Thanks Brian. OK, that's for HP dye-based inkset #22, and there's nothing in the article about how they derived these findings. Nevertheless.....when we're talking Epson 4900 or 3880 or equivalent Canon models, we're talking pigment inks. There's ink and there's ink. We don't know what the composition of Epson's Ultrachrome HDR inkset is, but whatever it is, there is a lot more than the ingredients that go into the price. These compounds need to be developed and tested. That requires people and laboratories and time. Then there is the manufacturing and packaging costs, to a consistent and high quality standard, so again probably lots of testing; then the manufacturer is entitled to some rate of return on its invested equity; then there is transportation, marketing, advertising, wholesalers' margins and retailers' margin, plus various taxes along the way. Note, I am not trying to defend any particular pricing practice - just saying there's a whole lot more going into the cost than the raw materials, whatever the percentage water content, and we consumers must pay for all that. It may also be true that the price of the ink subsidizes the up-front cost of the printers (the razor blade and carrier-provided cellphone business models), and this perhaps explains why 3rd party inks can be a lot cheaper than OEM inks - the 3rd party guys don't design, manufacture, market and warranty printers that need to be marketed at attractive enough prices for a large enough body of consumers to buy-in.