paulnsoo

can't say i didn't think of it,

but done bar work years agon too much like hard work!

and running/owning a bar < NO ESCAPE Very hard work
and i want to live among the Spanish not in the Middle of Little England

thanks Mark

mikelincs

Yes, postage was £13.49 :scared:

paulnsoo

WOW

although couriers are Expensive to Spain( my minimum is £24.00 to Spain for up to 30 kilo's)

thats a little over the top for normal Postage.

I believe i have sent you a price on some inks on your direct email.

thanks

cidshock

I can get 3 sets of 6 catridges for the R300 compatible for a tenner and they are great for my photos.

cidshock

I can get 3 sets of 6 catridges for the R300 compatible for a tenner and they are great for my photos.

kevray

As some closely associated with the printer trade, I would advise anyone to use so called compatible cartridges with caution , while HP/Canon use a generic ink, which can be easily replicated with almost the same quality results. Companies such as Epson use a special type of ink designed solely for their range of printers, compatibles tend to either, confuse the printer into thinking the cartridge is empty when only half empty or cause blockage in the nozzles.
Its false economy if you have to buy a new printer every 14 months. plus my way of thinking is comparing compatibles with remold tyres, gets you out of a situation but should be replaced with the genuine article as soon as possible.

Fred James

I have been using compatible cartridges for my Epson R200 for 2 years. I pay less than £5 for the same set of 6 that Epson charge £66 for. If my printer goes belly up as a result I will buy another printer for £60 and carry on with the cheap cartridges. In 2 years I have saved 10 times the cost of a new printer.

It is a well known fact that the printer manufacturers make almost all their profit from the ink. They just give the printers away at less than cost price to encourage idiots to pay £66 for a set of cartridges.

I have never suffered from blocked nozzles and the cartridges last as long as the originals. In fact the Epson software tells you to replace the cartridge when it still has 20% left - another con.

The only time it is worth considering paying the premium for original ink is where you are looking for archive quality photo prints and this only applies to a small number of printers anyway.

paulnsoo

it a bit horses for courses really
i have been selling Compatibles (ribbons and inks) for over 20 years and myself for general use i always use Compatibles but for quality work of any kind i use Originals. i can the "see the Why pay 50 quid when you can get em for a fiver" sense, but i can tell you that i sell 2500 original ink cartridges (and more ) every month to those people who like the piece of mind of an original brand too. and I can sell you Photo paper (top grade) 260gsm for £1.25 for 50 6 x 4" but my EPSON photo paper outsells it by 20/1

I believe most people would prefer to use originals if they could.

i didn;t mean to cause such interesting discussions when i started the thread.

keep em coming

kevray

There is always an exception to the rule, and I get to hear all the excuses every day, when I have to repair printers damaged by 3rd party ink carts.
The chances are that you use twice as many compatibles to one genuine, so the savings are not that great, plus loss of quality and with the latest Epson inks, you also loose out with the anti fading element


Epsons never denied that their main line of business is the manufacture of ink, but, they also make what is considered in the graphics trade as the best inkjet printers.

My Uncle smoked like a chimney all his life, he died aged 90, but I still wouldn't smoke.

Yet another urban myth, yes some ink remains in the cartridge, but its closer to 3% and is there so that air is NOT drawn into the printhead, as that could cause damage. Its controlled by Firmware not software

Can't find fault in that statement

You really need to think about the whole concept, If Epson could market a quality ink and sell at the same price as the compatibles then of course they would do so, but as they have to bear the costs of producing a very stable and high quality product the prices are bound to be higher. You pay your money and take your chances.

Fred James

I think the point here is that the printer manufactures have chosen a business model where they sell the printers at well below cost just to make their profit from the supplies.

I cannot believe that Epson can produce a photo quality printer for €100 and make a profit on the hardware.

If they choose to make the profit on the ink then the sensible approach is buy the underpriced printer and use cheap compatible ink.

As I said before, if the printer screws up because of the ink I can easily afford to buy another one paid for by the savings on the ink. I have been using compatible cartridges or ink refills for over 10 years and have never had a problem.

As for your unsubstantiated comments suggesting that compatible cartridges do not last so long, so what! At 10% of the price or less should I be concerned?

kevray

Whilst I cannot obviously go into details I can assure you that Epson make a profit on their entire range of inkjets, be they "cheap throw away " as you describe them or professional large format. Epson did not become the top inkjet manufacturer by losing money just to sell ink
As printer support/repair has been my business since the seventies I think I possibly know more about the printer trade than the average user But I could be wrong

paulnsoo

i also have been in the printer /consumer market since the late 70's and i think you are totally wrong............

i believe when pricing a printer they look at what they can make on consumables over a lifecycle not how much the printer costs.
Japanes inscrutability don't ya know.........
AH SO!

paul

kevray

I'm not disagreeing with your statement, of course they are looking to sell x number of carts over the lifetime of the printer, theres no question. but I was merely stating that Epson do not sell their printers at cost or as a loss leader as was suggested.
Have you always traded under your name as shown on your profile ? I was one of the very first people to setup a toner re-manufacturing business here in the midlands as opposed to the drill and fill brigade, who caused so much grief by bad work and sloppy refilling.

paulnsoo

No Our trading name now is (PM me if you need it) ,but in the late 70's i worked in London and in the 80's too.

i used to get all My ribbons re-inked (before tomers really) by a company called KLEENSTRIKE uk they also were one of the first to set up re-inking ink carts and re-manufacturing of laser toner.

if you belong to any associations you'll know LAURA up there. she has won awards for her work and is as passionately against the drill and fill culture as anyone.
i think you're probably right about the printers and the profit thing. but its not where there main profit is thats obviously in the consumables......

not sure if i should mention names but we are not looking for business.