Issue #0737/1 - While many manufacturers claim that their printers, AiOs and MFPs are ‘affordable’, it is often better to look elsewhere for the most cost-effective option but customer preference often over-rides any financial consideration.
Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Xerox all make claims that their low-end laser printers are ‘affordable’. This is with particular relevance to last week’s article "Phaser 6130 - Fuji Xerox challenger to new Samsung CLP-350N" because, interestingly, Samsung does not make a similar claim regarding the CLP-350N despite its obvious attraction as an entry-level business machine.
And yet, we saw that it is the Konica Minolta magicolor 2530DL that actually works out as the most cost-effective printer to own by quite a large margin – 25% – while all of the “affordable” machines fall at the top of the cost scale.
At the end of the day, the manufacturers’ claims, and the facts, are irrelevant if customers choose to ignore the facts because they wish to make their decision based on other factors. What this boils down to is that every printer is affordable – as long as:
- it gives the users what they want … and …
- they are prepared to pay whatever it costs to run the machine
In addition, the list should include ‘the machine is appropriate to purpose’ but this is likely to be at the bottom of the list of priorities, rather than the top, if the user has other factors in mind. For instance, some users may be inclined to buy machines that have far more to offer than they actually need, meaning that their Cost of Printing is out of all proportion to function.
Take the case of a UK company that purchased a Hewlett-Packard LaserJet 8550 and printed a test page on it – nothing more – just a test page!! That is the ultimate in high Cost of Printing, wastage and is tantamount to criminal negligence in terms of business planning and purchasing.
Then again, in how many locations have you seen high level copiers sitting in the corner of a workspace, used to print/copy a handful of pages in a week? Particularly where copiers are concerned, there is a significant tendency to overbuy – payment is by contract and outgoings are constant. So, the fact that few pages are printed goes generally unnoticed or, at least, ignored. The user is liable never to equate the monthly outgoing with Cost of Printing, especially at a page by page level.
I know of several office environments where a big copier is installed that I have never seen used and can’t imagine that the owners use it sufficiently to justify its cost.
However, that has been their choice and proves that any printer/copier is affordable if the customer decides it is affordable – even if the machine is not appropriate to purpose!
As a comparison, we can consider car ownership and fuel prices.
Some people buy a particular car simply because they like the design; others because the marque is the ‘must-have’ for their social group; others because the vehicle category offers a certain perceived ‘status’; others because of a loyalty to the manufacturer; and others because of the reputation of the brand or model as being reliable and dependable.
In some of these categories, cost has absolutely nothing to do with the decision. In fact, for some people, the more it costs the better!!
One of the most significant examples is the penchant for 4×4s/SUVs.
These are big, hungry vehicles that are often purchased more for their status appeal than their practicality. Considered by many to be a blight on the roads, in the UK at least there are organisations dedicated to making Urban 4×4s/SUVs as socially unacceptable as drink driving or smoking in a public place!
There are even moves afoot either: to ban them from inner urban areas and school runs; to charge owners a very high congestion charge; and/or increase residential parking charges – all in the hope that numbers can be reduced in urban areas. A recent news item in London began with the words, “Parents who drive their children to school in huge 4×4 vehicles have been branded ‘idiots’ by London’s mayor Ken Livingstone.”
Now, place one of these vehicles in the hands of a farmer or rancher travelling over rough terrain, instead of in the hands of a school mum in London or Washington, and the whole scenario makes complete sense. This is ‘appropriate to purpose’.
Furthermore, 4×4s/SUVs are some of the most expensive vehicles to run on a day-to-day basis. At worst, they consume fuel at the rate of around 10 miles to the gallon under urban driving conditions.
Listening to a radio station from the US the other day, I heard the presenter talk about fuel prices in the US (now standing at $3.50 a gallon). He referred to several vehicles with large fuel tanks and quoted how much it would cost to fill the tank. The ultimate was the Hummer with a 38 gallon tank, costing $133 per full tank. This would equate to somewhere in the region of 35 cents per mile for urban driving.
Translate this to the UK and the 38 gallon tank would cost more like £165 to fill or 43 pence per mile driving cost (nearly $340 or 89 cents per mile!).
But, this really only becomes relevant when compared to a standard family car where we look at a tank of fuel costing closer to $45-50 or £55-60, meaning urban driving costs of around 14 cents or 17 pence per mile – a saving of 60-70% – and, the vehicle would cost a lot less to buy, to maintain and to tax.
Buy a diesel car instead of petrol car and this cost could drop by a further 25% or so. Buy a small family car, or compact car, and the costs reduce even further – but, care obviously needs to be given to whether the vehicle is appropriate to purpose at the low end as well (e.g. a compact car won’t pull a family caravan!).
Back to printers, we have regularly shown that many printer owners could reduce their Cost of Printing by as much as (or even more than) half by making an informed decision at the time of purchase. But, this will never be relevant unless users decide to make it relevant and move Cost of Printing up their list of priorities.
At the end of the day, the key to any purchase is ‘appropriate to purpose’. Where a user decides that ‘appropriate to purpose’ is not their priority, then Cost of Printing is irrelevant.
~End~
