Come on, Mease. Honestly.

  • Thread starter Thread starter trevor
  • Start date Start date
trevor said:
measekite wrote:




That's the question that caught me by surprise. Sourcing is one of the arts
of the industry. You find a good supplier, you cut the best deal you can
with them and you hope the competition isn't doing as well. You absolutely
try to keep these deals a secret and you absolutely do everything you can
to nail down whatever "exclusive arrangement" you can with this supplier.
Guess why? To try to secure your position against competitors. See, that's
where the real competition is in this business-the supply side. It's hard
to charge more for the product, so your best way to increase margins are to
source for less. The fact is, until I'm told, I have no idea who and where
the various suppliers are. Sourcing is not my job.

So figuring it does no harm to ask, I went to the boss. "Where does our ink
come from?" He's like "all over the world, why?" And I'm like "some people
on usenet want to know" and he's like "why?" and I'm like "I dunno, because
they are curious?"

Well, I'm told that I'll be provided with as much information as "possible"
about our sources. I'm not sure how complete this information will be, but
I'm interested to see what the answer is too. Until that comes, understand
that we do in fact sell lots of OEM products. We generally try to have an
OEM option as well as an aftermarket/reman option for the consumer.




Does anyone else do that?

No and that is why this is a sleezy industry
Again, does anyone else do that?

They should
And what percentage of the population do
you think would actually know or care about it?

100% of the intilligent people who want to know what they are paying for
What do you mean "track" the product? Do you mean some kind of rating system
or historical performance data?

It is like this. Canon ink is sold online, in all of the major office
supply stores and many big box stores. It is all sold under the Canon
label. If it was not good it would soon be known all over the industry
and also be reported by the computer and foto mags.
Hmmmm. Maybe there is such an organization already. I'll ask the big shots.

There are no big shots in the generic industy
 
trevor said:
First of all, apologies to all those who accuse me of "feeding the troll".

----worthless diatribe snipped------------------

I've had that know nothing stuck-on-stupid meahsershithead who is a
known oem spamming liar kill filed now for months. He is a certified
mentally deranged idiot who is also a moron. He has one printer...has
never used after market inks...and you think he's expert on after market
inks?
Guess what? You too are an idiot just like him.
Guess again...KILL FILE!!!
Frank
 
For emphasis. I could have used *PLONK*, PLONK, ~PLONK~, <PLONK> etc.
Are you trying to be funny?

No. You confused me. Using quotes for "emphasis" doesn't work. If you
wish, you can "plonk" me. Or, in newsgroup/email tradition, _plonk_ me.

Richard
 
trevor said:
In other, other words, I'm ready to send free ink to Measekite just for
the
analysis. Mease, come on bro. Want some free ink? Please? Purty-please?
Please review our ink and/or toner?

Seems as though you PO'd a lot of people with your idea. Personally, I'd
like to se a test of your ink, plus a couple of others, by the resident
curmudgeon of inks. . The backup to the offer should be a replacement
printer if you ruin his. No risk to the tester.

Ink should be sent blind to Mease from a third party.
 
measekite said:
No and that is why this is a sleezy industry

Is GM, Ford, and Chrysler sleazy too? If you go to the dealership, they
offer genuine Mr. Goodwrench, Mopar, etc, oils and filters for your car. We
all know they do not make them, but they do not reveal their sources either.
Your car is worth far more than the $99 printer, so . . . .
 
trevor said:
SNIPPED..


Here are a few worldwide industry associations........

Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association
Web: www.supportacra.org
Association of Toner Remanufacturers, Latin America
Association of Japan Cartridge Remanufacturers
Australasian Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.acra.asn.au
Canadian Imaging Products Remanufacturers Association
United Kingdom Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.ukcra.com
International Imaging Technology Council Web: www.i-itc.org
European Toner and Inkjet Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.etira.org/
Association California Cartridge Remanufacturers
Web: www.accr.com



Here are a couple of trade magazine web sites;

www.therecyler.com

www.rechargermag.com

There are others, but that's some for starters!
 
Stick Stickus said:
Here are a few worldwide industry associations........

Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association
Web: www.supportacra.org
Association of Toner Remanufacturers, Latin America
Association of Japan Cartridge Remanufacturers
Australasian Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.acra.asn.au
Canadian Imaging Products Remanufacturers Association
United Kingdom Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.ukcra.com
International Imaging Technology Council Web: www.i-itc.org
European Toner and Inkjet Remanufacturers Association Web:
www.etira.org/
Association California Cartridge Remanufacturers
Web: www.accr.com



Here are a couple of trade magazine web sites;

www.therecyler.com

www.rechargermag.com

There are others, but that's some for starters!

Thank you! That's awesome!
 
Edwin said:
Seems as though you PO'd a lot of people with your idea.

No kiddin' eh?
Personally, I'd
like to se a test of your ink, plus a couple of others, by the resident
curmudgeon of inks.

I think it would be great. What the heck?
The backup to the offer should be a replacement
printer if you ruin his. No risk to the tester.

Boy, that's going to throw a wrench in it. But it is a good point. I
understand that mis-applied cartridges can physically break a printer and I
know that bad ink can clog print heads, so you are right.
Ink should be sent blind to Mease from a third party.

That would increase confidence in results. Someone else published their
personal ink review here and it was great. Kind of home-spun maybe, but the
process yielded a lot of good observations.

-Trevor
 
Edwin said:
Seems as though you PO'd a lot of people with your idea. Personally, I'd
like to se a test of your ink, plus a couple of others, by the resident
curmudgeon of inks. . The backup to the offer should be a replacement
printer if you ruin his. No risk to the tester.

Ink should be sent blind to Mease from a third party.

What would be more reasonable would be a goodwill printer with the
approperate inks in it. Something like an i550 or i560, which I tend
to see for under $15.00 still in reasonable working order. Even an old
S520 would be an adquate vehicle for testing.
 
trevor said:
That's the question that caught me by surprise. Sourcing is one of the arts
of the industry. You find a good supplier, you cut the best deal you can
with them and you hope the competition isn't doing as well. You absolutely
try to keep these deals a secret and you absolutely do everything you can
to nail down whatever "exclusive arrangement" you can with this supplier.
Guess why? To try to secure your position against competitors. See, that's
where the real competition is in this business-the supply side. It's hard
to charge more for the product, so your best way to increase margins are to
source for less. The fact is, until I'm told, I have no idea who and where
the various suppliers are. Sourcing is not my job.

Obviuosly desperate for sales. Not 1 person has said they have tried
your ink. If your a seller of ink than the question would not have
caught you by surprise. You act as if your company has an exclusive
arrangment with the supplier...YA RITE.

"Sourcing is not my job" Nor is selling...You can't even give your ink
away. You as a non profesional to qualify your ink and expect everyone
to buy based on his responce. You have know intention on giving your
ink to anyone...for free...you can't...unless your real job is "the guy
that gives out free ink to unqualified people for testing."

Find a qualified source for testing and post the results. Who knows if
the ink you send is the ink you sell. You might change the ink once it
"qualifies".

Again...WHO MAKES YOUR INK???????????
 
So figuring it does no harm to ask, I went to the boss. "Where does our ink
come from?" He's like "all over the world, why?" And I'm like "some people
on usenet want to know" and he's like "why?" and I'm like "I dunno, because
they are curious?"

Well, I'm told that I'll be provided with as much information as "possible"
about our sources. I'm not sure how complete this information will be, but
I'm interested to see what the answer is too. Until that comes, understand
that we do in fact sell lots of OEM products. We generally try to have an
OEM option as well as an aftermarket/reman option for the consumer.

So the options are

1) you are a cheap seller: You take whatever you can get. You don't mind
about the continous quality of your ink, nor a permanent color match

2) you are a quality seller: You select your own sources. You have a
huge testing lab to ensure that source 1 will be mixed and modified to
the same output ink A as mixing A from source 2.


A typical member 2 seller would take the effort to have the same number
of inks as the original supplier, giving detailed lists which ink does
match which original ink best.

A typical member 1 has one ink, claimed to fit for all. A member who
claims to be 2, but is 1 only, might reuse the same ink, although naming
them differently.


A typical member 2 would take high efforts to offer the SAME quality.
That's not necessarily a good quality - but it's reliable.

Maybe there are some few sellers of a type 3 which could provide BETTER
(and stable) quality. From those I would expect that they would offer
e.g. color profiles, although a pro user would do this himself fo a
special ink and a special paper. But a pro would like e.g. reasonable
certificates, proofing the higher quality, e.g. by long time UV / ozone
tests.

Does anyone else do that?

Yes - I know a poor example of a Print Rite relabel. He names the proof
of quality. He shows the certificates. But those certificates are just
blank forms without names written on them.
Again, does anyone else do that? And what percentage of the population do
you think would actually know or care about it?

Only few would know. Here in Europe it's more important to use a label
that is known from good old office applications.
Hmmmm. Maybe there is such an organization already. I'll ask the big shots.
What would your "quick list" of rules be? 1-5 above?

* warranty for no damage to the print head

... you'd ensure that the end user would not have to mind. You'd
ensure that the printer manufacturer could not refuse warranty
when a user did take your ink

* warranty for matching color

* warranty for long term stability

* warranty for physical behavior (e.g. usability for duplex print)

....
 
Richard said:
No. You confused me. Using quotes for "emphasis" doesn't work. If you
wish, you can "plonk" me. Or, in newsgroup/email tradition, _plonk_ me.

It seems you are more disturbed with my "PLONKING" than the syntax used.
I'll explain my reason for *PLONKING* in this instance. I have come
to the conclusion that in this newsgroup there are some who have become
as irritating as the poster I originally _PLONKED_ because they appear
to be fixated on that individual and want to encourage him to post more
drivel. Therefore, I need to "widen my net" so to speak in order to
further filter out more useless posts involving the original <PLONKEE>.
I hope this helps clear your confusion. I have no reason to ~PLONK~
you at this time. ;)
 
It seems you are more disturbed with my "PLONKING" than the syntax used.
I'll explain my reason for *PLONKING* in this instance. I have come to
the conclusion that in this newsgroup there are some who have become as
irritating as the poster I originally _PLONKED_ because they appear to
be fixated on that individual and want to encourage him to post more
drivel. Therefore, I need to "widen my net" so to speak in order to
further filter out more useless posts involving the original <PLONKEE>.
I hope this helps clear your confusion. I have no reason to ~PLONK~
you at this time. ;)

Naw.
Sorry. I over-reacted to your misuse of quotes. As a tech writer, I'm
bugged by confusing traditions that get perpetuated to the point where I
begin to doubt my own correct usage: things like "insure" for "ensure,"
and the apostrophe for plural.

And some traditions are "correct" without any particular logic. Our
American standard, for example, is to put punctuation inside the
"quotes;" like I just did; the Brits do the opposite.

Richard
 
Richard said:
Naw.
Sorry. I over-reacted to your misuse of quotes. As a tech writer, I'm
bugged by confusing traditions that get perpetuated to the point where I
begin to doubt my own correct usage: things like "insure" for "ensure,"
and the apostrophe for plural.

And some traditions are "correct" without any particular logic. Our
American standard, for example, is to put punctuation inside the
"quotes;" like I just did; the Brits do the opposite.

I am definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to
proper punctuation, grammar, proof reading and Net etiquette. Thank God
for spell check, otherwise my posts would be a total mess.
 
trevor said:
First of all, apologies to all those who accuse me of "feeding the
troll".

I make two defenses. To whit:

1. Mease is a defender of quality and he backs up his assertions with
verifiable and reproduceable findings. If you don't like his opinions,
you are free to do your own research.

She doesn't though. He claims all aftermarket ink is crap, or there is no
trusted sources of quality aftermarket ink, and is messy to refill, both
with no hands on expierience, and selectively ignoring the testimonials of
poseters here. She also asserts we aftermarket ink users are "in da
bizznees", which is not tru for most of us.
 
They should


The question is do they? The answere is few, if any do. OEM doesn't.
100% of the intilligent people who want to know what they are paying for

As opposed to aftermarket ink users that doesn't care, already knows, or
are satisfied with the product regardless.
 
I am definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to
proper punctuation, grammar, proof reading and Net etiquette. Thank God
for spell check, otherwise my posts would be a total mess.

Yeah. I know. And English is such a tricky language because so much of
it doesn't make sense. But some of it does and that's cool; other
standards are just, well, standards. I used to be married to an editor
-- and she is very good at her craft. I sometimes edit other peoples'
stuff and make it much, much better. But then, a professional editor can
tweak my work also.

Net etiquette has its value, but there are some times when, for example,
top posting is actually easier to comprehend and makes more sense than
the rule.

Richard
 
Gary said:
@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com:





The question is do they? The answere is few, if any do. OEM doesn't.



for


As opposed to aftermarket ink users that doesn't care, already knows, or
are satisfied with the product regardless.

You know, I think you're onto something. I'll try to paraphrase it and
clear up the idea.


We fall into two-and-three-half camps here:
1. People who care about printing photographs.
2. People who don't print photographs and want good text printing with
some color to spice things up.
3. People who just want black printing.
4. People who mostly print text and graphics with occasional photos.
5. People who go to the store and buy OEM cartridges. They are not us.
They are probably Republicans and/or "naive end users." Or, hell: just
plain folks.

The requirements are different.

Group #1 cares about professional-quality results. These people need
consistent, repeatable results from their tools and supplies. Image
permanence is important. The criteria are similar to the criteria for
professional, serious amateur, and art photography.

Group #2 just want ink that works. Minor inconsistency is OK. Price is
important.

Group #3 need good crisp black ink performance and reasonable
permanence. They'll be just fine with laser/LED printers, and they'll
get high speed in the bargain. Price matters.

Group 4 will be similar to group 2. They want their photos to come out
pretty good, but color balance isn't super-critical. They'll be OK with
photo quality similar to automated drugstore 1-hour photo labs, cheap
mail-order photo processors, etc. They're into snapshots. Price matters.

Group 5 people don't hang out here.

None of these people want clogged heads and smeary printouts. If they
have an Okidata LED or a cheap Brother laser printer, they may flip out
when the time comes and they learn the price of a new drum.

So, it's clear that some people who participate here are very concerned
about knowing the source of their ink, in the same way that some
photographers need to know which batch their film is from. These
photographers tend to buy color film in bulk, and store the rolls in the
freezer. I'll venture that mostly, these serious inkjet users probably
have Canon printers. These people probably know that consistency will
cost money. Their vendors will not be able to buy ink on the spot
market, and the vendors will have to pay more for their consistent
supplies; thus, their wares will sell for more money. That's the
trade-off and it's worth it.

The other folks will probably be satisfied by getting very low prices
and bulk-reloaded cartridges of decent quality. If they fill their own
cartridges, they'll also be happy with no-name rebottled ink, so long as
that ink is of good quality, doesn't clog heads, etc. They're willing to
play ball with good ink mongers who buy decent ink on the spot market.

What's important is that we all realize these distinctions, and don't
try to lay our own particular requirements onto a poster whose needs are
different than our own.

I welcome corrections, illuminations, and comments.

Richard
 
Since "PLONK" is not a word, per se, but instead represents a sound,
single or double quotes symbols help to express that to the reader.

Art
 
Back
Top