FIFTY sheet box of Foma 100 in the UK for ten pounds less than 25 sheets of FP4+.

I am all for supporting Ilford, but I don't like being taken for a mug.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

In the days when Kodak packaged Rochester-made film overseas it would cost less in the US if it was imported from the EU/UK. How that figures was also beyond me: cost of shipping it to Europe, the cost of slitting and boxing in Europe and then the cost of shipping it back to New York.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

The answer simply is globalisation, market segmentation and marketing policy. Nothing new about that. It's not all bad and it's not all good. Happens with most internationally traded items. Try buying a US sourced car in Australia for less than twice the USA price. You can't. Import a couple of container loads of the same car ex a dealer in the US yourself and you might break even.

And that might even be part of the answer. I bet Adorama, B&H and anyone else in the huge USA market is actually shipping full container loads of product at least once a month or more frequently than that, and the freight and handling cost per unit in those containers is measured in a few cents or even fractions of a cent. How many UK suppliers would order a whole container load at a time? I bet not even Silverprint can do that.

You're not a mug. You simply don't understand. And you won't buy Ilford any more? I bet that's got them really rattled, but the UK retailer might also feel a bit miffed.
But if you're happy using Foma with all its quality problems, and don't mind having to store multiple boxes of re-imported Ilford stock in excess of normal usage patterns then go ahead if it makes you feel better. I'd prefer to pay more and be assured that what I was using was first rate quality and fresh when I use it - not just when I first bought it.

 

[MattKing]

This has more to do with distribution than anything else.

Ilford probably shoulders all the distribution administration issues itself for product sold in the UK, whereas it just sells product in quantity to its US distributor. That US distributor then determines the price it re-sells to US retailers after determining its costs.

Ilford most likely makes a reasonable amount of profit on its UK sales. The US distributor and US retailers control how much profit they make, and therefore may elect to accept less.

Ilford may also have some longer term pricing agreements with their US distributor.

 

[Adrian Twiss]

I remember the previous post about this issue. At the time I suggested that UK customers could "club" together and import a moderately large bulk purchase from the US. My only issue is that if the package is X rayed before transit the film could be damaged. Any thoughts anyone?

 

[john_s]

I remember the previous post about this issue. At the time I suggested that UK customers could "club" together and import a moderately large bulk purchase from the US. My only issue is that if the package is X rayed before transit the film could be damaged. Any thoughts anyone?

Some of us in Australia have made bulk purchases of Ilford film from the US and so far, no problems.

I bought a camera from a US resident and he included several rolls of film. Shipping by DHL. The package said "SCANNED," I phoned them to ask what "scanned" meant and they refused to answer, assuming I suppose that I was a terrorist looking for clues about shipping bombs. The film (low speed) was ok.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I don't know about X-Rays from the US to the UK, but have regularly bought film in Afghanistan through the APO military mail and suspect most of it is X-Rayed in the military postal chain. I say this, because when I have had unusual looking items in there, the box has been opened, suggesting that the X-Ray has been the prompt for doing so. None have had any damage. I doubt it would be an issue, but there would be only one way to find out....

FWIW Foma has had QC issues before, but as far as I can tell (at least with Foma 100) it is clean as a whistle; at least it has been for me for hundreds of rolls over about four years. I believe most of the issues were related to the 200 film, which ceased production and has now come back from the dead. I do not know if QC is better now with this film and will have to try it.

Also, this whole freshness thing is overstated most of the time, esp with slow films. I just shot some 5x4 FP4+ that expired in 2005 and it is no different to new stock that I can see. I'd quite happily stock up on films and use them a little later, at or around their expiry, if it saved a boat load of money. By the time you have shot 250 sheets of 5x4, it will have cost you £190/$300 more in the UK compared to the US and that's significant.

Considering that the market for film products in the UK is smaller than the US, but not miniscule, I struggle to see how the economy of scale issue is the cause unless Ilford is allowing US importers to buy at much lower prices than they will allow UK wholesalers/retailers to buy at. We have trucking, the Atlantic, more trucking and (probably) warehousing (US) versus a few miles of British roads for UK retailers. Considering that retailers like Silverprint turn over plenty of Ilford film, paper and chems, I can imagine that they are able to take a good van load at a time. That van only has to do a relatively small number of miles down British roads from the Ilford factory, or take a share of a truck journey servicing a number of retailers in London.

Rather than being patronising as some posts have been, I would be interested to know if anyone can provide a convincing market driven explanation for the differential, rather than one that involves a deliberate pricing policy on the part of Ilford. I strongly suspect the latter and, if this is correct, I have every right to be indignant. That is how markets work. The consumer decides where choices are available and, whilst I am only one person, I am quite a liberty to make decisions which save me considerable amounts of money.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I recently noticed that FP4+ 5x4 25 shoot boxes are £35 to £40 in the UK (£35.06 Silverprint and 39.99 from Firstcall) and about $30 in the US ($28.95 from B&H and £29.99 at Adorama).

How is this possible and why are we paying close to double the price for a product made in the UK? Forget our 20% VAT being the explanation, because we are paying an extra 90% in the UK.

At this rate it is far cheaper to reimport from the US, which is absurd. It cannot possibly be due to logistical costs and economies of scale in the US.

What's the reason? I feel like we are being ripped off here, but will quickly adopt a smile if there is a sensible explanation!

it has always been more expensive tolive on an island!and..thdt'swhy you sre not alloed to own guns!

 

[Moopheus]

This has more to do with distribution than anything else.

Ilford probably shoulders all the distribution administration issues itself for product sold in the UK, whereas it just sells product in quantity to its US distributor. That US distributor then determines the price it re-sells to US retailers after determining its costs.

Ilford most likely makes a reasonable amount of profit on its UK sales. The US distributor and US retailers control how much profit they make, and therefore may elect to accept less.

In a previous post on this topic Simon Galley pointed to this issue in particular, that they sell at a certain price to distributors, and the distributors decide their own markups. Some countries are notorious for having complex and costly distribution systems that drive up the cost of everything.

Also, in the US at least there is not one price level everywhere. A few of the larger dealers (B&H, Freestyle, Adorama) can offer good prices, most of the smaller shops must sell at much higher prices due to volume.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

If distribution and volume was the issue, it would affect all manufacturers similarly and the fact is that it doesn't. Compare Foma sheet film in the US with Ilford and the do the same in the UK, closer to where both are made. The conclusion is that Ilford sheet film is not that much more than Foma in the US, but Ilford is dramatically more expensive than Foma in the UK. Prices below are for 25 sheets (with Foma films this is half the 50 box price)

B&H - USA
FP4+ $29
Foma $25

Silverprint - UK
FP4+- £35.06
Foma - £13.48

AG - UK
FP4+ - £35.79
Foma - £13.45

Note that for Foma film to reach the UK it still has to drive across most of Europe and cross the channel before hitting the British roads Ilford starts out on right away. How does it end up miles cheaper than Ilford in the UK, but almost the same price in the US. It does look rather like deliberately inflated UK prices on the part of Ilford.

There is not one price level in the UK either. It seems the Ilford box of 5x4 goes from just over £35 to over £40. Bulk sellers like Silverprint and AG tend to be at the lower end and represent teh B&H and Adoramas of the US for darkroom products.

 

[Ian Grant]

I started the other main thread on this topic and totally agree with Tom. In the past I have bought from the US with no problems and may well do the same again for Ilford films. I've plenty of stock at present though.

While in Turkey I found Foma films easy to get off the shelf and have been very happy with the results 120 & 5x4 and so will almost certainly switch to Fomapan 100 for 10x8 work once I use up my last boxes of Fortepan 200.

HP5 has become one of my main films for 5x4 because I can work hand held with it (while in Turkey) and there's no substitute I'd use instead but I will have to think carefully what slow film I use in future.

It would be great if Ilford enabled those of us in the UK to buy films at prices as competetive as those in the US instead of the extortionate prices that mean many of us switch brands or import from the US.

Ian

 

[freecom2]

You can replace 'FP4+' in the title with pretty much any consumer product. It's just the way it goes in the UK I'm afraid.

 

[railwayman3]

Considering that the market for film products in the UK is smaller than the US, but not miniscule, I struggle to see how the economy of scale issue is the cause unless Ilford is allowing US importers to buy at much lower prices than they will allow UK wholesalers/retailers to buy at. We have trucking, the Atlantic, more trucking and (probably) warehousing (US) versus a few miles of British roads for UK retailers. Considering that retailers like Silverprint turn over plenty of Ilford film, paper and chems, I can imagine that they are able to take a good van load at a time. That van only has to do a relatively small number of miles down British roads from the Ilford factory, or take a share of a truck journey servicing a number of retailers in London.

Rather than being patronising as some posts have been, I would be interested to know if anyone can provide a convincing market driven explanation for the differential, rather than one that involves a deliberate pricing policy on the part of Ilford. I strongly suspect the latter and, if this is correct, I have every right to be indignant. That is how markets work. The consumer decides where choices are available and, whilst I am only one person, I am quite a liberty to make decisions which save me considerable amounts of money.

Firstly, I'm a greater supporter of Ilford (I've praised their products and service in another thread only this week), and am more than happy to pay a fair price to give them a good profit and thereby help keep Harman in a healthy business and financial state.

BUT, there is something here which makes me a little uncomfortable, as it gives an impression of "let's charge what the UK market will stand" (I was going to say "let's charge the most we can get away with", but that would be a little harsh).

The retail price and mark-up which the US distributor charges is actually irrelevent (they can choose a premium retail price, and accept that some will buy elsewhere, or sell at a small markup, shift more product and make their profit that way).

What matters is that Ilford (presumably) make a reasonable profit on their wholesale price to their US distributors, enough that someone, they or the distributors, can also absorb the high transport costs half-way round the world.

So, if that's profitable, could they not sell at a similar wholesale price to UK retailers, and, given the negligible distribution costs,
allow a reduced retail price and still a fair profit all round.

Perhaps someone can fill in what I'm missing???

(Curiously, the two-for-one packs of HP4+ which 7dayshop.com have been selling recently (even given that they avoid the VAT charge by being based in the Channel Islands, still an amazing bargain!) look to be originally packaged for the US market?)

 

[pentaxuser]

it has always been more expensive tolive on an island!and..thdt'swhy you sre not alloed to own guns!

Based on the anger of the OP, justified in my opinion, and that of others based in the U.K. it's not whether some U.K. APUGers can obtain guns that Harman has to fear, it's the ability to obtain maps showing how to get to Mobberley

We may as well get a laugh out of the situation as we have no ability to get action taken by Harman. The price differential would have caused a re-importation initiative in other markets and other goods but the fact that the effort needed by the U.S. stockists and the limited market they perceive is available to them makes the profit too small to bother, I suspect

I'd be amazed if the whole topic hasn't been discussed at Mobberley and the "what if this sparks re-importation?" question hasn't been posed. My assumptions in the above paragraph may well have been the conclusions reached by the movers and shakers at Mobberely.

pentaxuser




pentaxuser

 

[R.Gould]

Much as I like Ilford film and paper I gave up on it over a year ago because of this point, It seems it is another case of ''Rip of Britain'' and I have been using Foma 400 film in both 120 and 35mm ever since, and I am very happy with it, and I know several other film users over here that feel the same, and now even if Harman got their act together I very much doubt if I would now go back as I am very happy with the alternitives out there.
Richard

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I too really want to support the Ilford brand for all the obvious reasons, but paying through the nose to do so takes me into uncomfortable territory. This is not about Ilford bashing (I love the products and their commitment to film), but instead just wanting to support a great brand on a fair basis - nothing more. It does not seem right that in order to support a brand from the country I live in, I have to elect to pay them a special 'extra something, because you are British and we can' subsidy.

Speaking of price increases, has anyone noticed the price rise on Kaiser and Dunco 4 blade easels? They have just gone up 70%, approx but in this case I can imagine that the volume is trifling, hence the need if they are to continue making them. I managed to get one at the old price - the last in stock - hurray!

 

[Tom Stanworth]

You can replace 'FP4+' in the title with pretty much any consumer product. It's just the way it goes in the UK I'm afraid.

With many products, if you add a few % to the US price for the reduced economy of scale, cost of retail space, higher fuel costs in the UK and then add 20% VAT you get the UK retail price. Except with Ilford sheet film, where it seems there is an additional 50-60% hiding in there somewhere. Lets not forget there are import taxes paid when bringing it into the US too....

For example, knock 20% off Leica prices and you get a price slightly lower than US retail.

I have never tried Foma 400, but I will now. I have heard it is a bit slower than TriX/HP5+. FP4+ is taken care of with Foma 100, which is about 1/3-1/2 a stop slower in use.

 

[keithwms]

 

[railwayman3]

keithwms - your chart indicates that the US price would be expected to be decreasing over the period, as it becomes cheaper to pay for imports. (And it actually encourages exports from the UK, as the goods needs less $ to pay for the same number of £). It doesn't explain the difference between the retail prices in the UK and US for the same unit of film.