Printer wars: Epson vs Epson, or about the difference of mentality
Probably, everyone is somehow aware of the strange situation with printers and cartridges for them - when it is more profitable to sell an old printer and purchase a new one than to buy another set of cartridges. In my opinion, such a pricing strategy is vicious, and harms the final buyer.
I will try to talk about the causes of this phenomenon, the premises and conclusions. For example, one of the major players in the market for printing devices - Epson. The company uses different methods of making profits depending on the country. If for the US market the strategy can be briefly described as “extremely cheap printers, expensive cartridges”, for the CIS and Asia markets it is a little different - “expensive printers, expensive cartridges”. In my opinion, the reasons for such a different policy are the mentality of people in different countries.
In the USA and Western Europe, the market for alternative printer supplies is almost undeveloped. Users tend to buy original consumables, despite their high price. In the context of fierce competition from older brands (such as Canon, HP), Epson sets prices for printers equal to the cost, i.e. working at a loss - do not forget about taxes and margins of shops. The company receives its profit from the sale of cartridges, the price of which can easily be higher than the cost by several orders of magnitude, i.e. margin is from 1000% to 10000%. Strange numbers?
Together with two other factors - the low prevalence of alternative consumables and the reluctance to change a new printer, even if the cost of its operation for several months exceeds the price of the printer itself, the company reliably binds the consumer to itself, dooming it to spend several ... disproportionate amounts on printing.
It turns out to be a somewhat absurd situation when a new printer costs as much as a new set of cartridges in a store!
If I were a socialist, I would certainly go on the topic of the market without restrictions, but I will not do this. But still, it’s even funny to compare, the printer, with its rather complicated device, engines, nozzles, a control board - and 6 plastic paint boxes. If we calculate the cost of the ink that we buy in printer cartridges, it turns out that this is the most expensive liquid used in everyday life: in Asia and Eastern Europe (including Russia), the situation is somewhat different - due to the presence on the market a large number of cheap supplies (refillable cartridges and CISS) for 1 set of original cartridges for sale 3 printers! :) It is unlikely that there will be a person who used an inkjet printer, but did not know about refillable cartridges (PZK) or continuous ink supply systems (CISS).
Naturally, a company producing printers in such conditions cannot reduce the price of printers - it should make money immediately when selling a printer, without expecting any profit from purchases of cartridges by users in the near future. This leads to a fundamental difference between the Russian market and the US market. While in the United States the prices for printers are getting lower and lower, in the Russian Federation the prices for printers, on the contrary, are rising. For information on current prices and pricing, I thank INKSYSTEM . I remind you that printers are complete analogues, with the exception of firmware, a power supply, and a more durable case (in the US version).
Fun, right? Buying a printer in Europe and the CIS will cost you at least 2.5 times more than in the USA. Or, if you like this interpretation more, a similar printer in the USA will cost 60% cheaper!
Of course, such a difference in prices could not pass by the companies that engaged in the supply of Epson printers from the United States to Russia. The activities of smaller companies are no different from buying on ebay - you get a printer cheaply, but with English firmware, and designed for 110 volts. Large companies, on the contrary, have established a whole chain - printers purchased in the USA are localized - Russian firmware for models with a screen is installed, and the complete drivers are replaced with the Russian version, the power supply unit under voltage 220V is changed or reconfigured, and CISS is installed. Of course, such an Russified American will cost a little more than a native one, but the margin of companies can not be compared with the 60% price difference in different countries - you can still buy an “American” much cheaper than the same printer made for CIS market.
Finally, the most significant advantage is CISS instead of cartridges. Yes, the schedule is a little incomplete - it reflects only the cost of consumables, not paying attention to the cost of the printer. Let's see how the price per print will change if we take into account the depreciation of equipment (i.e. the printer itself) when using the first set of consumables: Version for visuals:
Do you still think it’s a good idea to buy an official printer?
In particular, I would not bother to study the market - I have an old, but quite working laser printer, which is enough for both LUT and document printing. It simply accumulated so many photos that my friends and relatives really wanted to have in my archive that it seemed to me not very rational to go to the photo lab every week. I had to choose a printer, and it was necessary with CISS, because you don’t even have to think about saving money when using cartridges - it’s negative :) Before my eyes there is a living example - a student brother who bought an inkjet printer and continues to buy cartridges for it. The scholarship is 3400, the set of cartridges is 3150. The remaining 250 are two buckets of potatoes until the next scholarship. The joy of owning a printer is priceless. :)
We do not live in the USSR, and are quite capable of voting in rubles for those proposals that suit us. I would be satisfied, for example, with a moderately expensive (but high-quality) printer, and cheap cartridges. But since companies, in particular Epson, do not make such compromises with customers, I will buy where it is more profitable.
And you can subscribe so as not to miss new reviews on the company page and in my profile (the “subscribe” button)
I will try to talk about the causes of this phenomenon, the premises and conclusions. For example, one of the major players in the market for printing devices - Epson. The company uses different methods of making profits depending on the country. If for the US market the strategy can be briefly described as “extremely cheap printers, expensive cartridges”, for the CIS and Asia markets it is a little different - “expensive printers, expensive cartridges”. In my opinion, the reasons for such a different policy are the mentality of people in different countries.
In the USA and Western Europe, the market for alternative printer supplies is almost undeveloped. Users tend to buy original consumables, despite their high price. In the context of fierce competition from older brands (such as Canon, HP), Epson sets prices for printers equal to the cost, i.e. working at a loss - do not forget about taxes and margins of shops. The company receives its profit from the sale of cartridges, the price of which can easily be higher than the cost by several orders of magnitude, i.e. margin is from 1000% to 10000%. Strange numbers?
Together with two other factors - the low prevalence of alternative consumables and the reluctance to change a new printer, even if the cost of its operation for several months exceeds the price of the printer itself, the company reliably binds the consumer to itself, dooming it to spend several ... disproportionate amounts on printing.
It turns out to be a somewhat absurd situation when a new printer costs as much as a new set of cartridges in a store!
If I were a socialist, I would certainly go on the topic of the market without restrictions, but I will not do this. But still, it’s even funny to compare, the printer, with its rather complicated device, engines, nozzles, a control board - and 6 plastic paint boxes. If we calculate the cost of the ink that we buy in printer cartridges, it turns out that this is the most expensive liquid used in everyday life: in Asia and Eastern Europe (including Russia), the situation is somewhat different - due to the presence on the market a large number of cheap supplies (refillable cartridges and CISS) for 1 set of original cartridges for sale 3 printers! :) It is unlikely that there will be a person who used an inkjet printer, but did not know about refillable cartridges (PZK) or continuous ink supply systems (CISS).
Naturally, a company producing printers in such conditions cannot reduce the price of printers - it should make money immediately when selling a printer, without expecting any profit from purchases of cartridges by users in the near future. This leads to a fundamental difference between the Russian market and the US market. While in the United States the prices for printers are getting lower and lower, in the Russian Federation the prices for printers, on the contrary, are rising. For information on current prices and pricing, I thank INKSYSTEM . I remind you that printers are complete analogues, with the exception of firmware, a power supply, and a more durable case (in the US version).
Fun, right? Buying a printer in Europe and the CIS will cost you at least 2.5 times more than in the USA. Or, if you like this interpretation more, a similar printer in the USA will cost 60% cheaper!
Of course, such a difference in prices could not pass by the companies that engaged in the supply of Epson printers from the United States to Russia. The activities of smaller companies are no different from buying on ebay - you get a printer cheaply, but with English firmware, and designed for 110 volts. Large companies, on the contrary, have established a whole chain - printers purchased in the USA are localized - Russian firmware for models with a screen is installed, and the complete drivers are replaced with the Russian version, the power supply unit under voltage 220V is changed or reconfigured, and CISS is installed. Of course, such an Russified American will cost a little more than a native one, but the margin of companies can not be compared with the 60% price difference in different countries - you can still buy an “American” much cheaper than the same printer made for CIS market.
Finally, the most significant advantage is CISS instead of cartridges. Yes, the schedule is a little incomplete - it reflects only the cost of consumables, not paying attention to the cost of the printer. Let's see how the price per print will change if we take into account the depreciation of equipment (i.e. the printer itself) when using the first set of consumables: Version for visuals:
Do you still think it’s a good idea to buy an official printer?
About personal experience
In particular, I would not bother to study the market - I have an old, but quite working laser printer, which is enough for both LUT and document printing. It simply accumulated so many photos that my friends and relatives really wanted to have in my archive that it seemed to me not very rational to go to the photo lab every week. I had to choose a printer, and it was necessary with CISS, because you don’t even have to think about saving money when using cartridges - it’s negative :) Before my eyes there is a living example - a student brother who bought an inkjet printer and continues to buy cartridges for it. The scholarship is 3400, the set of cartridges is 3150. The remaining 250 are two buckets of potatoes until the next scholarship. The joy of owning a printer is priceless. :)
findings
To summarize all of the above, the situation that has arisen is absolutely logical, and is an adequate response to the pricing policy of manufacturers. I do not think that the parallel printing system market that has arisen in this way will somehow harm manufacturers. Of course, on the one hand, Epson is not making a profit from buying printers, not cartridges. But on the other hand, it should be understood that dumping policy, especially carried out selectively, always has two sides of the coin. Either the company itself decides to use part of the profit to lower the price in other countries, or others will do it for it - buying where it’s cheaper and selling where it’s more expensive.We do not live in the USSR, and are quite capable of voting in rubles for those proposals that suit us. I would be satisfied, for example, with a moderately expensive (but high-quality) printer, and cheap cartridges. But since companies, in particular Epson, do not make such compromises with customers, I will buy where it is more profitable.
And you can subscribe so as not to miss new reviews on the company page and in my profile (the “subscribe” button)