4 ms·

I think you're giving too much credit to the people and their decisions and not the circumstances of the business that HP is in. The fact is that the printing b

I think you're giving too much credit to the people and their decisions and not the circumstances of the business that HP is in. The fact is that the printing business was completely reshaped by re-manufactured ink/toner. The business is razors and blades, build the printer, take a loss on it and make it up on the back end with toner/ink sales. As soon as cheap 3rd party ink/toner became ubiquitous all of the printer manufacturers were put into an existential crisis. The most popular solution, DRM. The big boys got to it quicker than the little guys, but every one of them knew this was 100% necessary or they'd get their lunch eaten at either end (upfront sales from DRM'd devices because they are cheap and backend toner sales from remans). Ever since its been a cat/mouse game of breaking DRM for 3rd party toner suppliers and print manufacturers trying to stay ahead. Instant Ink is a play by HP to get out of this game. Also, I feel like lot's of other product categories are doing the same thing, but get far less hate (e.g. Keurig, video game consoles). Not sure if printers are just easy targets or what. Source - SW Engineer @ HP for 10+ years.

hakfoo 3y ago
They chose to embrace a razor-blades model-- they sold their soul chasing the consumer market. People trusted HP printers at the high-end of the market, where words like "TCO" and "duty cycle" matter. That could scale that down to the "prosumer" end of the market very easily. They were pretty close to that already, with the LaserJet 6P and similar. I can recall my first job used two big networked HPs for the bulk printing, and a 6P for a special case (a few dozen sheets per day printing cheques with MICR toner). Despite the hundreds of pages per day volume we ran, the printers were pretty bulletproof. They also missed the opportunity to take control of a new market: the "second printer" buyer. Target the people who took the "free" or dirt-cheap inkjet printer that came with a PC bundle. When they're fed up with 25 pages per cartridge, using three colours to print black, and drivers that are clearly a less whimsical GlaDOS, you can be there to say "now that you've learned why a $300 printer is worth it, here's one explicitly engineered to solve your pain points." Brother has now successfully captured this market entirely through word of mouth. One would expect that's the long-term play: selling $49 inkjets was like deciding to double-down on manufacturing 56k winmodems: it might do well in 1998, when the market is flooded with first-time customers taking the cheapest thing they can get, but it doesn't provide you a place to take your brand as customer expectations march upwards.
- campbel 3y ago
  > They chose to embrace a razor-blades model-- they sold their soul chasing the consumer market. I really don't know what you'd expect from a publicly traded company other than to go after where the profit is at. At least in the 2000's through 2010's HP consumer products made the most money off of low end devices via toner sales. I'd argue that they were following the market and the tech savvy consumer is not their target audience anymore.
  - hakfoo 3y ago
    By that logic, Rolex is leaving money on the table by not selling a rebadged Chinese quartz watch for $129 in Walmart. An established brand like HP had options. They had profitable product lines in the business and high-end consumer market segments, so it was a specific effort to start aiming for the low-end. It's not like they were a new kid in town, who couldn't sell to businesses without a proven track record, so they HAD to sell $50 inkjet printers to consumers who didn't worry about the brand.
blindriver 3y ago
HP as I assume you know is a lot more than just printers. HP has betrayed their customers across the board since Fiorina. This particular offense is just one in dozens committed against customers in the last 2 decades. HP used to be one of the great companies of the world, with great guiding principles. I learned how to use a calculator with my dad’s HP Reverse Polish Notation calculator. Now it’s a nothing company that somehow stays alive tricking their customers and treating them like idiots. It’s truly sad.
shiroiuma 3y ago
>The business is razors and blades, build the printer, take a loss on it and make it up on the back end with toner/ink sales. No, that's the business now. It wasn't like that back in the 80s. The printer companies chose to adopt that shitty business model. >The most popular solution, DRM. The big boys got to it quicker than the little guys, but every one of them knew this was 100% necessary or they'd get their lunch eaten at either end Yet some printer makers don't bother with this and are still in business, like Brother.
- campbel 3y ago
  > No, that's the business now. It wasn't like that back in the 80s. The printer companies chose to adopt that shitty business model. The entire industries hand was forced to adopt this model. Let me spell it out a bit. 1. Firs step, companies started to heavily discount device costs so that they could reap the profit on the backend from supplies sales. 2. 3rd party companies began to sell ink/toner for their devices eating into their supplies profits. 3. They couldn't go back to raising device prices or they'd lose market share. Consumers had gotten used to $500 devices being priced at $200 or less. 4. They add DRM to cartridges to force devices to use their supplies. 5. DRM is routinely cracked by 3rd party sellers or they just rely on refilling 1st party cartridges. 6. New and increasingly consumer hostile DRM tactics are introduced that are harder to crack. 7. HP and others are attempting to shift to a subscription model to get out of this game all together. Brother and other small brands are catching up and implementing similar DRM tactics on their new devices.

hakfoo 3y ago

They chose to embrace a razor-blades model-- they sold their soul chasing the consumer market. People trusted HP printers at the high-end of the market, where words like "TCO" and "duty cycle" matter. That could scale that down to the "prosumer" end of the market very easily. They were pretty close to that already, with the LaserJet 6P and similar. I can recall my first job used two big networked HPs for the bulk printing, and a 6P for a special case (a few dozen sheets per day printing cheques with MICR toner). Despite the hundreds of pages per day volume we ran, the printers were pretty bulletproof. They also missed the opportunity to take control of a new market: the "second printer" buyer. Target the people who took the "free" or dirt-cheap inkjet printer that came with a PC bundle. When they're fed up with 25 pages per cartridge, using three colours to print black, and drivers that are clearly a less whimsical GlaDOS, you can be there to say "now that you've learned why a $300 printer is worth it, here's one explicitly engineered to solve your pain points." Brother has now successfully captured this market entirely through word of mouth. One would expect that's the long-term play: selling $49 inkjets was like deciding to double-down on manufacturing 56k winmodems: it might do well in 1998, when the market is flooded with first-time customers taking the cheapest thing they can get, but it doesn't provide you a place to take your brand as customer expectations march upwards.

campbel 3y ago
> They chose to embrace a razor-blades model-- they sold their soul chasing the consumer market. I really don't know what you'd expect from a publicly traded company other than to go after where the profit is at. At least in the 2000's through 2010's HP consumer products made the most money off of low end devices via toner sales. I'd argue that they were following the market and the tech savvy consumer is not their target audience anymore.
- hakfoo 3y ago
  By that logic, Rolex is leaving money on the table by not selling a rebadged Chinese quartz watch for $129 in Walmart. An established brand like HP had options. They had profitable product lines in the business and high-end consumer market segments, so it was a specific effort to start aiming for the low-end. It's not like they were a new kid in town, who couldn't sell to businesses without a proven track record, so they HAD to sell $50 inkjet printers to consumers who didn't worry about the brand.

blindriver 3y ago

HP as I assume you know is a lot more than just printers. HP has betrayed their customers across the board since Fiorina. This particular offense is just one in dozens committed against customers in the last 2 decades. HP used to be one of the great companies of the world, with great guiding principles. I learned how to use a calculator with my dad’s HP Reverse Polish Notation calculator. Now it’s a nothing company that somehow stays alive tricking their customers and treating them like idiots. It’s truly sad.

shiroiuma 3y ago

>The business is razors and blades, build the printer, take a loss on it and make it up on the back end with toner/ink sales. No, that's the business now. It wasn't like that back in the 80s. The printer companies chose to adopt that shitty business model. >The most popular solution, DRM. The big boys got to it quicker than the little guys, but every one of them knew this was 100% necessary or they'd get their lunch eaten at either end Yet some printer makers don't bother with this and are still in business, like Brother.

campbel 3y ago
> No, that's the business now. It wasn't like that back in the 80s. The printer companies chose to adopt that shitty business model. The entire industries hand was forced to adopt this model. Let me spell it out a bit. 1. Firs step, companies started to heavily discount device costs so that they could reap the profit on the backend from supplies sales. 2. 3rd party companies began to sell ink/toner for their devices eating into their supplies profits. 3. They couldn't go back to raising device prices or they'd lose market share. Consumers had gotten used to $500 devices being priced at $200 or less. 4. They add DRM to cartridges to force devices to use their supplies. 5. DRM is routinely cracked by 3rd party sellers or they just rely on refilling 1st party cartridges. 6. New and increasingly consumer hostile DRM tactics are introduced that are harder to crack. 7. HP and others are attempting to shift to a subscription model to get out of this game all together. Brother and other small brands are catching up and implementing similar DRM tactics on their new devices.