Before delving into the feasibility of Kodak's razor and blade strategy, one should have a clearer picture of what this really means.
             The business model that the American company has decided to use for its inkjet printer was introduced by King C. Gillette and consists of commercializing two complementary products of unequal value. In other words, a company applying such model will establish a master (core) product which is offered at an incredibly low price (and, sometimes, for free) and a secondary one (a consumable) which is vital to the former's functioning and which is sold at a higher price. Thus, the two products are closely linked to each other and represent a profitable business as the loss assigned to the master product is excellently compensated by the benefits attributed to the consumable. A classical example, in this regard, was Standard Oil's attempt to trade oil lamps in China. For successfully entering the Asian market, the US company offered almost 8 million lamps for free while establishing a high price for kerosene, the combustible without which the respective product couldn't be used (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_and_blades_business_model).
             Consequently, Kodak has considered that such technique can be successfully applied to its inkjet printer and cartridges. Hence, if the former is rather cheap, the latter is provided at a higher price for resulting in an overall profit. The American company's initiative has been strongly questioned by both analysts and competitors. Yet, when making a list of pros and cons, the first category seems to prevail and forecast a favorable outcome for Kodak's printer. And here is why.
             First of all, the American corporation is striving to differentiate itself from famous rivals. Therefore, it has decided to customize the traditional razor and blade model by offering the printer at a higher price than competitors and reducing the price of ink by...