Guest, I'm in with Chef,

The point I tried to make in my last post was that people can charge whatever they like for their goods and services. You seem to indicate that because Co A and Co B charge a certain price for a service (shipping, which by the way is not the same thing as "postage"), that Co Camsco has an obligation to you and Chef to charge the same amount. Last time I checked, we were still operating in a free enterprise (Oh, no, there's a whole new discussion), which, in this case, I interpret as Camsco can charge whatever they want or need to. You, as a consumer in that system, can elect to buy or not. Why do you need to cast aspersions on a seller other than to say the price was higher. Had Chef simply stated that initially, no problem. Hell, maybe that was even his main point, and I think it was. (Sorry, Chef, I didn't mean to assume that you are a male.) My only problem is that when someone that I think is working hard for what I consider a common good (keeping the music alive), and someone else comes along and accuses them of being devious, I object, and will say so. I don't even know Dick Greenhaus and wouldn't recognize him if I bumped into him.