I just bought bulbs from Home Depot yesterday. Specifically, the chandelier style base. Home Depot had a package of 4 incandescent bulbs for <$5USD[0]. They sold a set of 3 LED bulbs with the same base for just under $7USD[1]. To the average consumer, the LEDs are way too expensive.

I'm not sure I'd agree that incandescent bulbs are 10x the former price. However, you may be thinking of the Edison style bulbs that are trendy now. One of these bulbs does cost as much as the multi-packs[2]. They also have these in LED style for even higher prices.

[0]:https://www.homedepot.com/p/Sylvania-25-Watt-Double-Life-B10... [1]:https://www.homedepot.com/p/EcoSmart-40-Watt-Equivalent-B11-... [2]:https://www.homedepot.com/p/Globe-Electric-60-Watt-Incandesc...

The LEDs you linked are also about twice as bright at 1/5th the power consumption.

Say you have one light bulb running three hours per day (living room, kitchen or office in the evening seems realistic). It uses 20 W more than the LED and using $0.15 per kWh (average rate in California) this gives

20 W* 3h * $0.15/(1000 Wh) * 365 = $3.29 every year

If you regularly use two incandescent bulbs the "more expensive package" paid for itself within a year and gives you brighter light at the same time.

But that involves math. The average consumer isn't looking at that. They just look at the prices in front of them.

I really think the price/wattage comparison thing needs to be the entire packaging design. I overheard a sales person helping a shopper choosing a generator size by adding up the wattage of all of the devices needed including lights. I turned into the conversation to politely suggest using LEDs for lighting because of the lower wattage requirements. Both the sales person and the shopper were shocked at the difference.

Thanks for the info. "Rugged service" or "long life" seem to be the magic words for finding them.