Unfortunately, I've just read this article today. Even though it's been almost a year since publication, I'd like to say something about it. If the price is lower it doesn't mean that the service is that bad, as described here. This cost covers the minimum what's required for the climbing, they do take care of clients, they do carry their sleeping bags, food and whatever is needed in higher camps, they do provide the toilet and shower tents, they do take the waste down from the mountain, as they pay the deposit for that. It looks like this article was written for the people, who's never been to Everest and don't know how it works. And the salaries of Sherpas in these "low-cost" expeditions are much-much higher than $ 800, nobody will go for this amount to the top of the world. Why did Russell brought the name of the particular company as an example? Just because they got 98 clients?? Not that many people can pay $ 60-70,000 for taking part in the expedition, but more people are able to pay $ 30,000. They are just different types of clients, to my opinion.