Issue#0725/1 - Sometimes we need to spend extra money in order to get what we want. There may be good justification for spending that extra money. This week we take a look at some of the areas in which we can justify spending that bit extra on our printing.
How often has someone said to you, “Why on earth are you doing that? Don’t you know that is costing you more money?”
Maybe your friends and family are too polite to take that approach but, as a parent, I know that the phrase is not so far from my lips much of the time. Children are a big enough drain on resources without them wasting resources – my resources!
However, there are things that we, as parents, do that are not necessarily based on obtaining the ultimate in economy – and, often, we have very good reasons for doing so.
I hope that, most of the time, the reason for doing these things is based in reality rather than laziness or a wasteful attitude. For instance, let’s consider for a moment some household activities – such as, the laundry!
In the developed world the presence of a washing machine is pretty much a given. It costs us money but it saves us a lot of time and effort, releasing us to attend to other tasks or family relationship issues that we feel are more important. We are prepared to accept that cost – purchase of the machine, cost of electricity, maintenance, etc. – as being worthwhile expenditure and good value for money.
How about drying the laundry though?
There are three basic methods of drying laundry (with variations, of course). Firstly, hanging outside in the open air on a clothes line; secondly, hanging indoors on a clothes line over the bath; and thirdly, using a drying machine.
Obviously this takes time however you look at it but there are two elements to time in this instance. Primarily, this is the time taken for the laundry to physically dry – highly variable. In terms of outdoor drying, we need good weather conditions, with sun and warmth, something that much of the world seems to be lacking this year. Even indoor drying is difficult if the weather is poor.
Secondly, the time taken to handle the laundry is equally relevant. To be able to transfer the laundry from a washer to a dryer and press the ‘Go’ button is much faster and more convenient than hanging the laundry out to dry.
Physical drying time has a cost to it. Either we must be willing to wait for the laundry to dry naturally – fine if the articles are not needed in a hurry – or we must apply some artificial heating to assist and speed the drying process, in which case we have to be prepared to pay for the fuel to produce that heat. From experience, I can tell you that this can result in the entire house being heated for the sake of one room or one radiator just to dry a small amount of laundry. This could happen on a warm, humid, wet day when the heating should not be required – not comfortable for the occupants but necessary for drying the laundry, and we may often be prepared to accept that cost and discomfort for the sake of necessity.
Alternatively, we could place the laundry in the tumble dryer and apply targeted heating so that it dries much more quickly and without the discomfort factor – very convenient. At the end of the day, the energy cost of the tumble dryer is probably higher even than artificially heating the house for several hours. Then, there is also the purchase of the machine to take into account. Yet the convenience and comfort factors hugely outweigh the cost factor.
So, assisted drying can be very helpful and convenient under the right conditions, even if the cost is higher.
But what of using the dryer at times when necessity is not created by inclement weather or the need for speed (sorry, Top Gun again!)?
Some articles of laundry actually benefit from being artificially dried, especially in a tumble dryer. I am thinking particularly of towels.
When dried in the open air (in Britain anyway), there is a distinct tendency for towels to handle like cardboard and to feel like sandpaper - nasty! For the ultimate is softness (no this isn’t a fabric softener advertisement), and body-drying comfort, a tumble dryer cannot be beaten but there is a definite and significant cost associated with this behaviour. This cost is one that is frequently accepted because of the benefits provided.
So, how can we associate this with printing behaviour?
There are occasions when a particular output style or format is preferable simply for the convenience or to achieve a particular, desired result.
As in the last issue of TCPglobal ("Old habits die hard - Why changing people is one of the major keys to Cost of Printing"), this is not intended to be an exclusive list but consider the following:
Choice of printer
Hugely variable costs should be a primary consideration at the time of purchase. We should look not just at manufacturer and model but at the technology concerned – laser vs inkjet (the equivalent of diesel vs petrol in motor vehicles). Sometimes inkjet is most appropriate and offers significant cost savings but there are times when a laser device is preferable for the type of print being undertaken, as with selection of petrol for highest performance.For instance, many business users will consider that laser output is preferable where important customer-facing documents are concerned and that inkjet, even if of equal or better print quality, is just not suitable.
In addition, the general view is that inkjet printers are slower than laser printers. While this is often true, many business colour laser printers (low-end) are still four-pass, with print speeds of only 4 or 5ppm. In these cases, inkjet can prove to be the faster technology. However, the impression is that a laser printer is much more ‘satisfying’ than an inkjet printer and is a more classy device to have in the office and to use.
We can, on the other hand, turn the tables somewhat and look at the class of printer as well, offering some surprising cost advantages in the face of higher initial costs (refer to Issue #0720 "Move up a notch and save money" for comment on Phaser 6115MFP in comparison to Phaser 6110MFP).
Choosing to spend a little more on the purchase may seem crazy to many but those with a forward-looking mentality will quickly see the long-term benefits. Many motorists (continental Europe in particular) are prepared to pay a little more in the purchase of a diesel car because they know perfectly well that ongoing motoring costs can fall by nearly half in comparison to running an equivalent petrol car.
Over the life of the vehicle that is significant and, for fairly high mileage motorists, this could easily amount to the additional cost of buying the diesel model for every year of ownership.
Over the life of a printer, buying up the range can reduce the overall Cost of Printing (not just running costs) by as much as 28% (Phaser 6115MFP vs Phaser 6110MFP at 1,250 pages per month) and will usually save much more than the additional cost of buying the slightly more expensive model.
Total Cost of Printing
by Monthly Page Volume
In the case of the Phaser 6115MFP, the cost saving per year (at 1,250 pages per month) would be £285 when the machine cost only £59 more to buy!! That is very nearly a five-fold saving for each and every year of ownership.
There could be further potential savings accessible to a user by careful selection of another model with higher print speed at a still higher purchase price, even if print volumes are no higher.
But, remember that monthly print volume is a key factor in overall cost – if the print volume is too low, then buying up market will not achieve overall cost savings because not enough toner or ink will be used over the life of the device to offset the initial cost of the hardware.
Colour printing
We don’t necessarily need colour for every document but it is nice to have and there are benefits to presentation and comprehension even though the nominal cost of the colour page is typically between 4.5 and 7.5 times that of a mono page. Then, in addition to the direct, comprehension performance factor there is the aesthetic, feel-good factor to consider. This can be worth paying for and is certainly worth paying for when image is at stake.With more and more colour printers coming on the market at lower and lower purchase prices, the pressure for users to buy colour is ever increasing, especially in the home and small business markets where colour is necessary for certain applications but the user cannot justify owning two separate printers.
In the home, as indicated, washing machines are common but the home owner might choose to select a washer-dryer (colour printer) rather than a separate washing machine (mono printer) and drying machine (colour printer) because it both saves space and is less costly on the initial purchase. Needless to say, this argument is good for promoting the purchase of All-in-One printers as well.
Simplex printing
There is just no getting away from the fact that some print jobs are not entirely suited to duplex printing or are more conveniently presented single-sided when paper could have been saved by printing duplex.For instance, double-sided invoices would rarely be beneficial whereas double-sided quotations and proposals (often including either several pages of terms and conditions or one additional page of very small print!). Also, forms to be completed manually can suffer degradation if printed both sides, resulting in some image or pressure show-through or the pressure of the pen on the paper can pick up an image on the other side of the paper from any printed sheets below or dirt from the table, thus ruining the completed form.
Photo printing
Convenience is one of the primary factors driving home photo printing. Standard sized photo prints are much cheaper to purchase in-store or online when ordering in reasonable numbers but are much more instant when printed at home.In addition, there is greatly increased potential, control and flexibility when it comes to image manipulation and custom-sized printing. Larger prints may still be cheaper to print at home than on the high street or on-line, although some very keenly priced retail enlargements have been noted.
Where copies of old, film/silver halide originals are concerned, experience shows that copying the original print on an All-in-One inkjet device can produce results that are barely distinguishable from the original. The most common defect is a shift in colour balance but this is a defect typical of postal print-from-print suppliers anyway.
What we should be looking out for is an efficient dryer for our laundry. All machines are energy rated and users can, if so inclined, compare the ratings and find the most cost-efficient machine for the job. What is not acceptable to industry watchdogs is a machine that costs twice as much to run as the market leaders or those with high energy efficiency.
Likewise, we should be working towards the same goal in the printer industry. So, why do we seem to accept that some printers will cost twice as much to run as others? If users work hard enough, they are able to calculate or obtain comparative costs before purchase. But, why should they have to work hard?
No doubt some users would continue to ignore the information anyway and the testing standards put in place by the ISO, while good in their own right, just do not go far enough in providing transparent information to prospective purchasers. What this amounts to is that there is currently no incentive for some manufacturers to change their approach so that overall costs for user are reduced.
Home electricals manufacturers do not benefit from the sale of electricity and nor do motor vehicle manufacturers benefit from the sale of fuel.
However, the ecosystem of a printer is entirely different and printer manufacturers rely on sales of consumables to make ends meet and to show a profit because competition is so stiff and there is the opportunity to accelerate profits by acquiring as high a percentage of the hardware market as possible.
Some manufacturers are literally buying market share by selling their hardware very cheaply.
Energy consumption is considered a major factor in today’s eco-aware society but energy consumption is a very, very small percentage of a printer’s overall cost. Even the volume of ink or toner used is irrelevant ecologically because its manufacturing cost is very low. The only impact the volume of ink and toner consumed has is on the owner’s pocket!
Anyway, ink and toner usage is not the primary issue here – it is the sales model and strategy adopted by the manufacturer that affects how much the individual pays for the printer supplies and therefore the overall Cost of Printing.
Where we come to though (with reference back to last week’s issue), is that reducing paper and ink/toner usage is the user’s only physical recourse to reducing their print costs once the device has been selected and purchased. But, users will have full justification for some of their print activities that result in higher costs – costs that are understood, planned and acceptable.
Far more significant is the choice of device (again with reference to last week’s issue). This is where a large proportion of the unjustified and unacceptable costs can be eliminated.
To finish off – prospective buyers MUST consider their print environment, print volumes and print requirements BEFORE making that crucial purchase or they WILL end up paying for a wrong decision. It is perfectly justifiable and sensible to pay a little more for the right device that will do more, faster and at a lower cost, than to try and save money up front by paying as little as possible for the device itself.
Printing is not like drying laundry – the cost of electricity is linked to the device bought only through the energy consumption rating and not through the hardware cost of the device. But the cost of ink/toner is directly linked to the hardware cost of the printer. It doesn’t matter how sensible users are in their printing, how clearly they have analysed usage or how precisely they have planned for justifiable higher costs in certain areas if they buy the wrong machine for the job.
~End~
