Canon printhead is dead

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

bill

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
1,834
0
19,780
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

For those following the printhead issues...

It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.

So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.

I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:rb6dnYHL_KpGUx_cRVn-ig@golden.net...
>
> For those following the printhead issues...
>
> It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
> laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
> and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>
> So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>
> I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
> longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.



Right. My Mercedes had a flat tire today. Mercedes must all be junk. I'm
going back to a Yugo because I never had a flat tire in a Yugo.

Tom
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:44:13 GMT, "Tom"
<seaskate32043@removethis.yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:rb6dnYHL_KpGUx_cRVn-ig@golden.net...
>>
>> For those following the printhead issues...
>>
>> It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
>> laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
>> and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>>
>> So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>>
>> I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
>> longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
>
>
>
>Right. My Mercedes had a flat tire today. Mercedes must all be junk. I'm
>going back to a Yugo because I never had a flat tire in a Yugo.
>
>Tom
>

That's not really a valid analogy. It's one thing to have a flat, but
the printhead on a printer is a vital and replacement cost is a fairly
large percentage of the printer price.

If your Mercedes had a flat tire on your way off the lot, it probably
wouldn't shake your view of the quality of their cars. However, if I
was driving along a short while after purchase and the engine blew up
or seized up, I'd be more than a little miffed. Of course, if I never
changed the oil or ran the car with the oil pan empty, I'd only have
myself to blame.

My point? Car analogies are pretty useless.
---------------------------------------------

MCheu
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I have a new one if interested.
It is Genuine Canon.
If you factor in all of the ink savings from the Canon ink versus an HP in
18 months I am sure you would agree you could still buy a $100.00 U.S
printer and still be ahead.
My I850 is 18 months old and has printed well over 30,000 pages and, knock
on wood , still giving excellent quality.


"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:rb6dnYHL_KpGUx_cRVn-ig@golden.net...
>
> For those following the printhead issues...
>
> It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
> laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
> and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>
> So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>
> I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
> longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Have you attempted any type of head cleaning process with the head out
of the printer?

Art

Bill wrote:

> For those following the printhead issues...
>
> It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
> laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
> and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>
> So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>
> I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
> longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"MCheu" <mpcheu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75j8o05titr1t09iasgt5m335qkhkhkuql@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:44:13 GMT, "Tom"
> <seaskate32043@removethis.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message
>>news:rb6dnYHL_KpGUx_cRVn-ig@golden.net...
>>>
>>> For those following the printhead issues...
>>>
>>> It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
>>> laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
>>> and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>>>
>>> So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>>>
>>> I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
>>> longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
>>
>>
>>
>>Right. My Mercedes had a flat tire today. Mercedes must all be junk.
>>I'm
>>going back to a Yugo because I never had a flat tire in a Yugo.
>>
>>Tom
>>
>
> That's not really a valid analogy. It's one thing to have a flat, but
> the printhead on a printer is a vital and replacement cost is a fairly
> large percentage of the printer price.
>
> If your Mercedes had a flat tire on your way off the lot, it probably
> wouldn't shake your view of the quality of their cars. However, if I
> was driving along a short while after purchase and the engine blew up
> or seized up, I'd be more than a little miffed. Of course, if I never
> changed the oil or ran the car with the oil pan empty, I'd only have
> myself to blame.
>
> My point? Car analogies are pretty useless.

But in comparison, your printer was not 'just off the lot either' and was 4
months out of warranty, so the car analogy works if you read it with an open
mind. Cars are higher ticket price and expected to last much longer than a
$200 printer. But in either case, had you dropped the transmission on your
car 4 months out of warranty, they also are not going to come running to the
rescue, just as Epson, HP, Lexmark or GM, Chevy or Volvo or any other
manufacture for that matter.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Michael Grey" <greyt@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4NZgd.337233$MQ5.90314@attbi_s52...
>I have a new one if interested.
> It is Genuine Canon.
> If you factor in all of the ink savings from the Canon ink versus an HP in
> 18 months I am sure you would agree you could still buy a $100.00 U.S
> printer and still be ahead.
> My I850 is 18 months old and has printed well over 30,000 pages and, knock
> on wood , still giving excellent quality.
>
>
And I thought I did a lot of printing!
30k pages in 18 months is getting your monies worth.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

>Have you attempted any type of head cleaning process with the head out
>of the printer?

Yes, but I knew it wasn't just a clog because it stopped working
properly right in the middle of a photo. For about a week prior to this,
it would streak a bit, but nothing dramatic. A regular head cleaning
helped for a while but then on Friday it just suddenly died.

Here in Canada, a new printhead is $60 plus shipping and taxes. That
makes it over $80 for a new one. Not at all economical or reasonably
priced.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Michael Grey wrote:

>I have a new one if interested.

Thanks for the offer, but I've already bought a new printer.

I considered buying a new printhead, but then was concerned that perhaps
when the printhead suddenly failed, it may have damaged the printer
electronics as well - it wasn't just a clog. Canon told me I couldn't
return the printhead if it didn't work as it may become damaged in my
printer.

So I had to weigh the costs of a new printhead and taking a chance of it
still not working thus wasting that $80. Or simply put that cost into
buying a new printer, not worry about anything, and get a new warranty
as well.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:14:35 -0400, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:

>
>For those following the printhead issues...
>
>It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead. It stopped
>laying down ink halfway through a photo today. Half of the black nozzles
>and most of the cyan nozzles are shot and will not work at all.
>
>So much for Canon quality and printhead life expectancy.
>
>I guess I'm going back to HP for my next printer. At least they last
>longer and I won't have any issues with printheads dying.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:14:35 -0400, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead.

Out of curiosity, how much use did it get in that period?

(For that matter, does heavy usage even affect life?)

J.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

JXStern wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:14:35 -0400, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>>It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead.
>
>Out of curiosity, how much use did it get in that period?

Roughly 5,000 pages, and I'm guessing on the high side. My friend's i550
printhead died recently too, and he only had a measly 2,500 pages put
through it.

I used refills, and some people are blaming the ink (sounds silly to
me). But my friend used only genuine Canon ink tanks from day one, and
his failed at half the number of pages.

>(For that matter, does heavy usage even affect life?)

Only Canon has that answer, and they're not talking.
:-/
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:53:04 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>>>It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead.
>>
>>Out of curiosity, how much use did it get in that period?
>
>Roughly 5,000 pages, and I'm guessing on the high side. My friend's i550
>printhead died recently too, and he only had a measly 2,500 pages put
>through it.

Hmm. My i550 is about the same age as your i850, I've probably put
well under 2,000 pages through it (pretty much all text and most of
that draft mode, very light duty), and so far, so good.

Major irritation is that I suspect I'm using less than half the ink on
the color cartridges on paper, the rest goes into cleaning cycles, as
I print mostly black with a few color hilites, and sometimes go a few
days between uses. Even on the black, I suspect I'm using less than
80% on actual output.

But at least the Canon cartridges are cheap. A couple of black tanks,
one set of color cartridges per year with an extra yelllow or two, and
if the head lasts me another year, I'll figure that's about the cost
of doing business, until and unless some manufacturer does better.

...

So I should ask, with your i850, was a lot of your 5,000 pages photo?

Frankly, it's fascinating to me that these $100-class printers work at
all! But I'm an old fart, and having quick, quiet color output at
home seems like the next thing to witchcraft to me.

J.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:i6fao0t157fec38vbaed3vusm3eq8hmhjg@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:53:04 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>>>>It's official...my 16 month old Canon i850 printhead is dead.
>>>
>>>Out of curiosity, how much use did it get in that period?
>>
>>Roughly 5,000 pages, and I'm guessing on the high side. My friend's i550
>>printhead died recently too, and he only had a measly 2,500 pages put
>>through it.
>
> Hmm. My i550 is about the same age as your i850, I've probably put
> well under 2,000 pages through it (pretty much all text and most of
> that draft mode, very light duty), and so far, so good.
>
> Major irritation is that I suspect I'm using less than half the ink on
> the color cartridges on paper, the rest goes into cleaning cycles, as
> I print mostly black with a few color hilites, and sometimes go a few
> days between uses. Even on the black, I suspect I'm using less than
> 80% on actual output.
>

Remember that if you print from a graphic application (Publishing software)
that even black text may use color ink as you often are getting composite
output. I generally change my black 3 to 1 over color tanks on my i560 but
most of my printing is MS Word or Acrobat documents. Also using any paper
setting other than 'Plain Paper' will use composite black causing use of the
color tanks.

> But at least the Canon cartridges are cheap. A couple of black tanks,
> one set of color cartridges per year with an extra yelllow or two, and
> if the head lasts me another year, I'll figure that's about the cost
> of doing business, until and unless some manufacturer does better.
>

Wait a minute!.... I thought all colors ran out at the same time? :0)
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

JXStern wrote:

>Major irritation is that I suspect I'm using less than half the ink on
>the color cartridges on paper, the rest goes into cleaning cycles, as
>I print mostly black with a few color hilites, and sometimes go a few
>days between uses. Even on the black, I suspect I'm using less than
>80% on actual output.

Just in case you don't know, if you want to make sure you're using black
ink only for text, just tick the greyscale box in the printer driver. It
will not use any colour at all.

>So I should ask, with your i850, was a lot of your 5,000 pages photo?

About one quarter were photos.

>Frankly, it's fascinating to me that these $100-class printers work at
>all! But I'm an old fart, and having quick, quiet color output at
>home seems like the next thing to witchcraft to me.

It is witchcraft...didn't you know? On the back every printer is a
serial number, and it ALWAYS has 666 in there.
:)
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:19:33 -0500, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
>Remember that if you print from a graphic application (Publishing software)
>that even black text may use color ink as you often are getting composite
>output.

Yah, when I switched to XP, my HP printer became useless because even
printing black text from Word it was doing that even for text, it
totally forgot it had black ink, and HP (nor Microsoft) didn't want to
fix the driver, tho it was probably a one-line fix and the printer was
barely a year old. Bastids. Um, 722C.

> I generally change my black 3 to 1 over color tanks on my i560 but
>most of my printing is MS Word or Acrobat documents. Also using any paper
>setting other than 'Plain Paper' will use composite black causing use of the
>color tanks.
>
>> But at least the Canon cartridges are cheap. A couple of black tanks,
>> one set of color cartridges per year with an extra yelllow or two, and
>> if the head lasts me another year, I'll figure that's about the cost
>> of doing business, until and unless some manufacturer does better.
>>
>
>Wait a minute!.... I thought all colors ran out at the same time? :0)

They all waste ink together in cleaning cycles, but I do *use* at
least some of the ink at different rates, too! The magenta and cyan
tanks went out together.

J.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Thanks for the clarification. It seems a pity that the replaceable head
would be that costly, but in fairness, an Epson head not only costs
about the same (or maybe more), but also requires considerable labor
fees to have it replaced and adjusted.

Art

Bill wrote:

> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>
>>Have you attempted any type of head cleaning process with the head out
>>of the printer?
>
>
> Yes, but I knew it wasn't just a clog because it stopped working
> properly right in the middle of a photo. For about a week prior to this,
> it would streak a bit, but nothing dramatic. A regular head cleaning
> helped for a while but then on Friday it just suddenly died.
>
> Here in Canada, a new printhead is $60 plus shipping and taxes. That
> makes it over $80 for a new one. Not at all economical or reasonably
> priced.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

>Thanks for the clarification. It seems a pity that the replaceable head
>would be that costly, but in fairness, an Epson head not only costs
>about the same (or maybe more), but also requires considerable labor
>fees to have it replaced and adjusted.

That's why I would never even consider an Epson. With replacement heads
from Canon costing as much as %90 of a new printer, I don't consider it
to be convenient nor practical. Imagine the cost of having to do it
twice.

If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
than a page count.

No thanks...I've gone back to HP. No more worries about printhead
failures, alignments, cleanings, or anything...just plug&play printing.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:22:20 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:

>If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
>prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
>upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
>than a page count.

Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
(especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
the profit comes from the consumables.

--
Remove preceding and trailing X from username for replies
(Sorry, but I'm SICK of spam...)
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Al Rudderham wrote:

>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:22:20 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>
>>If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
>>prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
>>upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
>>than a page count.
>
>Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
>(especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
>the profit comes from the consumables.

You're suggesting a semi-permanent printhead is a consumable item?

<rant>
All of the printer companies make a killing from the ink and paper
supplies. There's no reason such a printhead needs to cost $60+ taxes
and shipping, especially if it's user-replaceable. Canon is just
gouging. Even if the printhead did cost that much to make (and I
seriously doubt it), they can easily afford to give them away cheap and
make the money back on consumables.

After seeing how well the HP printers can produce equal or better photos
with simpler and cheaper integrated printheads in their cartridges using
larger droplets, it's clear Canon isn't the technology leader they claim
to be.
</rant>

Whew...I feel better now.
:)
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Al Rudderham" <xal.rudderhamx@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news😛eaco098jt99ouj1kd3as8mrhhkqkfvnls@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:22:20 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>
>>If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
>>prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
>>upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
>>than a page count.
>
> Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
> (especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
> the profit comes from the consumables.
>
> --

While you are partially right (the printers are sold at little or no
profit), the printhead is not a 'consumable' in this model or any current
Canon models for that matter. In fact, the biggest chuck of R&D expense now
goes into printhead and ink development. So while the OP may consider $40 a
'reasonable' price, I guess that is because they are not forking out the
millions for R&D.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:CfOdnXZV988pOBvcRVn-2Q@golden.net...
> Al Rudderham wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:22:20 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>>
>>>If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
>>>prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
>>>upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
>>>than a page count.
>>
>>Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
>>(especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
>>the profit comes from the consumables.
>
> You're suggesting a semi-permanent printhead is a consumable item?
>
> <rant>
> All of the printer companies make a killing from the ink and paper
> supplies. There's no reason such a printhead needs to cost $60+ taxes
> and shipping, especially if it's user-replaceable. Canon is just
> gouging. Even if the printhead did cost that much to make (and I
> seriously doubt it), they can easily afford to give them away cheap and
> make the money back on consumables.
>

Sure glad you started this part with "<rant>".

With a majority of the cost of R&D going to ink and printhead development
and covering packaging, marketing, warranty (yes this is built into a
products cost), and more, printer manufactures hardly gouge in their
pricing. I would say this is especially true with Canon due to the fact that
they also cover their printhead under both the original and 2 year extended
warranties.


> After seeing how well the HP printers can produce equal or better photos
> with simpler and cheaper integrated printheads in their cartridges using
> larger droplets, it's clear Canon isn't the technology leader they claim
> to be.
> </rant>

The number of patents they hold (#2 in the world) and the number of those
patents that HP and others license from them would say differently as would
several industry and consumer surveys.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

PC Medic wrote:

>With a majority of the cost of R&D going to ink and printhead development

That's fine...but it's all paid for in the consumables, likely paper
products alone. They're certainly not losing anything.

>Sure glad you started this part with "<rant>".

Perhaps I shouldn't have. The rant was a warning to those who take the
post as excessively hostile. But the intent of the content is still
there.

>and covering packaging, marketing, warranty (yes this is built into a
>products cost), and more, printer manufactures hardly gouge in their
>pricing. I would say this is especially true with Canon due to the fact that
>they also cover their printhead under both the original and 2 year extended
>warranties.

The gouging is mainly in regards to consumables. In this regard, Canon
has pretty much changed their view of consumable items, and a printhead
is now part of those items. They are charging prices more inline with
consumables than as a parts replacement commodity.

As I said before, if they charged a reasonable price (and where upfront
about the life expectancy), I'd be using my Canon i850 today. They can
easily recoup the measly $10-20 they lose selling the printhead at half
the current price from the first couple of ink tanks they sell the same
day.

>> After seeing how well the HP printers can produce equal or better photos
>> with simpler and cheaper integrated printheads in their cartridges using
>> larger droplets, it's clear Canon isn't the technology leader they claim
>> to be.
>> </rant>
>
>The number of patents they hold (#2 in the world) and the number of those
>patents that HP and others license from them would say differently as would
>several industry and consumer surveys.

And the photos I have in my hands shows that HP can do more with those
licenses than Canon.

Number of patents and size of litigation departments doesn't necessarily
mean "best", just look at Bose and the junk they sell. It's what you can
do with the technology that makes a company stand out.
:-/
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:kdGdnW4wlt1dRhvcRVn-rQ@golden.net...
> PC Medic wrote:
>
>>With a majority of the cost of R&D going to ink and printhead development
>
> That's fine...but it's all paid for in the consumables, likely paper
> products alone. They're certainly not losing anything.
>

You are correct there, they are not losing anything because they do not use
the practice which was proposed of pricing to take a loss.

>>Sure glad you started this part with "<rant>".
>
> Perhaps I shouldn't have. The rant was a warning to those who take the
> post as excessively hostile. But the intent of the content is still
> there.
>
>>and covering packaging, marketing, warranty (yes this is built into a
>>products cost), and more, printer manufactures hardly gouge in their
>>pricing. I would say this is especially true with Canon due to the fact
>>that
>>they also cover their printhead under both the original and 2 year
>>extended
>>warranties.
>
> The gouging is mainly in regards to consumables. In this regard, Canon
> has pretty much changed their view of consumable items, and a printhead
> is now part of those items. They are charging prices more inline with
> consumables than as a parts replacement commodity.
>

And you are basing this on?


> As I said before, if they charged a reasonable price (and where upfront
> about the life expectancy), I'd be using my Canon i850 today. They can
> easily recoup the measly $10-20 they lose selling the printhead at half
> the current price from the first couple of ink tanks they sell the same
> day.
>

They do charge a reasonable price, just may not be reasonable to you. But
then YOU do not have to pick up the costs of all the items I mentioned and
show your share holders how you can remain profitable selling at that price.


>>> After seeing how well the HP printers can produce equal or better photos
>>> with simpler and cheaper integrated printheads in their cartridges using
>>> larger droplets, it's clear Canon isn't the technology leader they claim
>>> to be.
>>> </rant>
>>
>>The number of patents they hold (#2 in the world) and the number of those
>>patents that HP and others license from them would say differently as
>>would
>>several industry and consumer surveys.
>
> And the photos I have in my hands shows that HP can do more with those
> licenses than Canon.
>

This would be an opinion not shared by millions or HP would not have so much
competition from Canon, Epson etc.

> Number of patents and size of litigation departments doesn't necessarily
> mean "best", just look at Bose and the junk they sell. It's what you can
> do with the technology that makes a company stand out.
> :-/

I did not say it did, but with some research on the industry you wish to
converse about you would see how many of them are important and award
winning patents as well as products. But then of course you had a bad
experience with a manufactures product so that is all irrelevant now.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

> Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
> (especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
> the profit comes from the consumables.
>

This may well be true, but then the question still remains that if a
person burns out the head (likely from a lot of use), then they are also
going through a lot of ink. Since the manufacturer cannot ever really
know if the user is using OEM or 3rd party inks, wouldn't it make sense
for the manufacturer to sell the head as a "lost leader", just like the
printer itself, and sell even more ink, rather than have the client:

1) Have a printer without a head, meaning they aren't using any ink

2) Have a client replace the printer with another brand

3) Have the client bad mouth the product in a public newsgroup and
elsewhere.


Makes no sense to me.

Art

Al Rudderham wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:22:20 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:
>
>
>>If Canon had made the printheads available in stores at reasonable
>>prices (say $30) and had informed us of their TRUE expected life
>>upfront, I would have stayed with them. "Life of the printer" means more
>>than a page count.
>
>
> Maybe they can't make a profit at $30? It is often said that printers
> (especially the low end ones) are sold as a loss leader, and all of
> the profit comes from the consumables.
>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom