That makes good sense, but if there is no competing product and/or if there is an urgent need the price may not be all that elastic.
For a commodity (say, server hardware or mechanical gear with well understood production processes) you'll probably be able to negotiate to some degree. But for a niche item such as this I'm not sure it would be nearly as effective. It would be interesting to know how many manufacturers of such tape there are and what the spread in pricing is. But usually they are not listed, it's 'call us for pricing' aka we'll see how much we can fleece you for.
There are half a dozen companies making and selling REBCO commercially, so there is competition.
In my personal experience with I&C equipment the number is much higher. When the market isn't making sense I make it myself or pay someone to make it. Knowing the price matters a lot.
It depends on the specs. If you have very lenient needs then you can skirt by with STM32s and pay a few bucks per channel. Networked, higher sample rate, higher dynamic range, and industrial spec rating compound for costs up to $1000 per channel. How local high quality I/O is to fast and reliable compute is often a relevant factor not serviced by existing markets. Cabling, connector, panels, cabinet, power supplies, and power distribution costs are also priced for the application. There are very few surprises except when having weird combinations of requirements (as is often the case in interesting applications).
My original point is that "if you have to ask it's too much" is never true. What is true is "if you have to ask then it is a high price, low volume market and there is an expectation of a discussion between the seller and buyer". It's also true that "the price is too much when it's too much", but that isn't a witty adage.
Ah, sorry, I meant the superconducting tape. But another commenter has already given an indication. I interpreted your original comment as spending millions on such tape.
How is "if you have to ask it's too much" different than "if you have to ask, you can't afford it"? The ability to afford something is independent from having to ask. Having to ask is a result of being in the market as a buyer and the seller not publicly stating the price. Most people in market likely know they can afford it. So the saying isn't marginally wrong, it's very wrong.
> How is "if you have to ask it's too much" different than "if you have to ask, you can't afford it"?
thank you for asking, I will answer to the best of my ability to explain how the two differ in the english language for someone who is genuinely curious and asking in good faith:
the answer is that a thing can be priced correctly for some, but still not affordable to everyone who wants one
for example, a superyacht for sale requires asking for the price, and it might be priced well, perhaps at half the going rate for superyachts, but still unaffordable to me and most people – the same goes for giant mansions, private planes, solid gold toilets, compete dinosaur skeletons, etc.
in essence, me not being able to afford a thing, is a description of me, whereas a thing being "too much" is a description of that thing, and applies to everyone buying it, not just me
the saying obviously doesn't apply to the few people rich enough to buy any thing they want
Gotcha, I did not know you meant it that way, as in english, it is the former, and not the latter, and it differs from "can't afford it" in the way I described.
If anything, in english, it is shorthand for "too much for the value it presents", since a superyacht still has value, and thus a million dollars might not be "too much", but I still can't afford one.
Indeed, both this example and the originating one help illustrate both the difference between the two and the utility of the difference: if there was no difference, the saying wouldn't make sense, as you pointed out. But it does make sense, hence why it's a saying, so the two terms must be different, and that difference is that one term applies to the thing as it relates to the payer, and the other term applies to the thing in isolation
