Yes, this is where I'm coming from in terms of the non-trade argument. It seems the location itself was as important as the axe, possibly more so (esp. if the same rock can be found elsewhere). I know that this can still be turned on it's head - amount we pay for real champagne versus other sparkling wines for example.
The distribution of axes does not lend itself to a classic ecomonic model - most being found at greatest distance from the source, the source being in a particularly remote and difficult location whilst alternative sources exist but apparently went unused.
It may be that it was all part of the ritual - the source, the journey, it's final destination.