From an economic/business perspective, the simple answer to why there's a pricing factor above and beyond standard supply & demand is that a perfectly competitive market model implies a commodity good - that is the good is more or less identical regardless of which firm you purchase it from. This doesn't hold for skis, since even within similar categories of skis, there are big differences. This doesn't mean that skis aren't subject to supply and demand, it just means that it's not the only factor. Essentially there is no one monolithic ski market, it's in fact many many small markets, broken down by segment or even individual skis if you want to look at it from a very granular perspective. The economic term for it is monopolistic competition - in that firms can set prices like a monopoly in the short run and make economic profits (note: not the same as accounting profits), but in the long run there is an equilibrium amongst firms and there will be zero economic profits (as in a perfectly competitive market).
From a manufacturers point of view, the way they would determine the price has a few factors:
First is basic market demand, obviously there's less demand for SG skis than intermediate-advanced 70-75mm carvers, so you don't produce the same quantities of each, and you can adjust prices accordingly as well.
Secondly, there is some accounting for the manufacturing costs, but there's no directly linear relationship between the manufacturing costs and the price. There is definitely some change though - just look at the price of a race carver, which tends to use more advanced materials, vs. the price of
a twin tip, which is entirely wood and fibreglass or even just foam.
Thirdly, marketing will definitely come into it. The newest fanciest skis (particularly carvers/all-mountain skis) will almost always command a premium over any other ski in the line, even the race stock stuff, despite the fact that the race stuff costs as much or more (lower quantity production, sandwich vs. cap, more metal). This is strictly because the ski companies know that there is a market out there of people who are willing to pay a premium for the latest and greatest. Want some proof? Look at the top list price skis for each manufacturer. For Volkl, it's the TigerShark with the Powerswitch. Atomic is tied between its various top tier hardpack skis - GS12, SX12, SXB5, and M:B5. Rossignol's top priced ski is (wait for it...) the R11 Mutix.
Finally, and this is related to the last point, because it's not a perfectly competitive market, manufacturers can set the price point at anything they want. Of course nobody has to buy at that point, but you know that out there are a couple people who would pay $3000 for a shiny Mutix
Manufacturers will consider what the total revenue they can get from a ski is - that is, if they can raise the price by 10%, but only lose 7% of the customers to do that, they will as long as it doesn't raise their costs too much (lower quantity run etc). Of course they don't have that specific information available, but they can make educated guesses based on market research.
This is also evident in deliberate market segmentation - they know that a 40 day/year advanced skier will pay more than a 20 day/year intermediate, who in turn will pay more than a beginner who's been on skis for 5 days total, who in turn will pay more than a 100+ day/year skier who refuses to purchase skis until he can find them on closeout for less than 10% of wholesale
So what we see is that the basic formula for pricing skis is a mix of basic economics, cost of production and marketing. That generally gives you the MSRP, and of course they factor in distribution and retail costs and work out wholesale (or go the other direction, figure out wholesale and tack on the others, it doesn't matter either way).