Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's multiple competitors for a product they compete and prices are lower overall? If there are no competitors you can charge a higher price. There really isn't much alternatives for eInk that don't totally alter the product. A Kindle with an LCD screen would just be a shitty limited tablet and so Amazon is forced to pay a higher price per unit for an eInk screen than a similar sized LCD.
> If there's multiple competitors for a product they compete and prices are lower overall? Sure, race to the bottom, but that's got nothing to do with OP's original claim of "expensive", nor the costs to actually manufacture electrophoretic displays, nor patents. How many competitors are there for Microsoft Windows? How many competitors are there for Google search? What price do you think is "not expensive"? How did…
Microsoft Windows is pretty expensive for an OS...its main competitors are literally free. But since they aren't a near-perfect replacement for Windows, Microsoft can charge more per unit. This is pretty similar to how LCDs are not a near-perfect replacement for eInk displays and that there's essentially only 1 mature supplier they can charge more per unit than an LCD manufacturer can.
Since again, the display tech is essentially what defines a Kindle Amazon is somewhat forced to use eInk displays despite their higher cost otherwise it would not be the same product.