Hacker News Reader

Comment by lostlogin | Hacker News Reader

> Collusion of the biggest producers would also explain why the more expensive eggs at the store did not rise as much as the cheaper brands.

Why would that be the case?

View on HN

Because smaller independent and family farms aren’t colluding?

But they are already more expensive. Does that mean they were colluding previously?

Couldn’t you argue that their pricing is more inflation resistant as their margins already allow for fluctuations in eg fuel prices?

Or their costs are a lot higher. When you don’t pack the chickens in a dense a space, you have more expensive feed, and you have a lot less chickens in the first place, then I’d expect it to cost a lot more.

Their costs are higher as it is more expensive to raise chickens using their methods. So one would expect these eggs to be more expensive.

their costs are almost certainly not higher in proportion to their costs. There is almost without a doubt a premium because the people that they are selling to are not price sensitive.

> their costs are almost certainly not higher in proportion to their costs.

Do you mean “their costs are almost certainly not higher in proportion to their profits.” I’m struggling to understand.

>But they are already more expensive. Does that mean they were colluding previously?

how is that your conclusion?

I don’t think that. I’m trying to understand why the parent comment thinks high priced eggs meant no collusion in the past, but means collusion now.

So your best guess as to why small-farm pastured eggs are more expensive must be that they colluded? It's because they cost more - how is that not obvious? How did you skip past that to the other is what everyone was wondering.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com