Canon Printers Announced at Spiceworld
-
I always want any printer under contract... It's a machine.. a printer is not IT responsibility anymore than manufactoring machine that interfaces with a computer.. No reason we should be expected to repair/troubleshoot that side of them that is not our expertise.
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
And it is a valuable niche. Very few people have any appreciable amount of printer skills.
It hasn't proven to be especially marketable that I've seen. However, every job I've ever had, I've been the printer go-to guy. Staples, Ridgeway, NTG, Centrada, all of them. IT people hate printers as a rule, as @IRJ reiterated. But yes, it is definitely a niche area.
Very few companies actually own printers anymore. Most just lease MFP/Copiers now days. It saves a lot of money for the company.
-
AJ please point us toward some independent analysis that show that inkjets have a lower cost per page than a laser. We simply can't trust a manufacturer to provide unbiased data in this field.
I completely agree with Scott. The companies selling printer and printer contracts would be shoving their vendors (those agreements you talked about) toward inkjets if the overall costs could be lower and the selling company could make the same or more money. If the product they sell is cheaper, they will make more sales, that's what they want.
I pay .002 cents a sheet for b/w prints on my service contract. I'd like to know how ink would ever get there.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I always want any printer under contract... It's a machine.. a printer is not IT responsibility anymore than manufactoring machine that interfaces with a computer.. No reason we should be expected to repair/troubleshoot that side of them that is not our expertise.
The thing is that MPCs are mostly scams. Let me explain:
You lease a machine, that is often already used when you get it. Now, as you said, having someone to call that is responsible for it is great. However, companies that offer MPCs not only serve a purpose, but by their very existence perpetuate the idea that they are required. As I said, you get a machine that you lease under your contract. It's likely already used, so when it breaks down due to already being used, it perpetuates the myth that printers are prone to break. Who saves the day? Your leaser swoops in and fixes it, often with remanufactured parts. Also, a lot of MPCs provide toners as part of the package. However, they aren't using OEM toners as a rule. They use remanned toners, which also have a tendency to break printers, even further perpetuating the myth.
Pricing schemes vary but a flat cost/page is not unheard of. However, if you look at it, they are making out pretty good.
Buying a new printer, with a contract from the VAR or the manufacturer, and buying OEM toners, combined with good maintenance as required, will work out to be cheaper. You still have someone you can call. I don't believe in MPCs as a rule. Planned well, you can do much better buying outright your equipment. Also, if you go with a MPC, that carrier is going to be partnered with a specific company, like Xerox or Ricoh. That means that even if someone else has better equipment for what you need, you're limited by that carrier.
-
@ajstringham said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I always want any printer under contract... It's a machine.. a printer is not IT responsibility anymore than manufactoring machine that interfaces with a computer.. No reason we should be expected to repair/troubleshoot that side of them that is not our expertise.
The thing is that MPCs are mostly scams. Let me explain:
You lease a machine, that is often already used when you get it. Now, as you said, having someone to call that is responsible for it is great. However, companies that offer MPCs not only serve a purpose, but by their very existence perpetuate the idea that they are required. As I said, you get a machine that you lease under your contract. It's likely already used, so when it breaks down due to already being used, it perpetuates the myth that printers are prone to break. Who saves the day? Your leaser swoops in and fixes it, often with remanufactured parts. Also, a lot of MPCs provide toners as part of the package. However, they aren't using OEM toners as a rule. They use remanned toners, which also have a tendency to break printers, even further perpetuating the myth.
Pricing schemes vary but a flat cost/page is not unheard of. However, if you look at it, they are making out pretty good.
Buying a new printer, with a contract from the VAR or the manufacturer, and buying OEM toners, combined with good maintenance as required, will work out to be cheaper. You still have someone you can call. I don't believe in MPCs as a rule. Planned well, you can do much better buying outright your equipment. Also, if you go with a MPC, that carrier is going to be partnered with a specific company, like Xerox or Ricoh. That means that even if someone else has better equipment for what you need, you're limited by that carrier.
They certainly aren't scams. Used or not it doesn't matter all parts and labor are covered under your contract with the lease. and all the ones I know of give you a brand spanking new one at every 2 year renew period. Most are dealers for multiple brands as well.
-
@Dashrender said:
AJ please point us toward some independent analysis that show that inkjets have a lower cost per page than a laser. We simply can't trust a manufacturer to provide unbiased data in this field.
I completely agree with Scott. The companies selling printer and printer contracts would be shoving their vendors (those agreements you talked about) toward inkjets if the overall costs could be lower and the selling company could make the same or more money. If the product they sell is cheaper, they will make more sales, that's what they want.
I pay .002 cents a sheet for b/w prints on my service contract. I'd like to know how ink would ever get there.
I have done my own analysis. An example though:
Brother TN-650 - 8,000 pages - ~$130
HP 970XL - 9,200 pages - $120Now that is an apples to oranges example, but even in this case, the inkjet gives over 1,000 pages more per cartridge for at least $10 less. The reason that it's apples to oranges is because you can''t compare cost of a b/w only printer to an inkjet, as there is no such thing as a b/w only inkjet. So, we look at that yield and cost compared to comparable lasers...
HP 312X - 4,400 pages - $112
HP 970XL - 9,200 pages - $120
Brother TN-315K - 6,000 pages - $117This is a comparison of two HP machines and a Brother. The HP is the M476dn and the Brother is the MFC-9970CDW. The 970XL goes in the HP X-series. This is more apples to apples, as all the machines are color, and they all cost pretty close to the same amount retail, at around $6-800. Even if you say that the HP ink number is off by 15%, which is a fair number, considering ink yields are always exaggerated some, we'll round up and say you only get 7,700 pages out of the black. That's still almost 2,000 more than the Brother. Laser tends to be a bit more accurate in its estimates, and Brother is always spot on, and even a little low at times.
All page yields are based on a 5% page coverage. This is the type of cost savings you'll see on inkjet. As I said...game changer.
-
Where did you get your numbers from? The manufactures websites?
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@ajstringham said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I always want any printer under contract... It's a machine.. a printer is not IT responsibility anymore than manufactoring machine that interfaces with a computer.. No reason we should be expected to repair/troubleshoot that side of them that is not our expertise.
The thing is that MPCs are mostly scams. Let me explain:
You lease a machine, that is often already used when you get it. Now, as you said, having someone to call that is responsible for it is great. However, companies that offer MPCs not only serve a purpose, but by their very existence perpetuate the idea that they are required. As I said, you get a machine that you lease under your contract. It's likely already used, so when it breaks down due to already being used, it perpetuates the myth that printers are prone to break. Who saves the day? Your leaser swoops in and fixes it, often with remanufactured parts. Also, a lot of MPCs provide toners as part of the package. However, they aren't using OEM toners as a rule. They use remanned toners, which also have a tendency to break printers, even further perpetuating the myth.
Pricing schemes vary but a flat cost/page is not unheard of. However, if you look at it, they are making out pretty good.
Buying a new printer, with a contract from the VAR or the manufacturer, and buying OEM toners, combined with good maintenance as required, will work out to be cheaper. You still have someone you can call. I don't believe in MPCs as a rule. Planned well, you can do much better buying outright your equipment. Also, if you go with a MPC, that carrier is going to be partnered with a specific company, like Xerox or Ricoh. That means that even if someone else has better equipment for what you need, you're limited by that carrier.
They certainly aren't scams. Used or not it doesn't matter all parts and labor are covered under your contract with the lease. and all the ones I know of give you a brand spanking new one at every 2 year renew period. Most are dealers for multiple brands as well.
Maybe I just don't have experience with the good ones then. Still, while I can appreciate offloading the responsibility for the printers onto another company, I prefer planning out my printing infrastructure and owning it myself.
-
@Dashrender said:
Where did you get your numbers from? The manufactures websites?
Basically. I got them from the Staples website, which pulls them from the manufacturer websites. They are the universal numbers to work with.
-
@Dashrender said:
Where did you get your numbers from? The manufactures websites?
Most manufacturers post those numbers. You then combine them with the real world prices to see what the price per page works out to be, roughly. It is always a bit of a guessing game, though.
