Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Competitive Behavior in the Printer Industry?
Greyfox writes: "Here is an interesting story about the printer industry versus ink-cartridge refillers. Anyone who's bought a low-cost inkjet knows that you can spend over half the cost of the printer on ink. So it was only natural that an industry would spring up around refilling the cartridges. Well the printer industry has apparently been fighting back, trying to protect their market share. As with all good stories, legislation is being considered. Worth a read." Sort of like spyware -- it's a back-and-forth battle.
This is the same as: Sell the Razor at a loss, make the profit on the blades.
I don't understand why something that's okay at the $3.00 range (blades) isn't okay at the $50 range. I mean really, do you think these guys are making a profit on a $50 printer when the _packaging_ for that printer's gotta cost $12?
Buy a laser printer. The toner doesn't dry out or age. Print 99% of your slashdot articles on it. Buy a cheapie inkjet for the occasional color print you need. Not only is the laser printer faster and easier to read, You'll go 2 or 3 years before needing a new toner cart. (I've got an NEC superscript 870. Bought it in 1997. The first toner cartridge lasted four years and printed 2200 pages with one misfeed. It's on it's second toner cartridge)
Besides, by the time you need ink on your color printer, the NEW color printer will be higher quality. (or USB, or whatever)
I'm actually considering buying a dedicated photo printer as that's all I really use color for now anyway!
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
The solution is all you people who want laws, throw your money into a corporation, and COMPETE.
If you can do it for cheaper, THEN DO IT.
I, myself, can not. I looked at the cost of getting it all to work. There is no way to do it. Since they know you won't pay $600 for a printer, and $5 for cartridges, they do it the way they have to do it to make a profit, albeit a small one.
Epson, HP, Canon, they're not in bed together. This is no boat race. They found out that the average American barely uses their printer, but enough that spending $100-$150 a year on cartridges is not a bad deal, rather than paying $500 for a new printer and $25 a year on cartridges.
There are numerous other ways to print in color. I bought an HP Color LaserJet 4500. I print everything. The damn thing is a personal printer for me, and it runs ALL the time. The cost over the past year? Maybe $200, including tons of toner (thousands of pages printed). I love it. I will NEVER go back to Ink Jet.
Go, compete. The market is open. Once the government regulates, you think it'll help us, or help HP and Epson?
Think hard. I know you can...
It is actually a rational strategy that over time defeats the printer manufacturers.
The printer manufacturers strategy appears to be to seel the printer as a loss leader for the cartridge. That strategy starts to become seriously painful for the printer manufacturers if people start buying the printers and not the cartridges. People who treat the printers as disposable are costing the manufacturers $20 or so every time they get a new one. If that takes hold the printer manufacturers will be forced to make it more attractive to buy the refills.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Consumer Protection Laws that are currently active don't protect the consumer at all.
I beg to differ. I think that laws against false and deceptive advertising help the consumer immensely. The laws regarding consumer credit are tremendously valuable. They guarantee that a consumer can see his/her credit history and dispute erroneous entries. Laws that require that manufacturers of food products accurately list ingredients not only help consumers, they saves lives (allergies). The Magnuson-Moss warranty act, that prevents a manufacturer from denying warranty claims when you use aftermarket products (e.g., a Fram oil filter in your GM car). Laws against bait-and-switch advertising help consumers. I could go on for pages, but I think you see my point.
Can you name ONE competitor to ANY of Microsoft's products that works decently enough, that is compatible across the board with the hardware that the average user has, that is easy to teach to the laymen, and that looks and feels good?
Yes. Opera 6 is a superior browser to IE 5.5. The UI is superior. The security is superior. When there is a rendering problem on a site, it is almost invariably due to some Microsoft "extension" to HTML that was put in to stifle competition.
How is selling a printer for $50 and cartridges for $30 colluding?
When all of the manufacturers get together and agree to do it, it's collusion. And I believe that is what happened.
If I come out with a $300 printer and $10 cartridges, will you buy it?
Not necessarily, but if it's $200, does not dry out the ink cartridges if unused for a week, and has reliability approaching my laser printer, sure I'll buy it. And so would many others. I'd even think about it at $300 if it had good paper handling, print quality, interface, etc.
The "Libertarian bullshit" about starting a company won't work well as long as we have all this government protection of "big business."
I said that consumers needed protection, not big business. I'll agree that we need a lot less corporate welfare.
But that does not mean that every time I am dissatisfied with a product sector that I should start a company. I don't want to go into competition with Canon, HP, Lexmark, and Epson. I just want an inkjet printer that does not use miniscule, expensive cartridges that are engineered to fail.