| 51 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
If they made them, they'd no doubt be breaking copyright of the cartridge design.. Manufactured physical products aren't protected by copyright they're protected by a patent. Any competing or similar product only has to vary from that original patent by a factor of 15% as far as I recall. I wouldn't necessarily bet that compatible cartridge suppliers are only refilling carts at all. That would mean they'd need a HUGE supply of used carts ? Where do you envisage these would come from ? nice_lady - 2021-05-17 18:21:00 |
| 52 | callum.irvine wrote:
So I can buy a new printer for a few dollars. I once "bought one" for $0. When there was a special on and manufacture cashback. I'm sure you don't really think they can produce something as intricate as a printer and be making money on it when they give them away. They make their money selling ink. They will do their best to protect that income stream. I somehow doubt the cost of genuine cartridges is because of R&D costs. If HP were any good, they would stop the shoddy practice of subsidising their printers and hyper inflating the cost of ink.
Again, thats an example of printer manufacturer competition. Brother entered the market with a very small market share, and once the adopted the low price printer model, started gaining market share, so then the others met that competition with equivalent products. Same can be seen in laptops. Acer hit the consumer market with cheap garbage, and all the others made equally nasty products to compete. All the other laptop makers still had their good stuff, as business / commercial models. But you'd be lucky to ever see one in a chainstore for plebs. Edited by bitsnpieces2020 at 6:28 pm, Mon 17 May |
| 53 | nice_lady wrote:
Manufactured physical products aren't protected by copyright they're protected by a patent. Any competing or similar product only has to vary from that original patent by a factor of 15% as far as I recall. I wouldn't necessarily bet that compatible cartridge suppliers are only refilling carts at all. That would mean they'd need a HUGE supply of used carts ? Where do you envisage these would come from ?
It's been before the courts in many countries and by many manufacturers.
ie https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/insight/publications/2019/1
1/no-licence-to-refill |
| 54 | Lets say for arguments sake you are completely correct. Manufacturers are selling printers at or below cost, and only making profit by selling ink & toner.
As compatible & remanufactured products take away their profit, where do you think that leads logically?
Does that sound like a smart business model to keep making printers at a loss, and no consumable sales afterwards? |
| 55 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
I like your example, as I got quotes from repco & toyota for brake pads. and toyota was cheaper. Also there are many articles about 3rd party car parts being rubbbish. Maybe they look good to start with, but they seldom perform as well, or for as long.
I've had a similar experience with wreckers, charging more for a second part, than the same thing (a headlight) from toyota. However sometimes aftermarket parts can be batter than OEM too. tygertung - 2021-05-17 18:46:00 |
| 56 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
Lets say for arguments sake you are completely correct. Manufacturers are selling printers at or below cost, and only making profit by selling ink & toner.
As compatible & remanufactured products take away their profit, where do you think that leads logically?
Does that sound like a smart business model to keep making printers at a loss, and no consumable sales afterwards? Obviously at the prices the ink is sold at from the OEM's they dont' have to sell a lot of ink to pay for a printer. Probably the first full set of OEM carts purchased brings them back to a profit on the printer. They're NOT losing money because of the aftermarket sellers. Many products have aftermarket suppliers and no matter how you rail against them it's a fact of life. The predatory pricing of ink is one, and quite possibly the main, reason why people don't buy it from OEM's. Seriously, people can't afford to throw money away like that. Life aint cheap, moneys hard to come by, and for example if you buy an OEM set of inks for your inkjet that could set you back $150 or more. That's SERIOUS money to the majority of ordinary people. If you can buy an aftermarket ink for 10% of the ocst of the OEM ink why the hell wouldn't you ? nice_lady - 2021-05-17 18:54:00 |
| 57 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
Lets say for arguments sake you are completely correct. Manufacturers are selling printers at or below cost, and only making profit by selling ink & toner.
As compatible & remanufactured products take away their profit, where do you think that leads logically?
Does that sound like a smart business model to keep making printers at a loss, and no consumable sales afterwards? No it's not a smart business model. But they started it and now they're trapped in it. If you look at epson, they have a printer which uses cartridges. $179 and $80 cashback = $99. Then they have a very similar printer, but with "ecotank" ink you can fill yourself. $599. No cashback deal offered. Makes you go hmmmm doesn't it? You can't tell me the manufacture cost of the ecotank one is that much more. I would actually suspect it is less. |
| 58 | lol I doubt they are trapped by it. HP could stop making inkjet printers tomorrow, and the net revenue loss wouldn't be much more than a rounding error to the total business profits. Edited by bitsnpieces2020 at 8:41 pm, Mon 17 May |
| 59 | Rubbish. If their profit on that side of the business was so minimal they'd not bother. nice_lady - 2021-05-17 20:43:00 |
| 60 | nice_lady wrote:
Rubbish. If their profit on that side of the business was so minimal they'd not bother. compared to HP's enterprise business, its a pittance. |
| 61 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
compare-
d to HP's enterprise business, its a pittance. Jeez you're hard work. So explain to me why HP are continuing with the production of Ink and printers then ? A pittance ? Yeah right. How many million ink carts do you think they sell each year for ridiculous prices ? A pittance - whatever. nice_lady - 2021-05-18 10:30:00 |
| 62 | nice_lady wrote:
Jeez you're hard work. So explain to me why HP are continuing with the production of Ink and printers then ? A pittance ? Yeah right. How many million ink carts do you think they sell each year for ridiculous prices ? A pittance - whatever. And I say to you it has come pass that the anointed one called Calidad 823
has appeared without notice in the temple of the Warehouse promising and performing miracles that all HP masters and servants are so amazed.
There was a wailing and a gnashing of teeth from the house of HP as they were banished from the land of competition forever. frank80 - 2021-06-10 19:24:00 |
| 63 | Haha ???????? nice_lady - 2021-06-10 19:55:00 |
| 64 | lythande1 wrote:
It makes no difference. you get the same with lasers, low page count for toner....you still need to research them first.
See the link I provided.
Price & resilience is a lasers winning attibutes
Seen literally tons of stuffed or problematic inkjets.
Seen about 2 in 50 genuinely stuff laser printers.
Biggest single problem has been burnt drums & thats normally only after about 10k+ pages on the small size printers that have a separate drum. mrfxit - 2021-06-10 20:51:00 |
| 65 | kitty179 wrote:
What I didn't realise until recently was the definition of 'page' when manufacturers state number of pages a cartridge will do. For example, the small print for an HP cartridge states it means "5% coverage for an A4 page". That is ridiculous. Most printing jobs use up a whole lot more page than that.
I suspect you will find it's an international regulation for all printer manufactures & consumables.
It's a benchmark they all have to adhere to & allows for easy constant cheap testing. mrfxit - 2021-06-10 20:58:00 |
| 66 | nice_lady wrote:
Some people ARE weird aren't they lol.
Some ppl do tend to attract them ;-) mrfxit - 2021-06-10 20:59:00 |
| 67 | bitsnpieces2020 wrote:
Lets say for arguments sake you are completely correct. Manufacturers are selling printers at or below cost, and only making profit by selling ink & toner.
As compatible & remanufactured products take away their profit, where do you think that leads logically?
Does that sound like a smart business model to keep making printers at a loss, and no consumable sales afterwards?
Under cost printers & very high consumables has been a lead practice for many years.
Generally only applies to the domestic market but commercial also cope it in the form of onsite warranty service mrfxit - 2021-06-10 21:03:00 |
