You can take any random supermarket bread and say it happens to not be as good as your standard, but the process that makes it mass market, making the dough and freezing it in the factory, and baking it in a store, I don't believe has to meaningfully compromise the quality.

I don't know how it would be better, but I don't think it has to be worse.

The manufacturing process makes them worse. On a mass scale, every cent counts and the first thing to take a hit is the quality of the flour and the density of the dough. Then it's machine mixed, frozen, and baked in the very same condition at all time in electric ovens and that makes for a pretty forgettable taste and texture.

The end result is nowhere near what a competent baker can do, working manually and especially when using for instance a wood fire oven

> On a mass scale, every cent counts and the first thing to take a hit is the quality of the flour and the density of the dough.

Yes, but a better product can be sold for more. That's why they are making something resembling baguettes in the first place, and not just the cheapest loaf possible.

(Not saying that in practice the factory baguettes are better than what your favourite baker does. Far from it.)

Surely baguettes are always sold for way more than the cost of ingredients.

I'd assume so. Labour costs (including both baking and retail) are a big part of the price of a baguette.

Why?

Oh, perhaps because I wrote 'Yes, but a better product can be sold for more.'?

To be more explicit: Yes, but a better product can be sold for more than a worse product.

(Not: "Yes, but a better product can be sold for more than price of ingredients.")

They’re pretty good though. And also cheaper. The same argument could be made of chips.