Things are worth what people will pay for them. As nirvana pointed out, looking at only the marginal production cost of something is highly misleading. Heinz makes about 36% gross margins [1], which is certainly good, but it's not as if they're seeing the 'value' of that '10x' markup. And lest you think the rest of their cost is advertising to fool people into spending too much on ketchup, their total marketing (not just ads) budget is only a few hundred million[2] (at least as of 2006) vs total revenue of over $10B.
[1] http://ycharts.com/companies/HNZ/gross_profit_margin
[2] http://adage.com/article/news/heinz-ceo-boost-ad-spend-proxy...
| Things are worth what people will pay for them.
If I pay $50 million for a forged Mona Lisa, does that mean that forgeries of the Mona Lisa are all worth $50 million?But people know what's in Heinz. They know what it tastes like. They keep buying it at the price Heinz and their grocer charges.
The other food that I will only buy one brand is Kraft Mac & Cheese. I know the stuff is nasty. I know it's bad for me. But, damn it that's what boxed Mac & Cheese is suppose to taste like.
How much a person will pay for something determines its "value" to them. If a person will pay $10 for a bottle of ketchup, then it doesn't matter what the production cost was, the value they received was at least $10.
For 99% of consumers, $2 is a value because it's less expensive than making it themselves. It doesn't matter how much it cost Heinz to make.
However, my points are that a) we routinely pay 10x the 'value' of food products, and b) supermarkets piggy back off our conditioning by brands to offer us 'value' products which still cost 8x what they are worth without any of the advertising/marketing overhead.
The parallel would be if Macbook Airs were being made and delivered to Apple stores for $100, or cars were delivered to dealers at a cost of $2,000 and then sold to you for $20,000.