Wow you get your film cheap. I don't know where I can get $2 film these days.
But even then, your math is based on the assumption that you will own the M9M till the day it dies completely with no way of fixing it. Even if you bought the M8 for $4,500, it's still worth a cool $2,000 like 6 years later. I am sure many of us would've spent $2,500 on film in 6 years.
Okay, it's $2.69 actually (right now). I've paid as low as $2.19. Even so, that would still get me 2,974 rolls -- or 107,064 photos. Even at $3.00 per roll I'd get almost 100,000 photos. Are the digital M cameras shutters even rated for above 100,000 actuations? (I honestly don't know).
$2500 = 33,444 photos. To me, that's still quite a lot of photos.
If you had to fix an old M out of warranty, that could cost a pretty penny. If my M8 shutter or sensor dies tomorrow, it's likely going to cost me $1000 or more to fix (and I wouldn't be able to get the same thing likely... I have an original M with the 1/8000 max shutter speed). In digital you'd have to maintain a decent computer, storage and software. There are always additional costs in either camp to consider (like cost of chemicals or developing) -- but I wash all that out just for sake of easy numbers. Leica film cameras have maintained their value better than the digitals... and my Zeiss, I could sell it for almost exactly what I paid for it 2 years ago... so you really have to call all of that a wash too.
I'm certainly not saying this is an argument against the M9M. I just don't think anyone can make the argument that
this camera will be the tipping point that pushes film-die-hards to finally switch to digital... and it's partially because of the price. At $4K it would still be hard to swallow for a lot of people, but I bet a whole lot more people would entertain the idea.
And I'm a Leica-fan-girl, so I'd likely buy it if money allowed. LOL. I like to live in denial and believe I'll afford one again someday, but that's highly unlikely.
😉