Issue #0414/1 - How can colour MFPs and copiers be called ‘essentially mono’ and ‘colour capable’ when they ship as colour and cost 108% more to run than mono MFPs and copiers?
‘Colour Capable’ is a term that has been used by several manufacturers over the last year or so in reference to colour laser printers or copiers. Why?
In a recent press release, Ricoh has again referred to colour laser copiers as being ‘colour capable’, despite the fact that they ship with a full set of colour consumables and ARE colour machines – like it or not.
They do not fall into the same category as early colour inkjet printers that were described as ‘colour capable’. They shipped with a mono cartridge and, IF the user was interested in printing in colour, a colour cartridge could be purchased.
Similarly, current models of colour inkjet printer may be fitted with an optional photo cartridge to turn a photo capable machine into a photo printer. Other inkjet printers that ship with full photo consumables are described as photo printers – such as the Hewlett-Packard PhotoSmart 7960 or the Epson Stylus Photo R800.
Ricoh knows that as soon as a colour device is available in the office, users will print/copy in colour. Users know this as well! This is exactly why there is still resistance from corporate buyers where colour is concerned. The costs associated with colour are so much higher than mono (typically between 4x and 8x higher as a minimum) that those in control of the organisation’s purse strings wish to restrict access to colour as one of the most effective means of minimising print/copy costs.
It was Ricoh’s own study (see TCPglobal Issue #0330 - "Ricoh colour survey exposes users’ concerns over the cost of colour") that showed that 55% of companies that do provide access to colour in the office restrict that access. Furthermore, the reason given by 65% of those companies is financial.
And yet … the cost of printing mono pages on the Aficio 2232C and 2238C is just over 0.9 pence per page. True, the cost of printing colour is about 5.8 pence per page, which is reasonably competitive, but - considering that typical costs for mono pages on mono copiers can easily be under the 0.5 pence level - these new machines are hardly going to be the device of choice for companies with an eye on costs and whose major print/copy requirement is, in fact, mono.
Indeed, Ricoh’s own 32ppm Aficio 2032 mono copier has a CPP of 0.44 pence, 52% lower than the mono CPP for the new Aficio 2232C and 2238. To take it to the extreme, probably the lowest cost per page available in the industry is from Kyocera – for instance, the 30ppm KM-3035 has a CPP of just 0.35 pence per page, 62% lower than the new Ricoh machines. (Note: all CPP is calculated using 5% cover per page)
The problem is that this represents a big premium, payable on mono pages, for occasional colour pages.
If Ricoh seriously recognises that costs are the major obstacle to the adoption of colour in the office, then running costs for mono printing and copying on the colour machine absolutely have to be comparative to the running costs of a mono device. As indicated previous issues of TCPglobal, this has been achieved in the printer world by companies such as Epson, with a mono CPP on the AcuLaser C1900 colour printer that exactly matches the CPP of 1.03 pence on its EPL-N2750 mono printer. Many mono workgroup printers exceed this CPP by 40% or more.
Of course, the other aspect is that these new machines cost £13k and £15k, respectively to purchase. Not exactly the level of expenditure that will encourage those companies with majority mono usage to buy these devices over a mono MFP costing half the amount, or less.
Ricoh does recognise two key factors here:
- firstly, that the mono CPP is too high. Local product managers are attempting to exert the necessary pressure to have that reduced to a level that would more closely emulate the cost of printing on a mono machine.
- secondly, that, at these costs, sales will not be as high as might have been hoped from machines of this calibre.
Perhaps the solution for companies with majority mono requirements would be to use a mono copier, at half the cost of the new Ricoh ‘colour capable’ machines, for the mono work and invest in a device such as the ultra low-cost Konica Minolta magicolour 2300W with copy station for the occasional colour work??
Although they would be paying a rather high 7.24 pence per colour page on the magicolour, compared to 5.3 pence on the Ricoh, it would take 89,710 pages just to cover the difference in purchase cost between the Aficio 2032 and 2232! That is quite a few pages! Of course, the magicolor does not look as professional or impressive in the business environment as would the Ricoh Aficio 2232C – but should that be a significant factor when there is such a high cost saving to be made?
Obviously the magicolor 2300W is a very low-end machine. It is said that average copy/print volumes for machines in this class are in the order of 18,000 pages per month. Using Ricoh’s metric, this would equate to 12,600 mono pages and 5,400 colour pages.
But, a recommended duty cycle that would allow 8,750 colour prints per month (or just about one print for every minute of the working month) to be printed on the magicolor. This is a substantial number of pages, requiring a substantial office environment to exceed. Using Ricoh’s metrics, this would mean a minimum of just over 20,400 mono pages per month – total 29,100 pages per month.
As a downside to this particular line of thought, at 8,750 colour prints per month, the allowance of 89,000 pages referred to earlier would be exhausted in less than a year! So, let us consider the magicolor 3300 ScanCopy from Konica Minolta? At 24ppm colour (albeit with a scan speed of only 10ppm on the copy unit), we have a machine that could produce up to 60,000 page per month – say 15,000 colour pages per month – at the same speed as the Aficio 2232.
The accompanying table shows the total cost of printing over a three-year period where the average 18,000 pages per month are printed. Using Ricoh’s 70/30 metric, this amounts to 453,600 mono pages and 19,400 colour pages over the three year period (total 648,000 pages).
We have calculated costs for the Ricoh 2232C and shown them against the cost of using the two printer-based solutions from Konica Minolta. Even allowing for the purchase of four magicolor 2300W units to inject a suitable robustness, and bearing in mind the high colour CPP for this machine, there is still a saving of 17.5% to be made over three years by using the Aficio 2032 mono copier, together with the Konica Minolta colour machine, over Ricoh’s new Aficio 2232.
Using the faster and more robust single-pass magicolor 3300 in its ScanCopy configuration instead of the slow four-pass magicolor 2300W, with its higher purchase price but lower colour CPP of 6.29 pence, the saving actually increases by a fraction, to 19%.
| Purchase |
453,600 mono pages |
196,400 pages |
Total expenditure |
Saving | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ricoh Aficio 2232 | £12,995 | £4,194 | £11,334 | £28,478 | - |
|
Ricoh Aficio 2032 plus 4x Konica Minolta magicolor 2300W ScanCopy |
£6,195 plus £1,220 |
£1,994 |
£14,075 |
£23,484 |
17.5% |
|
Ricoh Aficio 2032 plus 1x Konica Minolta magicolor 3300 ScanCopy |
£6,195 plus £2,650 |
£1,994 |
£12,228 |
£23,067 |
19% |
It should also be pointed out that in an environment that is producing almost two pages for every minute of the working month (18,000 pages per month), it may be preferable to have more than one machine available anyway – to improve access!
Clearly this scenario is being used merely as an example to illustrate that users must go into negotiations with their eyes open with regard to the implications of accepting the offerings being presented to them. Some offerings may sound extremely attractive in principle until the details and financial aspects are fully investigated.
Just by way of comment – 30% colour pages is a high ratio, not really the low-usage colour that Ricoh is hinting at targeting. It should be remembered that the figures shown in the table would improve in favour of the split systems (two separate devices) if the proportion of colour pages were reduced – giving greater savings!
Ricoh says, “The colour capable concept provides businesses with access to faster colour output on what is essentially a black and white machine”. Fair enough – but this statement from Ricoh makes it sound like the devices are mono machines that can print in colour. This, they patently are not – they ship as full colour machines, ready to go in colour. If the mono CPP was equivalent to CPP on a mono machine, this may be a valid claim but, as long as the user is paying a 108% premium for each and every mono page, then this approach is tantamount to preying on users’ ignorance.
If there is anything that users and corporate customers do NOT need, it is to be confused by ridiculous, misdirectional and misleading statements by manufacturers.
Manufacturers should refer to products for what they are; they should call a spade a spade; they should call a colour device a colour device and not a ‘colour capable’ device! Everyone will benefit from being straight with the customers, they will respect the industry more for that – and may wish to purchase the device in question regardless of the cost premium.
~End~
