States going after the ink industry?

[Tony-S]

http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1672723.html

This is why everyone should invest in a large format printer - over time you'll recover your cost in ink savings.

[Picture North Carolina]

I find nothing wrong with asking a manufacturer, at minimum. to label an ink cartridge stating how much ink is in the cartridge. We're not talking about ink formulations or other trade secrets here, simply how much ink, in (fractions of) ounces, a consumer gets when purchasing the cartridge.

It allows the consumer to make informed decisions on which printer to buy and which ink refill to purchase, if and when multiple choices are available.

Thanks for posting.

[Karl Johnston]

Why is kodak different?

[argyle]

More needless government oversight which will only increase the cost to consumers, thanks again to those stalwarts of society, the "consumer advocates". I agree with the manufacturers on this one...there are too many variables that can influence the amount of ink needed for a print such as print quality and print size, just to name a few, so telling me how many milliliters of ink are in the cartridge really won't mean a whole lot. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Honestly, aren't there more pressing issues for the consumer advocates to look into, or do they plan on looking at the amount of ink in various ballpoint pens next? After all, maybe I'd like to know this comparison from one pen to another. And why stop there? Maybe we need to know how many grams of toner are in our laser cartridges. Telling me how many pages I can get from a cartridge isn't that informative because I just may wish to do my printing in a 72 font, which blows that estimate. When does the nonsense and government intrusion end?

[nphsbuckeye]

More needless government oversight which will only increase the cost to consumers, thanks again to those stalwarts of society, the "consumer advocates". I agree with the manufacturers on this one...there are too many variables that can influence the amount of ink needed for a print such as print quality and print size, just to name a few, so telling me how many milliliters of ink are in the cartridge really won't mean a whole lot. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Honestly, aren't there more pressing issues for the consumer advocates to look into, or do they plan on looking at the amount of ink in various ballpoint pens next? After all, maybe I'd like to know this comparison from one pen to another. And why stop there? Maybe we need to know how many grams of toner are in our laser cartridges. Telling me how many pages I can get from a cartridge isn't that informative because I just may wish to do my printing in a 72 font, which blows that estimate. When does the nonsense and government intrusion end?
Never

[mike_d]

I find nothing wrong with asking a manufacturer, at minimum. to label an ink cartridge stating how much ink is in the cartridge. We're not talking about ink formulations or other trade secrets here, simply how much ink, in (fractions of) ounces, a consumer gets when purchasing the cartridge.

It allows the consumer to make informed decisions on which printer to buy and which ink refill to purchase, if and when multiple choices are available.

Thanks for posting.

Knowing the volume of ink in a cartridge won't help because I'm sure not all printers use ink at the same rate. Ideally, there should be some industry standard 8.5" x 11" test page that can be used to quote the page count of a cartridge. I know they quote cartridges life in pages now but I have no idea if they're all using the same page.

[20droger]

We all know how when the government (any government) pokes its nose into the supply and demand process, things become cheaper and more plentiful.

Yeah, right!

If the Acme printer company consistently charges too much for its expendables, word will spread and people will stop buying Acme printers. The problem is self-correcting.

If they must label the amounts, they should use microliters. It'll make for nicer numbers.

But you watch, they'll wind up labeled in fluid ounces! After all, the fight is being led by the great state of Tennessee, the people who once tried to prohibit the teaching of foreign languages in public schools on the basis that, "if English is good enough for the Bible, it's good enough for the children of Tennessee"!

And every American knows how many fluid ounces there are in a cup, a pint, a quart, or a gallon. We don't ever have to look it up or calculate it, it's instinctive. Just like inches, feet, yards, rods, chains (Gunther's), and miles.

[shayneyasinski]

I have a small inkjet for non photo use that I simply return to walmart every time it runs out of ink..

[bkburns]

I have a small inkjet for non photo use that I simply return to walmart every time it runs out of ink..

It is fraud like that that raises retail prices for the rest of us. Thanks.

[mikekelley]

I have a small inkjet for non photo use that I simply return to walmart every time it runs out of ink..
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01129/global-graphics-20_1129275a.jpg

[MT Stringer]

The price of ink cartridges are way too high. Anything that would reduce the cost would be good by me.

[argyle]

The price of ink cartridges are way too high. Anything that would reduce the cost would be good by me.

Putting more nonsensical stipulations on the manufacturers will have just the opposite effect...

[shayneyasinski]

It is fraud like that that raises retail prices for the rest of us. Thanks.


Let me explain further.

I bought an epson printer for $79 that after 3 months started printing odd lines across my documents so I contacted epson and they told me to run a cleaning cycle and that would fix the problem.
well it did do one thing!!! dumped all remaining ink onto a piece of paper !!!

After buying $100 worth of ink and dumping that onto more sheets of paper to TRY and clean the head I simply took it back and was out $100 on non refundable ink.

BUT I then thought I will buy the same printer so I can use the ink in that printer... NOPE they are not the same.

So I now take it back when it starts printing like crap and get a new one.

Fraud??? how about giving me a full ink cartridge instead of a starter cartridge like they do on almost every entry level printer?

but as far as them printing how much ink is in the cartridge, They should !

[20droger]

Removed by poster.

[20droger]

Let me explain further.

I bought an epson printer for $79 that after 3 months started printing odd lines across my documents so I contacted epson and they told me to run a cleaning cycle and that would fix the problem.
well it did do one thing!!! dumped all remaining ink onto a piece of paper !!!

After buying $100 worth of ink and dumping that onto more sheets of paper to TRY and clean the head I simply took it back and was out $100 on non refundable ink.

BUT I then thought I will buy the same printer so I can use the ink in that printer... NOPE they are not the same.

So I now take it back when it starts printing like crap and get a new one.

Fraud??? how about giving me a full ink cartridge instead of a starter cartridge like they do on almost every entry level printer?

but as far as them printing how much ink is in the cartridge, They should !
Fine, but that's not even close to what you said in your previous post.

Of course, if you bought a decent printer instead of the cheapest available, you might have fewer printer problems. Better printers also tend to be more ifficient in their ink usage (smaller droplets, less waste).

Few manufacturer's use "starter cartridges." It's simply not cost-effective. The reason the first set of cartridges doesn't last as long is because a considerable amount of ink is required to initialize the print heads.

[mikekelley]

to be more ifficient


Roger, what has become of you?

:lol:

[joayne]

Returning a printer because you ran out of ink is absurd....

$79
3 months of printing
Get real

[20droger]

Roger, what has become of you?

:lol:
Actually, I'm surprised there are as few typos as there are. I review each post and try to catch them all, but I miss a few.

I just had surgery in my left arm a couple of weeks ago to try to correct a neurological problem (for the second time), and the hand's just not working correctly. It wasn't working correctly before, but I had become used to it and compensated accordingly. Now, it's completely different, and my old compensations are making things worse.

That's the trouble with being nearly completely literate. When I screw up, it stands out like a sore thumb. If I typed like many here do, you'd never know that I was having problems.

There was a medium-sized post in another thread that I read three times and still couldn't figure out what the poster was trying (but failing) to say.

[mikekelley]

Sorry to hear about the surgery- hope everything works out for you :)

But yes, there are some posters that I just can't even start to attempt to figure out what they want to say.

[nphsbuckeye]

Sorry to hear about the surgery- hope everything works out for you :)

But yes, there are some posters that I just can't even start to attempt to figure out what they want to say.
Tru dat.

[argyle]

Actually, I'm surprised there are as few typos as there are. I review each post and try to catch them all, but I miss a few.

I just had surgery in my left arm a couple of weeks ago to try to correct a neurological problem (for the second time), and the hand's just not working correctly. It wasn't working correctly before, but I had become used to it and compensated accordingly. Now, it's completely different, and my old compensations are making things worse.

That's the trouble with being nearly completely literate. When I screw up, it stands out like a sore thumb. If I typed like many here do, you'd never know that I was having problems.

There was a medium-sized post in another thread that I read three times and still couldn't figure out what the poster was trying (but failing) to say.

If I can't figure out what the poster is trying to convey, I just skip over the post. There's always one in the landscape talk forum that just about writes a complete paragraph, consisting of a single sentence replete with spelling/grammar errors and zero punctuation...talk about run-on sentences. I get dizzy trying to read those...had to pass them up just to keep from pulling my hair out.

[HappySnapper90]

HP labels ink quantities for some if not all its cartridges. And labeling how many mL are in a tank isn't going to change the amount of ink in that tank. It also won't make someone buy a different printer brand because all consumer inkjet printers have similar sized ink tanks.

If printer manufacturers lowered the price of the ink tanks they would make up that money in increased paper sales and have happier customers.

[Todd Lambert]

Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.

I don't know about returning the printer, but I do consider them disposable. I usually buy a cheap printer, use it til the ink runs out, throw it away and go buy a new one. HEHEHE...

(It truly is just about at that point now)

Anyways, I can't remember where I saw it, but I recently saw a graphic that had the value of printer ink in relation to other precious commodities, and it was right up at the top - positioned higher than human blood. Ha.

Damn, where did I see that?!?!

(it was funny, but true.. Ink is something like $8000 a gallon)

[Todd Lambert]

Ah, here is it:

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2007/08/relative_prices.html

[mbellot]

Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.


That is why I use Costco for all (well, most anyway) my photo printing needs and an ancient (circa 1994) HP 4MV Tabloid Laser printer for non-photo needs.

I have an Epson R300 that gets used for emergency photos (school project with overnight notice) and printing on CDs only.

I'm to the point where I will send two 4x6 prints to Costco rather than fart around with the Epson, its just not cost effective.

[birdfromboat]

I havent studied the whole thread, or really looked into the kodak printers, but didn't I read somewhere or hear somewhere that kodak was advertising the cheapest ink by volume but it was false economy because you were forced to replace the entire four colors in one cartridge when one of the inks ran out. It never really interested me enough to look into it myself, if it doesn't say 'canon', I don't pay alot of attention to it. I hope I am not spreading falsehoods, but if true, wouldn't requiring cost per ounce pricing be a step toward eliminating this kind of ambiguity?

[bjyoder]

Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.

I don't know about returning the printer, but I do consider them disposable. I usually buy a cheap printer, use it til the ink runs out, throw it away and go buy a new one. HEHEHE...

(It truly is just about at that point now)

Oh, it's past that point... The free Epson printer that was being given away last Christmas season ( 2008 ) at my store was an $80 printer. The cost for the ink to refill the thing was $90. I bought an Epson NX400 with an employee discount, and the ink - still on employee discount - was STILL more than my cost for the printer!! :lol:

Here's an idea of how to solve this. Make an industry standard test page; it doesn't matter what's on it (although it would be good to make it use a typical amount of ink). Then, tell the industry that, if they want to advertise how many pages a consumer can expect from the specific ink, they have to use this industry standard page. Easy, and lets the manufacturer decide if they will comply. ;)

[Brikwall]

This question of product pricing versus consumables pricing has been going on for many years. Replacement ink cartridges cost more than the original printer and ink bundle. Replacement razor-blade cartridges for my Gillette Mach 3 cost more than the original razor and razor-blade cartridge bundle. You can get the kids in to a Saturday matinee for $5 but the pop and popcorn combo necessary to keep them quiet during the show costs $12 after taxes. The wedding cost me three grand but the marriage and subsequent divorce... oops, better not go there... ;)

I forget what the exact business or marketing term is for this but it basically boils down to "purchase our product and then we'll have you by the short and curlies."

[mbellot]

Here's an idea of how to solve this. Make an industry standard test page; it doesn't matter what's on it (although it would be good to make it use a typical amount of ink). Then, tell the industry that, if they want to advertise how many pages a consumer can expect from the specific ink, they have to use this industry standard page. Easy, and lets the manufacturer decide if they will comply. ;)

My guess is there are such standards.

I know just about every laser printer rates toner consumption based on 5% page coverage.

I would imagine similar stats exist for inkjet... The problem would be doing it for photographic output since everyone would have to use exactly the same image and method for sending the image to the printer to insure they are all printing the same data.

The big problem (IMHO) is the insane clean/purge cycles. Every time I turn on my Epson, whether its been a year or a minute since the last time it was turned off, it runs a purge.

I could probably empty the ink tanks just by turning the printer on and off twenty times. :rolleyes: