Use Value

From how I interpreted the reading, I understand that to be true; that a price (a quantifiable measure of value) is in this case a relatively valid indicator of exchange value. For instance, 1 coat can be worth 20 pieces of linen. This is given a simplistic bartering system; however, if all items stand relative to one another as exchangeable commodities then it stands to reason that you could introduce a hypothetical item which stands in for value, being currency. In essence, you are still trading goods, as each has its own exchange value.

Following this example then, if 1 coat is worth 40 coins, and 1 coat is worth 20 pieces of linen, then reasonably we can deduce that 1 piece of linen is then worth 2 coins where the coins stand in place as indicators of value to which we have arbitrarily given meaning. Going back to your question, I appreciate the idea of a price being equivalent to exchange-value, but given my limited knowledge of Marx and the nature of the reading my input is only a guess; factoring in all of the notions that Kristy has suggested in response to you, I believe it is too simplistic to directly equate price to exchange-value, as demand is also an important contributor in pricing.