Digital Print Trends

Themes at GRAPH EXPO 2011: Adding Value, PSP-MSP, Inkjet

Walking around the floor at GRAPH EXPO 2011, attending the seminars, and talking to industry experts provided a clear picture of the opportunities and the issues in the industry. Between our annual Owners Conference, the Executive Outlook program, and a trip to a Xerox inkjet beta site, I spent a total of six days on the road and came away with three key messages:

• The need to build more value-added services is increasing in importance,
• The one strategy that everyone is talking about is offering more marketing services, and
• Inkjet production technology continues to evolve.

Profit Squeeze

During various presentations at this year’s GRAPH EXPO, many of our NAPL staff members made reference to our most recent economic and trends research, published in NAPL’s Strategic Perspective 2011 report, which included the issue of declining profitability. Our research panel was very clear about the profitability squeeze that is occurring as manufacturing costs go up and pricing pressure remains intact.

The third chapter of the report opens with this statement: “Once we could wait a profit squeeze out, knowing that recovery would eventually restore print demand and pricing power. Now we have to position ourselves for profitability in markets that no longer guarantee margin to anyone—no matter how big, specialized, or profitable in the past.” One way to establish that profitability position is to streamline your operations and workflow; another is to offer more value-added services.

PSP-MSP, or Selling More Marketing Services

The prevalence of presentations at GRAPH EXPO 2011 on adding marketing services was nearly inescapable. You could not walk for more than 10 minutes in any direction on the show floor without hearing interlinkONE, MindFire, or one of the many digital press manufacturers discuss social, mobile, or cross-media marketing.

InfoTrends was handing out an Executive Summary of its latest study, entitled, “The Evolution of the Cross-Media and Marketing Service Provider.” It reported that of 285 print service provider respondents, nearly 87% were either offering cross-media marketing services today or have plans to start offering them in the next 24 months.

Not to be left out, in my two GRAPH EXPO 2011 presentations I also outlined a step-by-step strategy to transition from printing services to marketing services. If you’re interested in a copy of my handout, simply email me at hfenton@napl.org and write in the subject line “PSP to MSP handout.”

Xerox Introduces CiPress Inkjet Press

At GRAPH EXPO 2011, Xerox exhibited its newest entry into the inkjet production press competition, which the company calls the CiPress 500 Production Inkjet System. It prints 500 ft. per minute, or 2,180 pages per minute in the tandem engine configuration. Xerox says it is the “world’s only high-speed waterless inkjet device” because it is based on the Tektronix solid ink, phase-change technology that you may remember from the old days, when you loaded wax sticks into a desktop printer.

A group of 18 analysts drove 4.5 hours down to a beta site in Mt. Pleasant, Iowa, to learn how the technology has matured. We had the chance to talk to dmh Marketing Partners CTO Randy Seberg, who has been the champion of this project for nine months. We learned quickly that Randy is quite passionate about the new press as we debated inkjet issues.

A major motivation for dmh to work with the CiPress was its ability to use standard offset papers. The CiPress does not require paper with special coating (meaning it costs less to operate) and allows dmh to standardize its paper stock across its toner printers and offset presses. The other reason dmh chose Xerox was that it wanted a true partnership relationship, in which changes and improvements could be made.

The technology has evolved significantly; the press lays down only about half the amount of ink of the Tektronix, the ink does not rub off, and even though the ink is heated to 240º and the paper to 100º, there was none of that old Tektronix melting smell.  Most importantly, it has monitors and auto correcting controls that result in uniform image quality, and the pages are not wavy or curling, so they can go through the bindery effortlessly.  

According to Seberg, “The predictability and consistency is very high – the first sheet looks the same as sheet 500,000, which I could never say of an offset press.”  Despite the length of the trip, the analysts agreed that it was an interesting and worthwhile excursion.

Has Color Inkjet Production Printing Crossed the Chasm?

In the book, Crossing the Chasm, Geoffrey Moore talked about technology adoption cycles.  This landmark book went into great detail about how different groups of people adopt technology at different times, such as the innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Most noteworthy was the discussion about the gap between the early adopters and the early majority, which he termed “the chasm.” Crossing the chasm required a momentum, which resulted in the beginning of mass-market adoption. In other words, when a technology got hot.

No one really knows exactly when the “chasm” will appear or be crossed, but if we look at some available data about adoption, we can make some educated guesses when it comes to at least one key printing technology. Color inkjet presses emerged between 2006-2008 and have been increasing in speed and enhancing quality since then. Within the last year, there have been many announcements of companies that have purchased their first inkjet press and even some that have bought two or more.

According to Moore, the first adoption phase is the “innovator phase,” which for inkjet color presses may have occurred between 2006-2010, meaning that right now we are in the early adopter phase. Evidence to support this could be the Lyra Market research that found that last year 284 inkjet presses shipped, an 86% increase from the 167 shipped in 2009 and more than four times the 67 shipped in 2008. In all, that is more than 500 purchases in three years.

There are actually two chasms: The first is a small one between innovators and early adopters; the second is a larger gap between early adopters and mass-market acceptance. Using the Lyra research, the small gap may have already occurred and the second larger gap may still be ahead.

The first products driving this early adoption are direct mail, transactional (bills, statements), and books. The driving force for books is the cost, which is cheaper for inkjet at shorter runs. The crossover point is determined by existing internal costs, but some are saying it is between 1,000-5,000 books.

With direct mail and transactional printing, the driving force is a combination of cheaper cost for color, a workflow that is streamlined, and the ability to personalize the direct mail or credit card bill with targeted messages. Many of the companies that print these documents use a hybrid printing strategy that starts with offset four-color shells that are stored and then overprinted with high speed, black-and-white toner devices. The problem is the “carry costs” associated with this workflow, which can be eliminated by a “white paper in-finished product out” workflow.

What do you think? Is inkjet production printing ready for prime time?

Cross Media Effectiveness: Twitter vs. Facebook vs. LinkedIn

The effectiveness of social media tools to drive business results is not always obvious and is constantly changing. As Betty White said on Saturday Night Live, “When I first heard about it [Facebook] I thought, what a huge waste of time.”

And that was the running joke for years on late night talk shows about Twitter, too. But on its fifth anniversary it’s clear that Twitter is no joke. For its birthday the staff posted some interesting stats on the Twitter blog, including:

• It took three years, two months and one day to get to the billionth tweet. Now there are a billion tweets a week.
• A year ago, people sent 50 million tweets a day. On March 11, 2011, the tally was 177 million.
• There were 456 tweets per second after Michael Jackson died in 2009. That record was broken on New Year’s Day this year with 6,939 tweets after midnight in Japan.
• There were 572,000 new accounts created on March 12, 2011; there were 460,000 new accounts created daily, on average, in the past month.
• Mobile users increased 182% in the past year.
• Twitter has 400 employees today, compared to eight in January 2008.

There is constant fear and predictions of the sale of Facebook and Twitter, but Biz Stone, the co-founder of Twitter, says that is not the case. "We are not for sale," he said. "People insist we are, but we're not. I think we have created a strong brand, but we need to do that second part, which is build a strong business on top of all that work. In that regard we are just beginning."

On the other hand, LinkedIn filed for an IPO in January. Unlike Facebook or Twitter, LinkedIn is considered more of a professional or B-to-B tool. A study from the Society of New Communications Research of 114 executives across 10 countries found that the execs had decreased their use of almost all social networks other than LinkedIn, and that 97% of the respondents used LinkedIn.

But does LinkedIn—with almost 100 million users worldwide—drive business results in cross-media marketing campaigns as Facebook and Twitter do? I heard an expert say the answer is no because LinkedIn is for networking, job hunting, and keeping you in touch as people change jobs, but it is not an effective marketing tool.

I disagree. I think the effectiveness of different social media tools is based on the preferred tool of the target audience. I worked with one supplier who wanted to market its product to in-plant printers. They targeted all in-plants with the same message and the same medium and were unsuccessful.

I suggested that they would have greater success if they used Facebook sites with university in-plants, which is the tool they use to communicate with students, while corporate in-plants would be more likely to use LinkedIn. Of course, better segmentation results in better results.

Do you think that social media plays a role in cross-media marketing? What do you find more successful: Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn?

Is Web-to-Print Still a Hot Technology?

The list of technologies considered hot today is long, which makes prioritizing possible investments difficult. On the list are QR codes, inkjet presses, social media marketing, Web-to-print, variable-data printing, automated PDF workflows, Purls, integrated MIS systems, large-format printing, email marketing, and many others. If you ask different people in sales, management, or the operations side what technology they consider top investment priorities, you will get different answers depending on their unique experiences or individual motivations. Here is the perspective from a workflow and digital technology guy.

Two things determine a hot technology. From a sales and value proposition viewpoint, a hot technology is something that helps address a customer need, such as increasing customer convenience. From an internal workflow perspective, a hot technology is something that helps increase productivity, such as reducing turnaround times and reducing manufacturing costs. Ultimately, both increase your value proposition because your customers want to work with companies that make it easier for them to work with you, and turnaround times and competitive pricing are also high on their list.

One hot technology that fits these criteria is Web-to-print. For some customers, the ability to get an estimate online quickly or order a reprint fast makes that company more convenient and valuable. In addition, there are some products such as business cards or books that can move directly from Web-to-print solutions into production with no touches.

Does Web-to-print diminish your sales or service value?

Some people consider a Web-to-print solution a threat because it can remove or reduce the role of the salesperson, estimator, or customer service representative in the process. Admittedly, for certain products, it will reduce time spent in estimating, order entry, and monitoring the progress of the job as it goes through the process. Is that a bad thing?

How much value is added to the work we do in estimating, order entry, or job tracking? Even if someone were to argue that there is a significant value associated with those functions, what happens when your competition automates the process and makes it faster, easier, and less expensive for your customers?

After preaching the value of Web-to-print for years we have received many questions. Here are few answers: Yes, Web-to-print is a different way of working with customers than our traditional workflows. Yes, Web-to-print may remove some of the customer touch points from staff in sales, estimating, or customer service. And yes, not all salespeople or customers are going to like or want to use it because it is different.

For those customers who prefer the contact with their salesperson and/or CSR, they can take advantage of that option. That may mean that the customer calls and uses some verbal shorthand based on years of experience to describe the job and the changes that are required and that approach can continue and remain very valuable.

For other customers, however, it may mean that they want to log in and click a few buttons and log out. The printing process is becoming more automated and some customers are looking for faster and easier ways to get in and out of the process. As a result, there may be a loss of contact with some customers. Will that mean the end of sales or customer service? No. World-class sales people and CSRs are constantly evaluating and reinventing their value.

As the economy slowly recovers and companies start rebuilding and investing, the inevitable priority list will be created. Often the newest technologies—such as QR codes, inkjet presses, and social media—are considered the hottest technologies.

But as with the above concerns with Web-to-print, there are also concerns about those technologies. Inkjet presses cost millions and you need the demand to feed them. The success of QR codes is tied to the adoption rate of smart phones in your target market. And while everyone loves the idea of social media marketing, most experts agree that it works best as a part of a cross-media marketing campaign.

From the perspective of this workflow and digital technology guy, the answer to the question we asked at the outset is yes, Web-to-print is still a hot technology today. And if given a list of possible investments, it would on my list.

Howard Fenton is a Senior Consultant at NAPL. Howie advises commercial printers, in-plants, and manufacturers on workflow management, operations, digital services, and customer research.

The Future of In-plant Printing

In a presentation I made recently at TACUP (Texas Association of College and University Printers), I spoke about some of the reasons companies create in-plants: greater convenience, increased data security, consistency of the logo and brand, faster turnaround times, and, of course, competitive pricing.

Each in-plant has a parent organization and each parent organization has its own unique list of priorities, but regardless of their priorities, as the industry changes and budgets are cut, no one can deny the threats to in-plants from outsourcing or facilities management services. It’s no surprise that after my presentation I had several conversations with in-plant managers about their struggles and the long-term prognosis of in-plant printing.

First some background. The printing industry is undergoing challenges impacting both commercial and in-plant printers. Over the last 2 years I have worked with in-plants that have remained in business and others that have been outsourced. One advantage of an in-plant is that it uses a business model that does not include profit and often has a lower cost structure because it may not pay rent or utilities, or charge tax. As a result, a well run in-plant with enough demand can save its parent organization between 10% and 30% of commercial printing costs.

But in-plants, like their commercial cousins, are struggling with the same two issues—cyclical and structural changes that are reducing the demand for printed products. The cyclical change is tied to the economy, while the structural changes are from technologies that are disruptive to the printing industry, such as the Internet/email, cell phones, and e-books, among others. While a portion of the cyclical demand will return as the economy returns, the effects of the structural changes are more profound and the declines due to those changes may never rebound.

To assess the long-term prognosis honestly, you have to acknowledge that there are two different camps. On one side are the “naysayers” who believe that in-plant printers offering printing services are not sustainable. I sometimes get phone calls from people requesting an evaluation of their in-plant, but after hearing a description of the methodology of an objective assessment they may admit that they are not looking for an unbiased evaluation, but rather for ammunition to support their own agenda. I politely tell them they are talking to the wrong person.

On the other side are those who say that, as with commercial establishments, in-plant printers are evolving and will survive as long as they are responsive to their customers’ changing needs. The most recent market research supports the latter thinking and shows us that while there are signs of declining numbers of in-plants, overall they will remain a vital source of print production.

In February 2009, InfoTrends released a study of the in-plant market titled, “In-House Production Printing—Critical Trends for Corporations, Government, Education, and Non-Profits.” The report, based on responses from 376 in-plants, revealed that digital printing is quickly displacing offset in in-plants, data center Integration is growing, and in-plant production is increasing.

In two assignments I worked on this year I would say that this conclusion is spot on. In both in-plant assignments, I have seen digital printing displacing offset and data center integration becoming a motivating factor for keeping the in-plant operational. I suspect that the original impetus behind the statement that digital printing was displacing offset was a result of toner-based technologies, a conclusion I believe is further supported by high-speed inkjet presses.

The InfoTrends study also estimates the number of in-plants in the U.S. to be 52,078 and concludes that from 2006 to 2007 the number of in-plants declined by about 2.5%. The report supported the thinking that the success of in-plants will come from their ability to be responsive to their customers’ changing needs. When asked which new products and services they expected to show the greatest growth, study respondents listed the following areas: Internet-based services (Web-to-print), variable-data printing, cross-media marketing and digital asset management.

Howard Fenton is a Senior Consultant at NAPL. Howie advises commercial printers, in-plants, and manufacturers on workflow management, operations, digital services, and customer research.

Electronic-books: Threat or Opportunity?

I got a call recently from Graphic Communications World, the publishers of the Green Sheet, and interviewed for an article entitled, “Will Digital E-readers such as the iPad and Kindle Impact Your Print Business?” I suspect the call resulted from the recent blogs I wrote on this subject (http://bit.ly/bDKThc ) which has spurred interesting debates about which is better (Kindle vs. iPad) and why. But a more important question is, “Will e-books help or hurt the printing industry and your business?”

Typically when asking if an alternative technology is a threat or opportunity you need to consider market acceptance and potential growth. The size of the e-reader market is unknown. One reason is that Amazon does not disclose how many Kindles it has sold. Another reason is that even though Apple is talking about sales of 3 million iPads, since it offers more than just e-reading it is not clear how many are being used to download newspapers, books or magazines.

But that does not stop experts from trying. Late last year Forrester predicted that Amazon sold 600,000 (newly discounted) Kindles during the holiday season and 1.8 million by the end of 2009. Overall, Forrester predicted U.S. sales of three million e-readers in 2009 with Amazon owning 60% of the market. According to The Association of American Publishers’ (AAP) electronic books grew at a rate of more than 170 percent through 2008 and finished at more than 170 million dollars. Year-to-date through May, e-books have grown year-over-year 250 percent. However, none of those predictions included the most recent changes: sales of Kindles through Target stores, Sony's Reader broad distribution and multiple price points ($170 to $350), Apples huge success of the iPad and the latest marketing push from Barnes & Noble.

While Kindle was one of the first to market, Barnes & Noble is playing catch-up. But that may change now that Barnes & Noble announced a low-cost, Wi-Fi-only version of its Nook e-reader and cut the price of its original Nook. Barnes & Noble has cut prices for its nook e-reader from $259 to $199 and introduced a $149 Wi-Fi version. Sharp is the newest player to announce a product. They announced plans to enter the market later this year with a device that can read a new e-publishing file format of its own. They say their e-book reader will launch in Japan before the end of the year and they are also working toward a launch outside of Japan.

For some a threat – others an opportunity?

I’m not sure about you but as someone who works, lives and breathes print I feel guilty about writing, talking or even thinking about alternative technologies such as a Kindle or an iPad. On the other hand, while these alternatives may not help the printing industry they may play an important role in the future of book, magazine or newspaper publishing. E-books may be less of a threat for designers and service providers who can create books for distribution in multiple formats.

Dave Dickson wrote a post entitled "Creating Digital Magazines" on the Adobe Digital Publishing site which talked about Adobe technology that print magazines such as Wired are using to create publications the iPad can display.  InDesign CS5 is the starting point of Adobe's digital magazine workflow. That's where the page layout takes place and where you add some interactivity, such as slideshows and embedded videos. Then you move to a new utility, the Digital Content Bundler, where you add metadata like article titles and issue numbers. The Digital Content Bundler is also the app that joins an issue's vertical and horizontal layouts.

If your business focuses on just printing, this will be a threat. As John Conley, the VP of book publishing at Xerox said in this Green Sheet article, “This change in overall mix is going to have a negative impact on the number of books produced on the traditional, centralized print platforms, which have dominated the book printing business for close to 100 years. The reason for the change in mix is being driven by both the reader and the publisher. You no longer have technology in search of applications; instead, you have reading solutions that are being driven by the need for a superior end-user experience, which print alone cannot deliver. The end result will be a shift of work off the dominant offset platforms, which service the book industry today, to a combination of platforms that will still include centralized offset but will also include: e-readers like the Nook, Kindle and Sony Reader; book application platforms like the iPad; continuous feed high-speed inkjet; print on-demand digital print facilities; and, eventually, print at retail solutions. Every one of these alternative platforms will take work away from the centralized offset platform that dominates the market today.”

In an interview last week with USA Today, when Jeff Bezos from Amazon was asked when he felt that paperback sales would fall behind e-book sales and he responded, "I predict we will surpass paperback sales sometime in the next nine to 12 months. Sometime after that, we'll surpass the combination of paperback and hardcover. It stuns me. People forget that Kindle is only 33 months old."

But others believe that there is still room in the market for digital short run books. John Lacagnina, the president and CEO of ColorCentric, a leader in digital book production, says that “If you are a traditional printer that has not fully embraced digital printing, now is the time to make the move. Offset printers have to move to digital, and they have to move quickly, otherwise the future does not look good. We have not hit the tipping point yet—not for another couple of years—but in the end, other than the large Harry Potter-type titles, the bulk of the remaining print work in the book industry will have to go to some form of ultra-short run digital print engine, not offset engines.”

David Davis, from the market research company INTERQUEST believes that there is still room for growth in the book market despite the e-book phenomenon. INTERQUEST estimates that digital systems currently account for about four percent of all book printing, but that by 2015 it will grow to about 15 percent of the total. In the coming years inkjet printing will play an increasingly important role in the market as the cross-over point between conventional and digital manufacturing moves up, making available more first-run front list titles as well as longer run reprints.”

To contact Howie directly feel free to call 20.523.6328 or e-mail your comments here and to sign up for Howie’s free newsletter click here.

Integration is the Key to Overcoming the Threat of Substitute Products

According to the 2010 State of the Industry (SOI) report if you’re waiting for clients to rediscover the power of print, for competitors to fail, or for the economy to make everything right you will be disappointed. Simply put we are undergoing a fundamental structural change and if you continue with business as usual you will likely struggle. To thrive you need to reinvent your business.

What is structural change? According to the Harvard Business School a company’s health depends in part on the structure of the industry in which it competes. An industries structure depends on five forces of competition:

• the intensity of rivalry among existing competitors;

• the threat of new entrants;

• the threat of substitute products or services;

• the bargaining power of suppliers; and

• the bargaining power of buyers.

Most of these forces are not new but one has become more of an issue over the last few years. For years we have witnessed the competition become more cut throat and ruthless, new emerging sources of new competition, and the simple fact that larger printers and customer with more purchasing power command better pricing.

But the one force that continues to grow and become a much more disruptive influence is the threat of substitute products and services. These substitute products are so ubiquitous that we often don’t realize that email, the internet, cell phones, laser printers and color copiers are changing the demand for print and mailed products.

Occasionally something will happen that may bring this to our attention such as the release of the iPad and recent discounts of e-readers such as the Amazon Kindle. These products impact the consumption of printed books, magazines and newspapers. But after a short period of time, the threat becomes less obvious when something timelier occurs.

How can you overcome this threat? One strategy we have used successfully for years is to surround the printing process with more value-added services such as design, mail and fulfillment. Since many have already done this, many companies are wondering “what’s next.” A newer option is to create new solutions that do not have threats of substitution.

These solutions include variable data printing, email marketing, Purls, social media marketing and QR codes. While each of these can be offered as stand alone services, we believe “to add is bad.” In other words, simply adding new services may provide a temporary bump in sales and/or profits but may not result in sustainable change, because your competition will see what you’re doing and make a similar investment and offer it for less.

We have long emphasized that investments must be integrated into a compelling value proposition that locks additional value by helping your customers become more successful. That could mean that you have already developed the internal expertise for mailing, databases or variable data printing. If you confirm the need exists but listen to the voice of your customers, then you could also integrate Purls and email marketing to create a more unique, compelling and valuable solution.

Summary

The take home story is that our industry is in the midst of a fundamental structural change due at least in part to the substitute products and services. While there are many ways to compensate, one solution is to grab more “wallet share” or more work from existing clients and within existing markets by grafting new products and services into your portfolio and offering them as part of an integrated service.

To contact Howie directly feel free to call 201.523.6328 or e-mail your comments here and to sign up for Howie’s free newsletter click here.

IPEX 2010: The Battle of the Dominant Printing Technologies

Now that IPEX is over and the industry experts have reported their stories, let’s look back and try to make some sense of the show and then evaluate what it will mean.  I read and watched everything I could get my hands on and there were stories claiming that Inkjet was Killing Offset Printing, DI Printing was Killing Toner Printing, and Offset was Killing Toner Printing.

I thought that Dave Erlandson (Caslon’s General Manager) did a great job with his webinar entitled, “Inside IPEX 2010.” I especially liked the pictures of both the products on the floor as well as from some press conferences. As someone who often thinks about the break-even point of different technologies and for different applications, I especially liked the photos from the FujiFilm presentation on the new break-even point between offset and their 720 – a new B2 sized device. This presentation is available on the podi.org site.

But I thought that WhatTheyThink.com offered the best coverage of the show with their three industry experts reporting from the show: Andrew Tribute, Frank Romano and Richard Romano. Two stories stand out in my mind, Andrew Tribute’s story “Will Inkjet Printing Kill Offset?” and Richard Romano’s report on the Presstek press conference at IPEX.

Richard Romano reported that Jeff Jacobson, Chairman, President, and CEO of Presstek said, “I believe with the advent of inkjet, electrophotographic missed an opportunity.” Romano goes on to report that Jacobson sees shops with three basic equipment rosters: inkjet for short-run, variable printers; offset for long-run printing, and a DI press for the “doughnut hole” between those two technologies’ run-length characteristics. And I have heard from clients that some offset press manufacturers are claiming, in back rooms of the show, that their make-ready and run-lengths can compete with electrophotographic or toner-based printing. The obvious question is, who is really killing whom and when will they be dead?

Same old story?

This is nothing new. It seems like the big international shows bring out the big predications of gloom and doom. A few years ago, before Drupa, William Buckley wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal that said in essence inkjet printing will kill toner.

The story opened with this: “Inkjet-printing technology that dominates inexpensive desktop printers is about to enter the world of commercial print shops. If the new technology succeeds, it could spell trouble for Xerox Corp. and lead to expanded business for Eastman Kodak Co., Hewlett-Packard Co., Ricoh Co. and other inkjet makers. The world’s printing industry gathers Thursday at the Drupa trade show in Düsseldorf, Germany, where a host of companies are showing new inkjet presses touted as the wave of the future. Giant offset presses, which cost several million dollars apiece, dominate the $400 billion-a-year printing business. But inkjet and laser technologies are nibbling at the market.”

I’d like to offer my two cents on this subject, which is just another guy’s opinion. I don’t think that any printing technology is going to kill any other printing technology. In fact, after this article appeared I wrote this letter to the editor, which offers a less lethal predication.

“Dear Editor:

It is naïve to focus on the advances in high-speed inkjet technology in a vacuum (“Inkjet Printers Get Set to Turn the Page,” William Buckley, May 29, 2008). While tremendous advances have been made in inkjet printing technology, inkjet simply does not have the potential in the near future to become the dominant printing technology, in the face of new advances in electrophotographic (laser or toner-based printing) and offset printing. However, the new announcements blur the advantages of each technology more than ever before.

• High-speed inkjet technology’s popularity will grow in specialty printing areas such as merging transaction and promotional communication messages, as well as in new markets such as newspapers, books and office printing. While longer runs have typically offered cost efficiencies and customization, we have not yet seen the higher quality that is comparable to what other printing technologies offer.
• Toner printing technology’s quality and speed continue to improve, resulting in a reduced price per page, even for longer print runs historically reserved for offset printing. Toner printing has always offered the same ability to customize as inkjet.
• Offset lithographic technology will continue to automate the make-ready process and remains the dominant printing technology for the foreseeable future for the highest-quality printing and longer-run lengths.

Ultimately, the print buyer should be aware of the differences in quality, cost and the ability to customize associated with each printing technology. The printer, in order to decide what equipment he requires, must understand how the needs of his customer base are met by each technology.  There is no room in today’s highly competitive marketplace to invest in the wrong machine.”

Or has the momentum changed?

But this year my opinion has shifted slightly. I still don't think that any one printing technology is killing any other but while I don't expect any homicides, there may be some injuries. It would be naïve not to acknowledge the momentum that inkjet presses are achieving. After years and years of predictions of inkjet technology shifting from the transactional print space to the commercial and publishing spaces, it is actually starting to occur. Within the last 9 months, I’ve been having conversations and witnessing commercial printers and book publishers invest in inkjet technology.

While no deaths will occur, we have to admit that the advantages are getting more compelling. The advantages include lower cost per page for certain run lengths, higher speeds, and improved quality – which is something that no one should dismiss without more careful consideration. Clearly this is going to require greater scrutiny for certain products and for more markets. So, as noted above, while no deaths, there may be some injuries!

To contact Howie directly feel free to call 20.523.6328 or e-mail your comments here and to sign up for Howie’s free newsletter click here.