Re: Printer Ink Shock!

Guess what George? I don't care for your politics either. However, I walk my walk. As is usually the case with those of the right "persuasion" you tend to ignore the challenges when a logical argument is made in your general direction, and just repeat what you stated the first time, flaws and all, as if that makes it true.

You are the one who brought politics into this. The poster was just expressing outrage at something almost everyone agrees is a terrible business model, that fosters anti-consummer and anti-environmental commerce. Not all commerce is "good" just because it makes someone money. Wars make people money too, but other than a few perversities who happen to have ended up in some powerful positions, the majority of people are opposed to that type of commerce.

I have to laugh whenever the Rush Limbaugh mentality of extremes is used as a defense. It sounds ridiculous when he does it, but he was addicted to pain killers, so that might excuse him, but it sounds equally ridiculous when other do it, as well.

"I prefer to just lie drunk in the gutter and let sympathetic passer-bys throw wonderful printers and cheap ink in my direction."

So whom, exactly, is this drunk you are implicating? Is it I (I don't drink alcohol at all) or perhaps it is DLinda you are referring to?
As I stated previously, at least we see the flaw in the current system and it's intent (you aren't going to tell me now that the inkjet manufacturers just decided to use the business model they do for reasons other than to deceive people as to the real cost of ownership of the printer, are you?)

Governments and laws are supposed to exist to protect the general public from abuse and deceit, whether it comes from individuals, manufacturers, ethnic groups, political groups, or anyone else wishing to direct their power. If the printer manufacturers were not attempting to use this business model to deceive, what possible objection would they have to indicating the cost of ink use of their printers?

And, by the way, some car manufacturers do indeed supply cost of ownership on their tags now (and some states require they list all taxes, surcharges, delivery and prep fees). Some manufacturers also cover costs like oil changes and tune ups and other maintenance costs for a several year period. Lots of states will also tell you how much it will cost you should you drive drunk ;-)

And, regarding your home, some states require paint manufacturers to not only guarantee the square footage coverage of their paints as indicated, but to buy back any leftover paint. Chances are there is also legislation regarding roofing estimates and floor estimates that they must include installation charges.

So, why not require manufacturers to indicate what it costs to keep their printers in ink? Are you not in favor of healthy competition?

Art



George E. Cawthon wrote:

Art, I think you do a great service in helping others with clogs, but I don't share your political ramblings.

What can I say? I'm a lazy SOB. I prefer to just lie drunk in the gutter and let sympathetic passer-bys throw wonderful printers and cheap ink in my direction. If I remember right, that worked well when I wanted my house painted, a new roof applied, a wood floor in the kitchen and dining area.

Oh yeah, I think that strategy also worked for my last new vehicle, except the SOB that gave it to me as I lay in the gutter, didn't say one word about all the extra costs, like gasoline, oil, filters, tires. Hell, I even had to beg some person to buy me insurance. There ought to be a law against such deception. Course I don't get much driving done anyway, seeing as how I'm lying drunk in the gutter most of the time, me being so lazy and all.


Arthur Entlich wrote:

There is one major flaw with your diatribe here. The ink companies are being intentionally deceptive. The cost of those cartridges comes nowhere near a reasonable real cost with profit integrated, and the cost of the printer comes nowhere near its real cost with profit considered either.

If your car came with a full tank of gas, and the next fill up cost 150% what the car complete with the full gas tank cost, you might also think there should be a law.

She didn't buy a "two ton" printer for a econo-box need. She bought a run of the mill, low end printer, for basic needs.

When intentional deception is the intent of a manufacturer or distribution system, yes, then a law may be required to balance things. It might also properly alter the business model toward one which is more sane and honest. I think its a great idea.

Linda is correct in her shock, and correct in thinking government is supposed to control deceptive advertising intent.

Quite honestly, in this case, I'd say you are the lazy one lacking initiative, and I would add selfish to those qualities. While Linda's suggestion would both protect consumers and force the manufacturers to change a very poor business model by bringing a little light on it, you seem to be content just in the "knowledge" of what they are doing.

Art


George E. Cawthon wrote:

LindaD wrote:

We were looking for an inexpensive printer for the kids to use for their
schoolwork. We found one in one of the Staples circulars, an Epson C88 at
only $69.92 after "easy online" rebates. This seemed like a good price. We
grabbed one and proceeded to pick up some spare cartridges as well. Well, I
was almost floored when my $69 printer required cartridges that would have
cost about $95 (Canadian) after taxes. Why isn't there a law, or at least
a store policy, that all printer ads must carry the price of replacement
cartridges for comparison purposes. Is this a store or printer maker
conspiracy to hide the ridiculous price of ink until after the sale? A very
angry customer! LindaD




Yep ink is costly. Should you be shocked? Maybe, lots of things are shocks when you randomly purchase items.

Every time I see someone say there ought to be a law..., I immediately loose any sympathy for the person. I don't like being made to pay for someone else's lack of initiative and laziness. No one hid the price of ink cartridges. You could easily have walked over to the aisle with the ink cartridges and looked at the prices. Part of life is thinking about the consequences of owning something or just accepting them. Do you buy a house without considering taxes, utilities, and other annual costs? Do you buy a 2 ton 4-wheel vehicle instead of a small economic car even though you just drive it around town?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Printer Ink Shock!
    ... Her point, which you don't seem to get, is that if the cost of printer versus ink was made more obvious, people might be both better educated and make better choices, and be outraged and force change. ... However, believe me, manufacturers know exactly how much these average out to and therefore average cost per "page". ... I fully understand sarcasm, and I also understand miscues in a debate. ...
    (comp.periphs.printers)
  • Re: Equipment, and the Useless Eco- legislation ...
    ... What you're asking for are government mandated inventory ... where manufacturers are required to make parts available for 5 ... cost considerably more if the manufacturer is expected to inventory ... If world governments want to see landfill from ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: UL/ETL Choking the market
    ... prohibits manufacturers experimenting with new fixture ... assured market is required before it is worth the cost of testing. ... lighting export industry than a heavily defended industry hemorrhaging ...
    (sci.engr.lighting)
  • Re: Are HP breaking any anti-competition laws or regulations?
    ... Ink is a consumable, just like fuel, oil, tyres, plugs, brakes. ... Companies like HP will go for the least cost option, they are not going to go ... money out of the machines themselves, the money comes from the consumables ... All printer manufacturers subsidize the printers and slate you on the toner. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Sanyo eneloop at Costco
    ... manufacturing cost and capacity. ... there were two big advantages of proprietary lithium ion batteries: ... Additionally, while self-discharge and size were the principle disadvantages of NiMH batteries, there are many more disadvantages that apply to enough purchasers that a switch back to AA batteries is highly unlikely. ... Manufacturers like to make products that are usable by the greatest number of people in the greatest number of countries under the greatest number of circumstances. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
Loading