> Wax has been estimated to be worth between ten to 18 times it's weight
> in honey, and that does not include lost nectar during the time it was
> being synthesized. Bees foraging activity is also stimulated by the
> surface area of comb available for filling. Cut comb out, you cut honey
> production out.
 
I agree with Garth on this -- in theory.  However have to comment the
the theorical math does not always work out. The case against comb is not
quite that bad...
 
I have never made much cut comb, but did make an awful lot of Ross Rounds.
 When making the Rounds, we often found that we made on average a bit
over half amount of honey that we did in other hives making extracted
honey nearby.  We averaged 100 sections per hive while about 100
pounds were typical at that time on extracted.  I should note that the
RR sections were often about 10 ounces, not the 8 that the label says, so
that means we got around 60 pounds average on comb.  Some hives did
make double or triple the above, of course, on both comb and
extracted.  However, poor hives or poor flows made nothing on rounds where
they might have made some honey on extracted.
 
Another big consideration is that the need to build comb puts a
lot of pressure on the brood nest.  If the queen cannot or will not
compete strongly with nectar for cells (old or conservative queens), the
populations dwindle a a bit, and wintering tends to be quite a bit poorer
as a result.
 
Allen