Isn't that basically his point, though? I read this as a reflection on the fact that our current economic system incentivizes and promotes companies that refus

Isn't that basically his point, though? I read this as a reflection on the fact that our current economic system incentivizes and promotes companies that refuse to make/sell low-margin goods. It rewards companies that instead make high-margin goods, even when those high-margin goods are genuinely worse for consumers in general. I read this as another poke at capitalism and how it utterly falls down in making efficient markets when there is information asymmetry. And it shows that information asymmetry is easy to artificially introduce, and it's beneficial to sellers (perhaps even required by sellers) to do so. --- Basically - successful safety razor companies exist, but you literally cannot buy their products in person. Stores don't want to sell them, and you won't see commercials for them either (low margin goods usually don't have the budget to spam you with marketing). So the consumer is mislead into purchasing a much more expensive option by default, outside of extensive personal research into what should be an easy choice. If you think Razors are the only place this is happening... I promise it's not. The issue isn't that you can't create a company that sells safety razors. It's that market incentives drive those companies out of sight of consumers by default. The end result is bad for the average consumer.