# How do you feel about the cost of DTG ink.



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

DTG ink is the most expensive part of our business. It is also the biggest mystery in our business.

*How do you feel this impacts your prospects?*

*Do you feel that ink cost are preventing you from closing deals?*

*Do you feel that you are being over charged for DTG ink?*

*Are you happy with the ink that you use - Why or why not?*

*What is the average ink cost of a 14"x16" print on darks on your machine?*

*Other than ink cost what changes in DTG ink would you like to see in ink technology?*


----------



## jimprinter (Oct 13, 2011)

You've asked a lot of questions, but I will give a short answer. I believe the ink costs are very high. The one I'm familiar with is Brother. A 500 ml color cart. costs approx $365.00, which means it costs $730.00 per liter. The white ink is approx. 600.00 per liter. Keep in mind this does not include shipping, waste ink left in cart when the machine deems it empty, waste in retrieving ink, and cleaning tubes, etc. 

A liter is just slightly more than a quart. Multiply the liter price by 4 for the gallon price (approx), and I think all will agree that it is very expensive. And you thought gasoline was expensive? These prices makes gasoline seem like it's free!

Yes, if the price of inks were more reasonable, then of course we could sell much more because our prices could be more within reach of our customers. I do believe the prices will come down as some ink/chemical companies will develop competing inks for the various machines.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Kevin,
You asked same questions 6 times with my reading ability. Maybe not---.
I do see where you want to lead TSF members. You are quite right. Kornit ink is the lowest. Liter quantity is not all of measurement. How much area Ink will cover is the real question. $1 covers how many sq" is the answer we all want to know. Do you have this answer? I do on Aeoon.
Aeoon is soon challenge Kornit on machine and ink price. It will start in Spain Madrid. It could be in long beach but that is fighting time. Faster (4 times?)and same or cheaper ink cost. MSRP of CYMK+4W is same or lower than Avalanche. Less printhead is available at lower price tag. If you want to know on Aeoon more feel free to ask me. 10+ cm wide printhead was flying without any bending. Covers same width on each pass. 1228 nozzles. Printhead warranty is great when you use Aeoon ink. Much higher DPI than Kornit. It will be exciting jousting.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

One very little bird told me Brother ink price will come down but who knows? If people wants(demand) there will be another supply. If they don't somebody will.
Brother have great printers but ink price has been huddle for machine sales.
Cheers and beers!
Tomorrow is my birthday, all beers are on me. Send me receipts for to $20 on my birthday. Nov 19th only. checks will be on your way. 
Cheers! For and to Peter! Don't forget.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

allamerican said:


> Kevin,
> You asked same questions 6 times with my reading ability. Maybe not---.
> I do see where you want to lead TSF members. You are quite right. Kornit ink is the lowest. Liter quantity is not all of measurement. How much area Ink will cover is the real question. $1 covers how many sq" is the answer we all want to know. Do you have this answer? I do on Aeoon.
> Aeoon is soon challenge Kornit on machine and ink price. It will start in Spain Madrid. It could be in long beach but that is fighting time. Faster (4 times?)and same or cheaper ink cost. MSRP of CYMK+4W is same or lower than Avalanche. Less printhead is available at lower price tag. If you want to know on Aeoon more feel free to ask me. 10+ cm wide printhead was flying without any bending. Covers same width on each pass. 1228 nozzles. Printhead warranty is great when you use Aeoon ink. Much higher DPI than Kornit. It will be exciting jousting.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always.


Good evening peter. Who is talking about Kornit? Aeoon? What is the issue? How much is Neo Flex ink? Read the questions. Where did it mention Kornit? If you own Kornit $180.00 p/l probably feels like too much. You and I have been thru this before. Please do not put words in my mouth or insinuate that my motives are anything other than what I clearly state in my post. You will be proven ill informed if you choose that route. I wish you Happy Birthday. May thousands of forum users send you receipts!


----------



## binki (Jul 16, 2006)

for darks it is too expensive to be competitive. for lights it is ok but the machine i have is kind of slow. on the other hand i can do 4 color process printing which most screen printers around here cannot do.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Good evening peter. Who is talking about Kornit? Aeoon? What is the issue? How much is Neo Flex ink? Read the questions. Where did it mention Kornit? If you own Kornit $180.00 p/l probably feels like too much. You and I have been thru this before. Please do not put words in my mouth or insinuate that my motives are anything other than what I clearly state in my post. You will be proven ill informed if you choose that route. I wish you Happy Birthday. May thousands of forum users send you receipts!


Kevin, Good morning to you.
Thanks for happy birthday wish. I have no problem to keep my word on thousands receipts. Too old and have that much to celebrate 60th BD.
Read all your past posts. How much Pro-Kornit you are. Last time you made lists similar as this. remember? Anyway I wish I will have a chance to show you Aeoon to you soon.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

allamerican said:


> Kevin, Good morning to you.
> Thanks for happy birthday wish. I have no problem to keep my word on thousands receipts. Too old and have that much to celebrate 60th BD.
> Read all your past posts. How much Pro-Kornit you are. Last time you made lists similar as this. remember? Anyway I wish I will have a chance to show you Aeoon to you soon.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always.


Peter


As the digital textile writer for numerous major trade publications around the world, I am attempting to gather information on printers attitudes toward ink costs for an article that will appear in a major trade magazine in 2012. I would actually like to speak with owners of ALL brands of machines whether thru the forum or offline. I am seeking individuals that have credible experience and a professional level of understanding of this industry to use as quoted sources.


Please understand this and respect my posts. Should you choose to discuss the merits of ink, ink costs or ink technology please reply citing same.


Thank you


----------



## Stitch-Up (May 26, 2007)

Textile inks for DTG printers is a limited market and therefore its development costs are proportionately high. Pricing is always an emotive subject - ask anyone if they'd prefer the cost to be lower and they're bound to say yes.

There is a price below which it won't be in the financial interests of the developers to continue developing. The question really should be, is the price of DTG inks equitable for the developers and the end users? I don't know!


----------



## FatKat Printz (Dec 26, 2008)

Kevin-

Mark (DA Guide) did an offline survey awhile back and offered free pretreat now I don't know what you have to offer (not that you have too) but I think you should ask Mark about the offline survey and how it went for him. It actually was an eye-opening survey the way the questions were laid out because it made you really go back and tighten up on some of your production processes. 

You may get more of response because people seem be hesitant to get involved with the DTG ink argument.


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

When looking at ink costs for all of the major brands of machines it comes down to relatively little difference when reduced to the garment level. On the Epson-based side the average cost of inks is about $250-260 per liter - with a range of perhaps $180-340 per liter. The average image on a light colored garment (no white ink) uses roughly one ml of ink. Based on pricing above that would be roughly 20-35 cents. A reduction of ink price by 50% would save an average of 10-18 cents per shirt. Likewise on dark garments (those requiring white ink) the average image takes 5-8 ml of ink - which would result in roughly $.90-3.00 for ink. Based on a 50% reduction in cost you would save $.45-1.50 on ink for a dark garment. My question would be - if these price reductions were realized would the average direct to garment printer charge that much less per shirt? And, if you did, how much would your business increase? When you average all of this out you get something like $1.10 average ink cost per shirt - would reducing that cost by 50% (55 cents) seriously impact your direct to garment sales? If not, what does the cost of the ink need to be at in order to have a noticeable impact on your sales? Lastly, if ink prices were significantly lower - would you be more tolerant of higher machine costs and/or fee based tech support to offset the loss of revenue by the machine distributor?


----------



## erich (Apr 15, 2009)

Don,

While I agree with where you are going with your statement, in a developed economy, in most cases we should be able to absorb 50 cents or so in the margin of the actual garment.

This is not always the case in lesser developed countries where "pay per print" is the only annuity stream.

Interestingly, the demand for digital printing is on the increase in these countries, fashion houses want to cut their inventory and order in smaller quantities yet they are still pushing for similar costs per print, therefore the production houses analyse the cost per print down to the last cent, that includes pretreatment costs.

It has forced quite a number of printers to source alternative inks.

I wont go into my thoughts of the exploitative demands of large buying groups or the ramifications of cheap ink just now....

Jerry
DTG Digital


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

FatKat Printz said:


> Kevin-
> 
> Mark (DA Guide)
> You may get more of response because people seem be hesitant to get involved with the DTG ink argument.


 mark
Why do you feel this is?


----------



## FatKat Printz (Dec 26, 2008)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> mark
> Why do you feel this is?


I feel (not Mark) that the DTG cost of ink argument is been there and done that. 

Mark DA Guide > had an offline survey regarding DTG practices. 
I suggested you contact him to find out how to get one started for this very question. 

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/direct-garment-dtg-inkjet-printing/t156939.html


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> mark
> Why do you feel this is?


Hello Kevin,

What Carla is referring to is this post - http://www.t-shirtforums.com/direct-garment-dtg-inkjet-printing/t106164.html. You should be able to find some of the information that you are looking for there.

As for my feelings about ink prices, I think unfortunately there is not enough information known for anyone to discuss really discuss accurate numbers and it is just a part of the total pricing that really needs to be discussed. 

Sure, you might have a RIP or driver that calculates your "cost per print"... but few people really understand what this means. The printing software determines the amount of ink per a pixel and then generates a number. This does not include any of the extra spitting that incurs during the printing that is controlled by the firmware of the print engine. As far as I know, no one outside of Epson knows exactly how much ink is spit during this process if you are using an Epson-based dtg printer. I don't think Brother or Kornit release this information as well.

Then add in the cost for the machine to do its wake-up process when you first turn it on, any nozzle checks / head cleans / purges to get the printer ready for its first print and throughout the day, and the cost to perform any end-of-the day or weekly maintenance procedures. Finally, add in the shipping cost to get the ink to you and consider the average amount of misprints... and now you are finally getting to the point where you have empirical data that one can really truly talk about ink costs. Otherwise, you are only looking at a piece of the pie and not everything.

This is one of my challenges with the sales reps / promoters of dtg equipment that are quick to state the their cost per a print is $X.XX and you can do Y amounts of shirts per an hour to someone that is new to dtg printing. There is a lot more that goes into it and several people have been surprised as to exactly how much ink it really takes when you add all the factors above. (Don't get me started on the manual pretreating application either that is either completely ignored during the sales process or made to sound like it is easy.) Most people that I have talked to have adjusted their prices from when they first started because of the items listed above; some of them have completely walked away from dark garment printing completely because they were not able to make the desired profit.

So a question for you Kevin... think back to when you got your first dtg printer, has your expectations of the cost per print and the number of prints per an hour changed? If so, how/why?

Mark


----------



## erich (Apr 15, 2009)

I might be splitting hairs here but I dont think there is a 100% accurate way for a RIP to calculate the exact amount of ink used. Humidity and barometric pressures can affect the picolitre drop size, it may only be half a picolitre but multiply this by all nozzles and by a full production day and you will see dicrepancies in ink usage

Jerry
DTG Digital


----------



## abmcdan (Sep 14, 2007)

Don- I think the 55 cents per print savings is a big deal to the DTG owner. If you are doing 10,000 prints per year thats $5,500 of pure profit. Some do much more. High cost of labor and high machine costs need to be offset with lower ink.

Mark - I know when I got my first T-Jet 2, I was shocked at the actual speeds and costs. Judging by the speeds quoted by US Screen we figured we could do $150,000 to $300,000 yearly in retail ($20) t-shirt sales before we needed a 2nd machine. It didn't come close. Ink and pretreatment costs were at least double what we thought.

As for ink cost, my hope is $100 per liter for the end user. If you can print out a full color, full platen print for $1.50 or less it will leave room to make money and stay in business. I don't know much about ink manufacturer but you would think $100 would be enough for a profit and it would help expand the DTG market.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

Wow, $100.00 per a liter. That would be a big jump from the current prices. But I still think this does not answer the real question. Are we talking about the low viscosity ink (that requires more ink applied to a garment to get the same amount of pigment down on the garment) or the higher viscosity ink (that requires less ink)? A liter of Kornit ink goes farther than the P5000 series of Dupont ink because there is less carrier fluid needed to jet the same amount of pigments from the print head.

This is just one reason why I say that the cost per a liter of ink does not mean anything. You should care about the cost per a print. You want a real number... track the exact amount of ink used for doing 100 or 1,000 shirts over a period of several weeks (# of weeks based on the average print per a day). This way you can track the other costs associated with printing. Then compare that to what the ink calculator in the printing software to see what the difference is so you can have a better clue of what the real cost per a print is.

Just my opinion,

Mark


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

abmcdan said:


> Don- I think the 55 cents per print savings is a big deal to the DTG owner. If you are doing 10,000 prints per year thats $5,500 of pure profit. Some do much more. High cost of labor and high machine costs need to be offset with lower ink.
> 
> Mark - I know when I got my first T-Jet 2, I was shocked at the actual speeds and costs. Judging by the speeds quoted by US Screen we figured we could do $150,000 to $300,000 yearly in retail ($20) t-shirt sales before we needed a 2nd machine. It didn't come close. Ink and pretreatment costs were at least double what we thought.
> 
> As for ink cost, my hope is $100 per liter for the end user. If you can print out a full color, full platen print for $1.50 or less it will leave room to make money and stay in business. I don't know much about ink manufacturer but you would think $100 would be enough for a profit and it would help expand the DTG market.


I agree with the 100 per liter.. white ink prints and pretreat are the deal buster with dtg!! waste ink is another factor aswell... Of course its the supply and demand rule however but i think cheaper ink costs will equal bigger demand of dtg... i did not see a notable difference running higher viscosity ink thru a ricoh head with exception to a faster cure time... I can only speak from my experience with epsons but i simply got tired of saying my prayers on start up and baby sitting a machine with white ink applied.. my thought if i have to do this i better be making some good margins and it just wasnt there with current consumable cost!! 

most screen printers that come to realize the white ink cost per print associated with a dtg nearly faint especially with much lower production than there acustomed to!! its a hard sell with all the numbers being realized upfront!! couple this equation with a startup and it usually spells failure, I honestly have no clue how folks spending comercial machine prices starting out make it work, i start sweating thinking about it.. I could only see spending 20,000-45,000 if the business was already established and at this point theres a serious learning curve once you own the machine... I think the industry needs to take a hard look and revamp to shore up dtg's future, cut back on consumable price now and save on marketing in the future to bring people back..JMHO currently the enduser has alot of obstacles high machine cost, high consumable cost, high learning curve and low profit margins, not a good combination with the safer bets of screen printing and plastisol transfers...


----------



## YoDan (May 4, 2007)

> Wow, $100.00 per a liter.


 I would say the same thing, WOW, but we have come a long ways since the early days when I printed a lot, just remember the companies that sell these inks also have over head just like the users of the ink.
The cost to bottle, ship and the handleing of the inks add up as well 
 Dan
*"HAPPY PRINTING"*


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

I hear all of the arguments here and do understand that lower ink pricing would beneficial. I had asked the endusers at what cost per liter (for the low viscosity inks Mark mentioned) would it have an impact on your business. Lowering the price of ink for the purpose of lowering the price of ink sounds noble, but in business every risk has an intended reward. Just as the decorator who chooses to offer lower prices of output risks lower margins for the potential reward of getting more business, the company that lowers ink prices would need to see the return of more consumption by his endusers to make up for the loss in profits per liter of ink. If ink prices were 50% lower than they are now - would the average decorator using a direct to garment printer sell more garments - thus increasing his ink needs - or would he simply "pocket" that additional $5500 in profit that abmcdan referred to and go on? If lowering the price of anything does not result in an increase in consumption of that product then lowering the price does not make sense - agreed? The same goes with your output as a decorator.


----------



## FatKat Printz (Dec 26, 2008)

DAGuide said:


> So a question for you Kevin... think back to when you got your first dtg printer, has your expectations of the cost per print and the number of prints per an hour changed? If so, how/why?


Gonna hijack this question, I can tell you when we first started we barely went through ink simply because of our poor prints, wasting ink on test prints and our prints were it really was hard to sell. But, once we did our adjustments we were are going through ink like crazy. The print price decreased and production increased. Do we want to know how much money we lost before our adjustment..H E Double Hockey Stick NO!!!


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don
I think the greater issue is that the reduction in ink cost would result in better cash flow. If I spend $75,000.00 annually in ink and I was saving, according to your calculations, 50% or $37,500.00 per year I'd be thrilled. Even if machine costs were higher and I banked 50% of my savings toward a new capital investment i'd still be $18,750.00 ahead!!

In response to other post comments - the cost per liter of ink has a direct relationship to the cost per print.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

german13 said:


> most screen printers that come to realize the white ink cost per print associated with a dtg nearly faint especially with much lower production than there acustomed to!!


This is the problem. Too many people compare what gets done with screen printing to that of dtg printing. They print the same 4-color or less design that every screen printer (including those working in a garage using a heat gun to cure the ink and have less than $1,000 investment) can do. With some basic knowledge in a graphic software program and less than 5 minutes, a dtg printer can change the art to add in shadows, 3-D effects, more colors, textures and other things that will prevent 90% of screen printers from even trying to bid on the job. The other 10% will do the work, but the screen charges and setup time will jack up the price to more than dtg printing for short to medium size runs.

The best analogy I heard from a company that does screen printing and dtg was "it is like using a backhoe to dig a hole for a small plant to go in the ground. Sure it can be done, but you are using less than 1% of the equipment's capability." Some artwork is design and will look better with screen printing (i.e. tone-on-tone, one-color discharge,...). I believe that the significant majority of artwork would look better if the artists removed the limitations required by screen printing and did it to their full potential that dtg printing allows for. This does require the dtg owners from switch from an "order taker" role and become more of an educator / consultant to their customers. Unfortunately, not enough dtg printers do this.

I say it all the time... artwork is one of the few primary factors that separates one garment decorator to another. Just my opinion,

TGIF!

Mark


----------



## deluxe prints (Nov 30, 2011)

its ok 
I'll like to buy it


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> In response to other post comments - the cost per liter of ink has a direct relationship to the cost per print.


Kevin,

I agree with this, but it is important to know that cost per a liter is only part of the cost per print and cost per print is only part of the equation to being profitable - which is what everyone should be focused on. In my opinion, too much emphasis is made on the cost per print when looking at making a buying decision. It should be one of many factors to consider, but not the primary one.

Mark


----------



## deluxe prints (Nov 30, 2011)

yes its ok


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Don
> I think the greater issue is that the reduction in ink cost would result in better cash flow. If I spend $75,000.00 annually in ink and I was saving, according to your calculations, 50% or $37,500.00 per year I'd be thrilled. Even if machine costs were higher and I banked 50% of my savings toward a new capital investment i'd still be $18,750.00 ahead!!
> 
> In response to other post comments - the cost per liter of ink has a direct relationship to the cost per print.


Thanks for the reply Kevin - if someone is spending $75,000 a year in ink I believe that most distributors are going to find a way to help save them on their supplies costs - but the reality is that most direct to garment consumers use radically less than that. 

You did answer my question indirectly, however. If the price of ink were cut in half the potential net return to your distributor might be 1/2 of that amount and that would be for equipment which generally has a much smaller margin than consumables. That might long term result in more consumables sales - but directly it would really only result in higher profit to you. From what I am hearing, lower ink prices would not neccesarily result in more garment sales - which makes sense as I doubt that most folks who are losing sales to screen printing are not losing them because of 50 cents per shirt. 

Mark is correct that direct to garment printing jobs that "should" be screen printed is most likely the reason for the ink cost concern. Taking control of the artwork and making it difficult to screen print is key to success in the direct to garment world. If you can drive the logical minumum to screen print a job from 24 to 72 by "improving" the artwork you will see a drastic increase in sales and ink costs will be much less of a concern.

Another factor to consider, we are a decent sized distributor in this marketplace. If we were to reduce even our profit by 50% on our inks (not our gross sales, but our profit%) it would directly impact our ability to service our customers. I can't give an exact number but I would estimate that at least a 50% reduction in tech support/service personel resources would result from the reduced revenue flow. This is the reason for my previous question regarding higher machine costs & potential pay as you go support.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

DAGuide said:


> This is the problem. Too many people compare what gets done with screen printing to that of dtg printing. They print the same 4-color or less design that every screen printer (including those working in a garage using a heat gun to cure the ink and have less than $1,000 investment) can do. With some basic knowledge in a graphic software program and less than 5 minutes, a dtg printer can change the art to add in shadows, 3-D effects, more colors, textures and other things that will prevent 90% of screen printers from even trying to bid on the job. The other 10% will do the work, but the screen charges and setup time will jack up the price to more than dtg printing for short to medium size runs.
> 
> The best analogy I heard from a company that does screen printing and dtg was "it is like using a backhoe to dig a hole for a small plant to go in the ground. Sure it can be done, but you are using less than 1% of the equipment's capability." Some artwork is design and will look better with screen printing (i.e. tone-on-tone, one-color discharge,...). I believe that the significant majority of artwork would look better if the artists removed the limitations required by screen printing and did it to their full potential that dtg printing allows for. This does require the dtg owners from switch from an "order taker" role and become more of an educator / consultant to their customers. Unfortunately, not enough dtg printers do this.
> 
> ...


I agree 100% and we could prolly start another mile long thread on this subject.. 

the processes are two different animals and should not be compared but fact is they are, screen printers looking to add dtg to there services look at the bottom line and generaly have more knowledge on where they need to be from a profit standpoint and this is usually what stops them "high consumable cost" mostly white ink/pretreat related.. in addition to that, the customer could care less and are far less educated on the different printing processes therefore shopping you the dtg printer against the screen printer down the street.. so again it comes down to bottom line vs screen printers, to be profittable when your being pitted against cheaper method to print.. this goes without mentioning faster production with non dtg methods when it comes to the 25 + garment order requiring white ink in a few locations.. this might not be everyones experience but its ours.. your always in a competition with screen printers for the job, its a hard sale.. most of what we see is the basic 1-3 color employee service industry shirts and you have the local screen printers pounding dtgs durability some going as far as printing a sample from the dtg and giving it to the potential customer for wash testing using this to sell screen printing plastisol....

you can educate a customer to your blue in the face but if theres a 4-5 dollar difference in per piece garment price you can be sure there going with the lower price quote in this economy especially on the 25 + piece orders.. I love the dtg technology but we just cant compete with dark garments and a dtg vs screen printers at current ink prices and make it work the effort.. this seems to be the general consensus with other printers local to us aswell we are just a speck in the wind as some of these guys are 30 year veterans.. we are very new at this nearing two years in and i say to my self how do you use dtg to its potential high detail one offs and make profit while jetting white ink?? the only way i can imagine this happening is being a large contract printer, a mall kiosk, or have a store front all requiring large over head!! its kinda like a catch 22 and makes you rework your biz plan to fit a more profittable approach and hands down leads to screen printing/plastisol transfers from a home based business.. to us theres far to much risk with a store front dtg print business..

every one wants to put all the preasure on the dtg printer "find away to upsell screen printers" higher volume" high machine cost" " high consumable cost because the supplier cant take a cut" " Get a storefront" without mentioning operating cost and insurance.. our "printers" success is going to determine your success and its not easy on the dtg printers end!! its just to many obstacles and preasure for the dtg printer IMHO..I think there needs to be more dtg machines put in these shops and order to make this happen the typical existing screen print shop with existing clients needs to see lower consumable cost to even consider it... Jmho...


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Another factor to consider, we are a decent sized distributor in this marketplace. If we were to reduce even our profit by 50% on our inks (not our gross sales, but our profit%) it would directly impact our ability to service our customers. I can't give an exact number but I would estimate that at least a 50% reduction in tech support/service personel resources would result from the reduced revenue flow. This is the reason for my previous question regarding higher machine costs & potential pay as you go support.


Our exchange features competing interests. You are suggesting that we should continue to pay high ink costs because it would hurt your business which in turn would force you to cut off services.

I understand your position. But it isn't exactly the answer a "printer" wants to here. It reads like this - shut up, suffer, and stay away from my bottom line or we are going to get it out of your hide some other way! Please don't take the assesment personally - if I were you I would say the same thing but probably not as diplomatically!! 

Let me pose this question - If the ink wasn't so expensive and production costs so high, do you think more screen print shops would instal DTG machines? I do.


----------



## abmcdan (Sep 14, 2007)

I agree with Jeff and Kevin, that like it or not DTG needs to compete with screen printing prices. Otherwise it will be forever stuck in niche markets and low volume orders that are the screen printers scraps.

Don - Yes if ink prices came down you would sell more ink and machines because DTG printers would start getting jobs that would have previously been screen printed. DTG would start capturing more of the overall garment decorating market. 

When I was involved in Contract Shirt Factory doing both Screen Printing and DTG, the majority of our business was 200 pieces or less. However, depending on colors in the design most dark shirt jobs over 48 pieces got screen printed. If DTG ink costs were lower and production speeds slightly faster it would have been feasible to do all of our jobs DTG.


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

Here's 2 cents worth. Dtg and screen printing and xfers all have some overlap as far as market share re: units. As far as pricing, look, longevity, resolution, they vary greatly. The real ink cost issue for dtg is the white underbase. The cost of a 13x13 on a black with high coverage can knock you back 5-6 bucks for ink. Yes, waste is also a recurring cost for DTG. Screen print inks, transfer paper, both can be way less, but they do not look as good if the dtg is executed correctly. The pre-treat is kind of an insult add on to dtg ink costs.

We would be happy if the total cost for a killer on black full coverage design could hold in the 2-3 buck range, including pre-treat. I think that would put the dtg in spitting range of being competitive on a moderate size unit order. So does it need to be cheaper? Yes. Would we use more if it was cheaper? Yes. Would more people get into it if it was cheaper? Yes. Would more people using the process increase the technical end of the biz? Yes. Do vendors still need to make a buck? Yes. Is paid for tech support via service contract a bad thing? No. We do it all the time with software support, office copiers, etc.

How about $1 a litre ink, and a 3k a year service contract? hee hee hee Sign me up


----------



## shirts456 (Mar 30, 2011)

*I'm in the ink & toner business as well as screen printing... I can tell you all that it's garbage. There is no good reason other than everybody is tagging on $$. It's the life blood for these machines so that's where they get you, period. The manufacturing of the ink is pennies. I don't believe for one second that there is a deviation in formula so huge that it bumps it up that much.*


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

This is getting heated up. Interesting


----------



## casperboy77 (May 20, 2009)

I feel DTG ink prices are a bit on the steep side. But as for this topic I don't believe that ink is the only cost problem with some of these DTG printers. You have the cost of parts that you have to change every now and again. So a good question would be how many prints can you get on one printhead? I will say since we have switched to bagged white ink that we rarely have printhead problems these days. Another cost is the time and labor. I have speant hours getting the ink shelf reset due to barometric pressure changes and then struggled entire days without getting any good prints. Another cost to factor in is the waste. So if you can figure the cost of ink per shirt, the number of shirts wasted, the cost of parts and overhead it equals out to DTG printing is expensive, not just the over priced ink. I agree if the ink prices were to drop then we could lower shirt cost and sell more shirts. Anyone out there know how to whip up this ink in their garage?

Just my 2 cents worth. take care everyone!


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

We can complain about ink cost all day long.. like our customers do about $20 t-shirts..., but at the end of the day if you consider what it would cost by another process, it's really not that "out of line". For smaller runs, you've just shifted the cost from pre-press to post. Ink and expendables and the profit they generate(whatever that is) is a part of what makes this industry viable. If my ink was half price right now, it would not impact my day to day business that much. Time/speed/labor are the biggest factor. Say if I was using $40 of ink an hour on a garden variety epson based machine, by my calculations that's only impacting sell price by $1.5. I'm not saying that I would'nt love to see competition and volume to have ink prices come down. Kevin (the thread starter) has a better perspective on the high volume side and where he would like this to go, but unless we are in a possition where some part of that $40 per hour is going to finance another machine and worker, It's not going to generate a landslide of profitability, It's going to in IMHO, create a cutthroat mentality from the bottom up.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

The intention is not to discuss high volume or low volume printing, brands or techniques. The intention is to hear real life users talk about the issues posted. The issue of ink cost is the single biggest complaint DTG printers have had in all the years I have been doing this.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> The issue of ink cost is the single biggest complaint DTG printers have had in all the years I have been doing this.


In my experience, the three biggest complaints with dtg printing in general are the following:
1. Reliability of dtg printers - by far the largest profit killer is down time due to lost profits and no productivity. Hopefully this changing with the newer models coming out.
2. The required maintenance steps when using white ink - white ink separates and requires users to perform cleanings / purges that waste ink.
3. Pretreatment process - most of which is by people that are manually pretreating shirts. Some are about pretreating bright colored shirts.

Ink pricing is probably next on the list. Granted, this is based on a majority of conversations with people that are interested in my dtg RIP for Epson modified printers and those people that I have talk to at trade shows. Most of which I would not characterize as high volume, dtg users.

Mark


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

DAGuide said:


> In my experience, the three biggest complaints with dtg printing in general are the following:
> 1. Reliability of dtg printers - by far the largest profit killer is down time due to lost profits and no productivity. Hopefully this changing with the newer models coming out.
> 2. The required maintenance steps when using white ink - white ink separates and requires users to perform cleanings / purges that waste ink.
> 3. Pretreatment process - most of which is by people that are manually pretreating shirts. Some are about pretreating bright colored shirts.
> ...


 All that you raise here is valid but not applicable to all printers experience. High volume printers may be more vulnerable to the three issues you raise from a P&L standpoint when compared low volume users. I agree that all are salient to the discussion of the medium. The issues you raise are relative to each of us when it occurs in our shop. Ink costs affect ALL equally and without discimination.

Consider this - if ink costs were not so extreme, the cost of repairs may not be so painful. If a small guy cut his ink bill by $400.00 - $600.00 p/mo he'd have enough money to cover wear and tear repairs when they came up.

DTG has a very tough give and take relationship within the technology. Tough biz.


----------



## shirts456 (Mar 30, 2011)

ROYAL SAVAGE wrote; "Consider this - if ink costs were not so extreme, the cost of repairs may not be so painful. If a small guy cut his ink bill by $400.00 - $600.00 p/mo he'd have enough money to cover wear and tear repairs when they came up."

Or draw a regular pay check.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

shirts456 said:


> ROYAL SAVAGE wrote; "Consider this - if ink costs were not so extreme, the cost of repairs may not be so painful. If a small guy cut his ink bill by $400.00 - $600.00 p/mo he'd have enough money to cover wear and tear repairs when they came up."
> 
> Or draw a regular pay check.


theres no doubt consumables are to high.. you can say it a million times, complain till no end, but you will not see a price reduction in the consumables untill there is a crisis state with dtg... IE enough people voice there experience with the process and the sales decline... most are forced to "try" and make it work for them due there machine investment, once the machine is sold you have a good year of consumable sales.. then the machine is resold and the cycle continues.. it can only repeat so long until the general public gets convinced the ROI is very low in comparrison to other methods requirring far less equipt cost as a start up and far better ROI/ profit margins!!. Once the printer educates themselves pre purchase and stops putting themselves in position to be a sacrificial lamb things will change!! I learned this very quick and have the capability to produce as many dtgs that are required but IMHO the margins are not enough for whats involved.. hence why i moved along to other methods.. I would love to see the liter prices around 100 this would change my perspective on margins.. the manufactures need to know you cant have your cake and eat it to!! " high machine and consumable cost" the printer would like to eat also Dtg is way way over rated IMHO and has a mysterious way of drawing the unsuspecting to the unexpected!! the average printer can easily invest 30,000 in epson based equiptment/ auto pretreaters/heat presses that only produces 20 pieces per hour average on darks with a single printer thats not a good ROI in my book this excluding consumables.. as i said to many hurdles for to little return without futher investing in store fronts or large contract printing biz plans, to me all this contradicts dtg's strengths "one off, high detailed images.. theres no money in this without further investment costs..IMHO the one thing that can be changed fast is ink cost to allow for some profit for the printer, at 90% water i dont see this out of line.. Its funny listening to suppliers post they cant take a cut due support costs and then you have those buying non dupont for less cost to themselves but little releif to the printer, where do you think that profit goes? In there pocket!!! Your seeing more and more dtgs hit the market, new brands and diy epson models.. existing printers marketing dtg, former printers selling dtg and consumables on and on.. Its the old adage "cant beat them join em" thats were the money is folks its not rocket science/ the machine/consumables/software as far as dtg goes IMHO... Why not price ink to benefit the printer? in my opinion this would greatly benefit the manufacturer as less people would try to get in the manufacturers/suppliers game making money on ink and printers..sorry for the ramble..lol


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

thank Jeff. It's good to ramble!


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> thank Jeff. It's good to ramble!


 
It would be nice to see the suppliers at least attempt to adjust the white ink and pretreat prices without touching cmyk pricing!! selling ink 100% in house may eliminate some suppliers with the OEM doing the suppling instead of adding more cost to the product thru the middle man, but the result as a whole would benefit everyone.. Or offer this deal to there machine purchase customers, as this would have the same effect forcing others to do the same effectively weeding out the non-sense 
OEM suppliers should try an experiment requiring the purchase of cmyk coupled with equiv white and pretreat prices and or require larger volume of white ink and pretreat purchase to save on packaging etc..

Seems such a simple concept to move dtg mainstream and to get more existing companies on board by reducing per print costs some where in the range of 1:50-2 bucks.. I know this can work as i know what this ink costs!! the supplier will make there money in volume alone.. learning the white ink process is expensive at @ 5-10 bucks including the garment for misprints etc.. this would be good for the industry as a whole..Imho  the greed is whats hurting it...


----------



## YoDan (May 4, 2007)

> the greed is whats hurting it...


 That is just not the case 
Dan
*"HAPPY PRINTING"*


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

YoDan said:


> That is just not the case
> Dan
> *"HAPPY PRINTING"*


I know better your a good guy dan, but i know better and know the competition you face and lower prices has served you well? I have seen first hand what printers are up against, helped numerous out of warranty folks get there machines going, helped numerous diy folks get going etc..

I have heard so many stories of failure and utter financial devastation its unreal, i could write a book on this experience!! You could basically give printers out free and these folks are failing due to consumable cost..they just cant make money as a start up with dtg!! and isnt this dtg's claim to fame small Sq ft biz from home? 90% dont make it and move along... If i understand correctly you were once a printer? I guess the ink business proves more lucrative?


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

german13 said:


> I know better


Jeff,

If wanting to make a fair profit that allows for fair wages for your employees, a respectable level of support for your customers, capital to reinvest into product development/improvement & a little for the one taking the risk (company owner or owners) - is considered greed, then I/we plead guilty. 

Proper pricing of output will go far further in impacting the bottom line of the typical direct to garment decorator than an average of 50 cents per shirt reduction in ink pricing ever will. Ultimately, as more players enter the ink marketplace with equal or better quality ink we will see a reduction in ink prices. Until there are serious alternatives to the big three ink manufacturers - Kornit, Brother, DuPont - we will not see radical price change on the ink side of this marketplace.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

german13 said:


> I know better


Jeff, It's easy to say I'm greedy for charging $18 for a shirt that cost $3, But there are other perspectives about that. The same can be said about distributors and the manufacturers. As has been said, If we're not willing or able to pay their price they will either lower it, or put their investment elsewhere.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

german13 said:


> Seems such a simple concept to move dtg mainstream and to get more existing companies on board by reducing per print costs some where in the range of 1:50-2 bucks.. I know this can work as i know what this ink costs!! the supplier will make there money in volume alone..


I don't want to be a pessimistic, but I just don't see this happening till the ease-of-use and reliability of these printers / ink chemistry gets to where the distributors / manufacturers can save the money on their tech support departments. Otherwise, the complaints on these printers will rise (due to the increase in the number of users that lack the knowledge on how to use and maintain them) and the reputation of dtg printing (that directly leads to sales everyone is discussing above) could be severely damaged. This basically happened early on when white ink was first released and the printers were being oversold. The problem will just increase in my opinion with a cheaper ink price. There is a balance that must be achieved.

Mark


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Jeff,
> 
> If wanting to make a fair profit that allows for fair wages for your employees, a respectable level of support for your customers, capital to reinvest into product development/improvement & a little for the one taking the risk (company owner or owners) - is considered greed, then I/we plead guilty.
> 
> Proper pricing of output will go far further in impacting the bottom line of the typical direct to garment decorator than an average of 50 cents per shirt reduction in ink pricing ever will. Ultimately, as more players enter the ink marketplace with equal or better quality ink we will see a reduction in ink prices. Until there are serious alternatives to the big three ink manufacturers - Kornit, Brother, DuPont - we will not see radical price change on the ink side of this marketplace.


Don,

nothing against making a living, but what you fail to see is 90% of the start ups are failing this will eventually effect you in the long run if changes dont come in consuable prices..

I cant argue with you publicly on ink prices as i have signed the same CDA'S you have but if you would care to do this on a private format, i think we would come to agree on a few things..

Ultimately i would love to see you and printers succede as i do love the technology and why I,m passionate on the subject, but i dont think anyone will disagree higher profit margins are needed on the dtg printers end!!!


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

DAGuide said:


> I don't want to be a pessimistic, but I just don't see this happening till the ease-of-use and reliability of these printers / ink chemistry gets to where the distributors / manufacturers can save the money on their tech support departments. Otherwise, the complaints on these printers will rise (due to the increase in the number of users that lack the knowledge on how to use and maintain them) and the reputation of dtg printing (that directly leads to sales everyone is discussing above) could be severely damaged. This basically happened early on when white ink was first released and the printers were being oversold. The problem will just increase in my opinion with a cheaper ink price. There is a balance that must be achieved.
> 
> Mark


Agreed, but again this puts the preasure on the printer, why must the printer bear the brunt of everything? If the product is not good and the ink chemistry is lacking, why sell it and let the printer bear the effects??!!

Dont you think the high failure rate of existing dtg users are damaging the industry at the same level? If not worse? look at some of the big printers on here that have sold there equipt due to this fact wheres the common ground!

Well guys, have a good day got run the work day is calling!!


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Jeff,

Not sure where you get your 90% figure from, and even if it is correct - how does this compare to startups in other industries? Do 90% of business opportunities fail in the bagel industry? lawn maintenance industry? etc. 

The most common reason I see for startup business failure is not related to ink cost or equipment reliability (that is not saying that none fail due to these). The most common reason for failure of business startups is failure to identify a specific market niche and effectively market ones products to that market segment at a price point that allows for profit and growth - that and undercapitalization. A failure to plan is a plan for failure.

As an individual who tries very hard to operate with integrity I can tell you that I have talked people out of going into a business that I see destined for failure. That being said, I have seen people take an idea I felt would fail and end up with a successful enterprise in the end (even if it was not where they initially intended to go). We (sales professionals) in this marketplace deal with people pursuing dreams every day. I try to be very fair and provide accurate informaiton about learning curve, cost of consumables, print times and the like - but ultimately I have to let the consumer make their own decision in regards to the validity of their business concept.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

zoom_monster said:


> Jeff, It's easy to say I'm greedy for charging $18 for a shirt that cost $3, But there are other perspectives about that. The same can be said about distributors and the manufacturers. As has been said, If we're not willing or able to pay their price they will either lower it, or put their investment elsewhere.


If your paying 3 dollars for the garment and an average white ink print, i would like your suppliers contact info you charge that much because you have to, try competing with a screen printer with that 18.oo garment price thats reality in our neck of the woods..

I think you must be referring to average ink cost alone of a white ink print? In my neighborhood a shirt averages 2 bucks, average white ink print 3-6 bucks with pretreat, this does not account for operating cost (overhead), equiptment cost etc.. 

As a low volume printer/ start up how do you make equiv profit to investment ratio or employee anyone at decent wage and offer insurance.. not possible running one machine!!


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Not sure where you get your 90% figure from, and even if it is correct - how does this compare to startups in other industries? Do 90% of business opportunities fail in the bagel industry? lawn maintenance industry? etc.
> 
> ...


Don,

Its fact that most business startups fail within the first 5 years this is a government statistic found anywhere and dtg is whole other subject matter with much greater obstacles than "your lawn guy".. I see it as the printer is the fall guy for the manufacter/suppliers business model, Instead of sharing the brunte with a relatively new industry..
Im speaking from a low volume/start up point of view and using dtg strengths one offs/short run/high detailed images and current consumable cost.. we are all pitted against the screen printer like it or not!! 

could you honestly say you could make a sustainable income at the current consumable rates with a machine that produces at best 20average prints per hour with white ink and feed your family?? We have to be the operator and marketer,customer service,purchaser etc.. wheres the time for 1 person to do this? Heck i couldnt pay the electric and phone bills on these numbers, let alone advertising and the like, this is the issue with dtg.. lower consumables will help greatly!! Like i said i want it to suceede and i want to succede but the numbers dont equate to success with the current senario. if consumables drop i would drop the seqeegee and jump right back in, but i see it far to much effort currently for far to little profit..JMHO dtg is no more than selling a dream, unless your adding dtg as an additional service, existing business with existing clientel, large contract printer with multiple machines IMO..


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

The lawn guy couldn't make it with one lawn mower. You are correct in stating that a guy with one DTG can make a good living. If you are regularly competing with screen printers then you either have screen printers who do not charge for screen charges or you are trying to do jobs that are too few colors or too many garments. 

I would ask for what would be expected as a reasonable return on a $20,000 piece of equipment that you run 20 hours a week. Are you looking for that $20,000 piece of equipment to net you out $20,000 per year, $40,000, $60,000? How many hours a week are you willing to dedicate to producing product? How many hours a week are you willing to spend marketing your product? If your business already exists and is not growing - what are you doing to attract more customers or to replace lower margin customers with higher margin customers? If trying to compete with screen printers is not working out for your business - then stop competing with then and look for a different market to address. 

One last thing on MY ramble. You speak of $6 ink costs on dark garments. Based on average market costs of ink for the Epson based printers of $300 liter - you are stating that you are putting down nearly 20 ml of ink on a shirt - I have seen this amount on one standard image - it was a full bleed 12.5" X 18" 100% underbase at high resolution, with a mostly orange top layer (It was a replication of an orange poster) - the shirt was noticably heavier after is was printed & pressed. The average dark shirt print will use 5-8 ml of ink - total. Many will use much less.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> The average dark shirt print will use 5-8 ml of ink - total. Many will use much less.


how big is an image on a black shirt that uses 5ml of ink total?


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

Jeff, The $3 was just the shirt... _and _ I was being generous

Like I said before, If you consider the process.... that $18 is cheap, if you take into account the separations, Art, screens and time to set it all up. Ink is pennies in screen-print, does this mean that they are more profitable or that there are less business failures?. I do not like the price of ink for my DTG or my desktop any more than anyone else. Are there monopolies, yes are their ( the ink makers) prices outrageous, perhaps. I just see opportunity to take care of people that I could not with other methods. 

Ink pricing is not going to prevent DTG from becoming "mainstream", Faster machines will take us there and they will in turn will get better pricing.


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> how big is an image on a black shirt that uses 5ml of ink total?


Good question Kevin, as you know the amount of black in the CMYK separation will weigh greatly into this equation. A darker image 10" x 12" with 30-35% coverage at a medium setting on dark would fall into the 5-6 ml ink consumption range on average. A bright yellow image is going to require more white ink than the same image in a color like purple or dark green.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Good question Kevin, as you know the amount of black in the CMYK separation will weigh greatly into this equation. A darker image 10" x 12" with 30-35% coverage at a medium setting on dark would fall into the 5-6 ml ink consumption range on average. A bright yellow image is going to require more white ink than the same image in a color like purple or dark green.


Don
This is the reason everyone is so insane over all of this. There is no logical answer that any rep, or distributor can give to anyone so they can make a solid judgement. 

I'm not suggesting anyone is purposely giving bad info, they just have no clue. You need to run your own machines and get your own data. Ink calculators are BS and should not be relied on. 

I love the shows when we hear, ok, this cost $.50 to print and it uses x-ml of ink. its all crap because every design is different and pixel data calculations are never the same.

If you print a square box on a black tee with a yellow print it is exactly the same cost as the square box with a top color of 25% each of CMYK. These minutia's are pointless - the point is that there is NO guidance out there that is reliable.

A 1,2,3 color screen print in flat color is easy to calculate. This is not. It's too ethereal.


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Kevin,

You are correct that there is no "canned" answer that will satisfy all graphics. In cost calculators are accurate in that they know what amount of ink they are telling the printer to print & how much the ink costs per liter. Factors like amount used by head cleans, an mid-print spits is not calculated in. Rouch costs for pretreatment are fairly easy to figure in as well. I have posted a formula used by a customer that does a lot of printing and it eliminates most of the concern in regards to ink costs. He charges $13 to do any job (whether 1 shirt or 300), doubles the price he pays for the garment and charges $1 per minute to print. He keeps tabs on everything he prints and doubles the price of his ink to make up for any slop. He has calculated how long it takes his printer to print some basic image sizes 10" x 10", 12" x 10", 12" x 4" etc. to calculate the "per minute" number. The ink cost calculator is there to make sure his print times are in check. 

You can't use the standard screen print mentality for pricing when doing direct to garment. It is more about printer time - which in turn equates to ink consumed.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

Kevin, I agree there is no easy answer. In large format sign printing they either have to use some kind of average or price at a "worse case scenario". As DTGers, we have the option of pricing to a size range (4x4, 12x10 or whatever) to limit our exposure to cost. If you let people create their own artwork you leave yourself open to them sending you something that's worse than average. 
It would certainly be interesting to know what companies like CP,Zaz and really "big dogs" pay for their ink.


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

zoom_monster said:


> It would certainly be interesting to know what companies like CP,Zaz and really "big dogs" pay for their ink.


It is cheaper by the tanker truck load!


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

zoom_monster said:


> Jeff, The $3 was just the shirt... _and _I was being generous
> 
> Like I said before, If you consider the process.... that $18 is cheap, if you take into account the separations, Art, screens and time to set it all up. Ink is pennies in screen-print, does this mean that they are more profitable or that there are less business failures?. I do not like the price of ink for my DTG or my desktop any more than anyone else. Are there monopolies, yes are their ( the ink makers) prices outrageous, perhaps. I just see opportunity to take care of people that I could not with other methods.
> 
> Ink pricing is not going to prevent DTG from becoming "mainstream", Faster machines will take us there and they will in turn will get better pricing.


Looks like dtg is not your only decorating method you use? this is exactly my point i dont see how anyone can make a sustainable income on dtg alone, unless there using multiple machines as a contract printer!! Imo.

faster machines yes and you are already seeing it with the likes of aeoon and anajets ricoh head m powers.. I was referring to epson based printers and these are not going to get faster!! 

I guess if your an existing company that can afford the likes of an aeoon type printers in the 100,000 ++ range you have no worries but certainly not benficial to the home based start ups!!


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Kevin,
> 
> You are correct that there is no "canned" answer that will satisfy all graphics..


Yet the sales pitches continue on and on. Something is wrong when you see all the equipment for sale in such a young medium. Obviously something in the calculation is skewed. I believe it's in the raw cost.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> The lawn guy couldn't make it with one lawn mower. You are correct in stating that a guy with one DTG can make a good living. If you are regularly competing with screen printers then you either have screen printers who do not charge for screen charges or you are trying to do jobs that are too few colors or too many garments.
> 
> I would ask for what would be expected as a reasonable return on a $20,000 piece of equipment that you run 20 hours a week. Are you looking for that $20,000 piece of equipment to net you out $20,000 per year, $40,000, $60,000? How many hours a week are you willing to dedicate to producing product? How many hours a week are you willing to spend marketing your product? If your business already exists and is not growing - what are you doing to attract more customers or to replace lower margin customers with higher margin customers? If trying to compete with screen printers is not working out for your business - then stop competing with then and look for a different market to address.
> 
> One last thing on MY ramble. You speak of $6 ink costs on dark garments. Based on average market costs of ink for the Epson based printers of $300 liter - you are stating that you are putting down nearly 20 ml of ink on a shirt - I have seen this amount on one standard image - it was a full bleed 12.5" X 18" 100% underbase at high resolution, with a mostly orange top layer (It was a replication of an orange poster) - the shirt was noticably heavier after is was printed & pressed. The average dark shirt print will use 5-8 ml of ink - total. Many will use much less.


I think it gets into alot of loaded questions regarding what 20,000 should net and folks will have different expectations but i also think we would need to figure out the true costs of ownership/ or additional cost this equiptment will need to function its intended lifespan ie print heads/ink lines/ boards etc "another thread".. when i buy a car in this price range i expect it to last 5-6 years and the warranty to reflect this and most do these days some even with 10 year 100,000 mile warrantys!! I dont think we can say the same about dtg printers, whats there warranty 1 year and nothing that touches ink?? so what warranty is there really? you would have to include replacement parts within the life of the printer at this cost/ + maint requirements etc... this is the only true method of calculating ROI and net profit.. Judging by these forums and this very thread i think its safe to say there not very dependable and need frequent expensive parts? and guess who pays for this? again the printer, in which the manufacturer/supplier will "again profit from".. This all equates to pure manufacter/supplier profit and sets there biz model up to accept no risk/liability unless there making electronics/drive system and ink delivery that cant last a year? Im i wrong? This is a great gig and why everyones jumping on board!! This is why i say the printer bears to much in comparrison and lower consumables will give them a breather/ better roi..

I think i posted white ink cost in the range of " average white ink print 3-6 bucks with pretreat" do you feel this ink cost an out of line price on a dark garment with pretreat? this is what my rip most frequently tells me without factoring waste ink most times and why the machine/s is now a paper weight/ boat anchor... Hey nothing personal just feedback on what im experiencing and what most others i talk to are!! I just personally feel the ink cost are to much for the dtg printer to bear.. the odds are stacked against them just starting, my hopes are that some day this will come down in order for epson based dtg printers to have half a chance! Will there be demand of the low viscosity ink with the current movement away from epson based printers? lots of unknowns in the current state of the union... It can work even with current white ink chemistry with lower cost.. the printer can have money in the coffers for the printheads etc.. otherwise ebay and the classified sections will continually be loaded with these printers when people throw in the towel..its no secret just look


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Yet the sales pitches continue on and on. Something is wrong when you see all the equipment for sale in such a young medium. Obviously something in the calculation is skewed. I believe it's in the raw cost.


Kevin, are you unhappy with the platform or just the ink cost? You can potentialy earn a lot more faster with a 100k rotary press than a 100k DTG. Is the a point in your mind where there would be a virtual parity?


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

zoom_monster said:


> Kevin, are you unhappy with the platform or just the ink cost? You can potentialy earn a lot more faster with a 100k rotary press than a 100k DTG. Is the a point in your mind where there would be a virtual parity?


Zoom
I am not unhappy about the platform or anything else. Yes, I believe Ink costs are to high due to the monopoly created by the manufacturers. Totary isn't something I've done in 25 years of decorating.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Zoom
> I am not unhappy about the platform or anything else. Yes, I believe Ink costs are to high due to the monopoly created by the manufacturers. Totary isn't something I've done in 25 years of decorating.


Sorry.. what's "Totary"


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Jeff,

Direct to garment printing does have a valid place in our market. Because the learning curve is lower, the space provided is minimal and the entry cost is not horrific - it attracts individuals who desire to become independant - which does not neccesarily mean they are business savvy. The challenge with any inkjet based technology is that the less the equipment is used the more issues will arise due to inactivity (ask anyone with an ecosol large format printer or dye sublimation system). The lion's share of those getting out of direct to garment printing are in this "under-utilizer" category. I cannot speak for others than myself in regards to how direct to garment is sold - I personally inform prospects of the need to have a good business plan - including marketing - before they jump into the mix. 

From the best that we can tell from our customer records, the average user consumes a liter to a liter a half in ink monthly (that number is somewhat skewed by users who consume 10+ liters per month). More than likely the "median" user consumes a liter a month. The low volume user would likely fall into 1/2 to 1 liter a month range. Based on a 50% reduction in the price of ink and an average of $300 per liter - the net "savings" to the low volume user would be $900 per year. If $900-1800 per year is "make or break" for a business model then something other than just cost of consumables is to blame.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

zoom_monster said:


> Sorry.. what's "Totary"


 Let's see. hmm.. the R is next to the T on my keyboard. Perhaps a typo! Rotary. LOL


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Direct to garment printing does have a valid place in our market. Because the learning curve is lower, the space provided is minimal and the entry cost is not horrific - it attracts individuals who desire to become independant - which does not neccesarily mean they are business savvy. The challenge with any inkjet based technology is that the less the equipment is used the more issues will arise due to inactivity (ask anyone with an ecosol large format printer or dye sublimation system). The lion's share of those getting out of direct to garment printing are in this "under-utilizer" category. I cannot speak for others than myself in regards to how direct to garment is sold - I personally inform prospects of the need to have a good business plan - including marketing - before they jump into the mix.
> 
> From the best that we can tell from our customer records, the average user consumes a liter to a liter a half in ink monthly (that number is somewhat skewed by users who consume 10+ liters per month). More than likely the "median" user consumes a liter a month. The low volume user would likely fall into 1/2 to 1 liter a month range. Based on a 50% reduction in the price of ink and an average of $300 per liter - the net "savings" to the low volume user would be $900 per year. If $900-1800 per year is "make or break" for a business model then something other than just cost of consumables is to blame.


Any one printing a half liter to one liter a month is working at a hobby. it is 10:30 (we start at 6:00am) in the morning and we have used 2.5 liters of ink already printing some hideous oversized ink sucking ugly piece of art! Nobody can make money printing a half liter a month - that's crazy.

Fixed overhead is just that - fixed. the issue that everyone complains about is the cost of the production components. There a very large folks that I know that won't buy machines even though they love the process because the business model on the supply side precludes them from being competitive.

Let's face it - If your ink cost is $2.50 per shirt and you reduce it to $1.25 and work on the same margins your prices will be more competitive to the buying public, hence, more orders and more supplies.

I suppose if a distributor sells $1 million in supplies at 20% margin he'd make 200K. If he sells $500K and makes 20% he's down 100K. Upsetting to the distributor. However, if the medium flourishes he can sell more machines, ink and supplies to recoup. The medium will be stronger and technical advances will occur more rapidly as more users demand better products. The distributor will be vulnerable but stronger in the end becuase he will have more eggs in more baskets.

But I'm not a distributor.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Let's see. hmm.. the R is next to the T on my keyboard. Perhaps a typo! Rotary. LOL


I guess I should have figured that out...

I thought you did screenprint as well. I was talking about the big 10, 12, 15-color round presses that MHM, M&R etc make. I was refering the fact that they print 10s of dozens per hour.....


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> we have used 2.5 liters of ink already printing some hideous oversized ink sucking ugly piece of art! .


OMG, that's so funny (and True). Print on demand hell.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> Any one printing a half liter to one liter a month is working at a hobby. it is 10:30 (we start at 6:00am) in the morning and we have used 2.5 liters of ink already printing some hideous oversized ink sucking ugly piece of art! Nobody can make money printing a half liter a month - that's crazy.
> 
> Fixed overhead is just that - fixed. the issue that everyone complains about is the cost of the production components. There a very large folks that I know that won't buy machines even though they love the process because the business model on the supply side precludes them from being competitive.
> 
> ...


Agree 100%,

Pretty much what i have been saying thruout the thread.. like i also said you can argue it to till your blue in the face and without the ability to show factual numbers it remains a mystery to the public and the manufactureres/resellers will not agree because it affects THERE bottom line and we will continue to see the politician type rebuttles

It will come down to a few smart resellers to jump in and undermine the system and current operations will either join or be gone!! who will do this? when? who knows but its along time coming!! dtg is lacking the sams club, walmart of dtg ink... it has to be taken out of the hands of the oem to gain control of pricing!! IMO lots also said you couldnt build an epson based dtg and market it for under 6,000 well that was proven wrong also you see about 3 dtg companies doing so now!!! 
Additionally you already see a bit of this with other guys going with non dupont purchasing at lower volume requirements but you dont see the price reduction because there reaping the benefits of the standardized ink pricing to the enduser!! If something doesnt happen more in more machines will go to the wayside or be recirculated, maybe they just dont care?? but as i see it from a diy printer builder "even given a low cost printer" the enduser abandons operations due to high consuables it happens over and over and over.. allthough allured to all that dtg is they move to cheaper methods and that tells me im not the only one with this argument users drop it like a hot potato once there REAL costs are realized.. If i would have to guess diydtg users are a pretty decent size market expansion based on the forums,youtube etc.. cant really say anything else regarding the subject, its been said.. people just are not listening or frankly dont care of the printers well being!!! I can tell you for cetain its not lack of effort on my part i put 200% into everything i do (I think my forum presence alone would dictate this, and i dont sell anything) , I just learned very quickly the margins are not worth the effort as a start up with better avenues to travel.. once real cost were realized, thank god i went with my instinct to build my own..I was right!!!


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

zoom_monster said:


> I guess I should have figured that out...
> 
> I thought you did screenprint as well. I was talking about the big 10, 12, 15-color round presses that MHM, M&R etc make. I was refering the fact that they print 10s of dozens per hour.....


 
Now you are killing me ! I've owned automatics since 1989!


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

german13 said:


> it has to be taken out of the hands of the oem to gain control of pricing!!


And here is the rub. Because DTG is a very small subset of the fabric inkjet market, the manufacturer _demands_ that they sell through OEMs. Other ink companies have come and gone, but they can't reasonably deal with the small shops so they have to sell to people who have an incentive to create a market.

I think we would all agree that "white" is the issue. If it's just price and if the application of X square inches of underbase costs the exact same as CMYK(current cost), would this issue be solved? Would the speed of through-put of white+ CMYK need to be faster? How fast?

Obviously underbase printing is more problematic. You need better art, more time, and thus have to charge more money. It happens every day. if you give people a choice... the more expensive one has to be worth it or they will walk away.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> "...Totary isn't something I've done in 25 years of decorating.



That's why the word "isn't" did not make sense.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

zoom_monster said:


> And here is the rub. Because DTG is a very small subset of the fabric inkjet market, the manufacturer _demands_ that they sell through OEMs. Other ink companies have come and gone, but they can't reasonably deal with the small shops so they have to sell to people who have an incentive to create a market.
> 
> I think we would all agree that "white" is the issue. If it's just price and if the application of X square inches of underbase costs the exact same as CMYK(current cost), would this issue be solved? Would the speed of through-put of white+ CMYK need to be faster? How fast?
> 
> Obviously underbase printing is more problematic. You need better art, more time, and thus have to charge more money. It happens every day. if you give people a choice... the more expensive one has to be worth it or they will walk away.


"IF" the white ink cost with pretreat was inline with current cmyk it would certainly change the game and allow the dtg printer to realize more of the market share that screen printers are absorbing!! 

As far as machine speed not really an issue for me as i would simply add machines to accomodate production..I really dont see the speed an issue for others in the future either as they can add lower cost machines to fit there needs, the likes of these under 6000 machines are already surfacing and we will prolly see a few more added to the line up!

the above is the formula to move dtg mainstream IMHO.. I will watch and wait until cheaper consumables surface!!


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

White ink is in line with CMYK pricing. Most companies charge within 10% for the white ink versus the CMYK inks. The reality of printing on dark substrates is that much more white ink is required to cover the dark substrate than color ink is required to cover the white ink. Screen printers lay down heavy layers of white before printing colors on dark - especially if they are printing with water based inks. 

Jeff you continue to complain about screen printers taking business or trying to be competitive with screen printers. This is not the wheel house for direct to garment printing and it never has been. If you have a screen printer who will print a 6 color job on 24-48 shirts for less than you can print it on a direct to garment printer - something is wrong with somebody's pricing. Most screen printers will charge $20-30 per screen for setup. At $25 per screen that would be $150 before a shirt is even printed. That allows you for $3 in ink on a 48 piece order and $6 on a 24 piece order. What am I missing here?


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

Don-ColDesi said:


> White ink is in line with CMYK pricing. Most companies charge within 10% for the white ink versus the CMYK inks. The reality of printing on dark substrates is that much more white ink is required to cover the dark substrate than color ink is required to cover the white ink. Screen printers lay down heavy layers of white before printing colors on dark - especially if they are printing with water based inks.
> 
> Jeff you continue to complain about screen printers taking business or trying to be competitive with screen printers. This is not the wheel house for direct to garment printing and it never has been. If you have a screen printer who will print a 6 color job on 24-48 shirts for less than you can print it on a direct to garment printer - something is wrong with somebody's pricing. Most screen printers will charge $20-30 per screen for setup. At $25 per screen that would be $150 before a shirt is even printed. That allows you for $3 in ink on a 48 piece order and $6 on a 24 piece order. What am I missing here?


The problem is that too many people are chasing down bad business. But, the ink costs hurt. Screen printing ink $40.00 per gallon

Kornit Ink $760.00 ( factor in purge waste and it's closer to $900-$1000.00)

Brother $3000.00

DTG v02 $1100.00

The whole thing means High prices. I get $7.75 for a 1 color screen printed tee plus a $15.00 screen. My DTG price for the same shirt (white on black) is $12.10.

Factor in the screen and my screen printed tee is $8.37 ea. Why - the ink cost too much!! The DTG print is 31% more retail. 

A one color tee may not be the best example but some people don't offer screen printing they only have DTG So ink really kills them. 

In screen print I could care les how big the design is but in DTG it is impossible to quote without art and feel totally secure.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> White ink is in line with CMYK pricing. Most companies charge within 10% for the white ink versus the CMYK inks. The reality of printing on dark substrates is that much more white ink is required to cover the dark substrate than color ink is required to cover the white ink. Screen printers lay down heavy layers of white before printing colors on dark - especially if they are printing with water based inks.
> 
> Jeff you continue to complain about screen printers taking business or trying to be competitive with screen printers. This is not the wheel house for direct to garment printing and it never has been. If you have a screen printer who will print a 6 color job on 24-48 shirts for less than you can print it on a direct to garment printer - something is wrong with somebody's pricing. Most screen printers will charge $20-30 per screen for setup. At $25 per screen that would be $150 before a shirt is even printed. That allows you for $3 in ink on a 48 piece order and $6 on a 24 piece order. What am I missing here?


Don,

Im not referring to retail price of cmyk/ white ink, and correct it takes 8 to 10 times maybe more? white ink vs cmyk.

Im referring to cost per print of cmyk vs white and pretreat and i think this is what z was asking.. so yes if the white ink pretreat was lowered to match cmyk per print cost dtg guys would be happy and this would do all the good things for dtg that we have been talking about... reality is advertised sales pitch cost per print is much higher than promoted especially with waste ink factored in...

regarding the screen printer "i wish they were adding screen cost most dont its a dog eat dog business im not in a rural area, remember the economy is bad.. we have 2 very large screen print shops and a bunch of the small ones..everybody is cutting everybody and the dtg gets the worst of it and why i myself had to learn screen printing.. so it comes down to this most stuff that comes in is simple 1-3 color service industry employee shirts " construction company, hvac,plumbers,lawn guys,sealcoaters, snow plowers, and your small specialty retailerstuff the bicycle shops etc, they have simple logos and want what they want you cant upsell them on art with dtg the screen printers kill the dtg guy around here and i see why after doing it..its cheap to screen print faster production on the larger orders and much more profittable and if your a home business like many of the small screeners are they can cut screen charges and still make a good living... so what are we supposed to do go and tell these guys they need to add more screen charge you can sell some retail stuff online to offset it but more work for little return.. additionally the small guy doesnt print white daily so we are flushing white down the drain to keep the machine going "its a lose lose senario for the small home base dtg business..

If white ink pretreat was cut the dtg guy could gain more market share, be more competitive because like it or not we are in competition with these folks.. additionally two of these small screeners i know have dtg in the corner for the same reasons i do, and one even uses it to print samples to down sell dtg against screen print!! !! It looks like most dtg dealers are not seeing the big picture and or catering to the larger contract multiple machine established business dtgers.. maybe the sales guys need to get in the car and go visit with these upstarts and see exactly whats going on? maybe thats what your missing? i wouldnt consider it me complaining but more on the lines of informational for those that want to take the dtg dive, and i can tell you i made more money in the first week in comparrison to dtg in a month and a half all things considered.. I would like dtg to be the only thing i do but i see this impossible given the circumstances with ink cost and screen print competition.. don, printing isnt my main source of income as i could not support my suroundings until further growth but we are working on this gradually my wife runs this primarily "the sales" and equals some late nights/week ends occasionally.. we need to see the ink cost come down to see dtg a viable source of income, then i would add more personnel.. the reality is screen print pulls in way more than dtg currently given the cost senario and production capability vs time alloted..it just fits better and i blame ink cost for knocking dtg out of loop


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> The problem is that too many people are chasing down bad business.


Amen. Not quite sure how we as distributors can prevent folks from doing this. Lower ink prices might help on this - but so would lower garment prices, lower machine prices, lower labor costs, lower rent, etc. Reality is that pricing should be set based on your costs, if you lose a job because your price was too high it means that it would not be have been profitable for you. If you don't lose jobs based on pricing sometimes - it means that your prices are too low. 

The argument about ink price for screen printing versus direct to garment isn't quite fair. You will not use equal volumes of each to create the same design. All analog inks will be much cheaper than inkjet inks as they do not have to meet anywhere near the same tolerance levels. 

Jeff has asked for a Walmart/K-Mart of the direct to garment ink world - the ink manufacturers will in turn ask for a Walmart/K-Mart demand for their product to justify Walmart/K-Mart pricing. Kind of a catch 22 - but it is the same way with all specialty inks (look at pricing on solvent & eco solvent inks 10 years ago versus now). When direct to garment inks get to $100 retail per liter across the board we will also see very low support printers that sell for lower prices. When this happens the Kinko's, Office Depot's, Walmarts & the like will all begin printing shirts onsite as will the moderate size decorated garment consumers. It is a choice to purchase new technology in the earlier stages (more costly and more challenging) when the potential for profits are much higher - or wait until you have to have the technology because everyone else does and margins are minimal because the output is commoditized.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Amen. Not quite sure how we as distributors can prevent folks from doing this. Lower ink prices might help on this - but so would lower garment prices, lower machine prices, lower labor costs, lower rent, etc. Reality is that pricing should be set based on your costs, if you lose a job because your price was too high it means that it would not be have been profitable for you. If you don't lose jobs based on pricing sometimes - it means that your prices are too low.
> 
> The argument about ink price for screen printing versus direct to garment isn't quite fair. You will not use equal volumes of each to create the same design. All analog inks will be much cheaper than inkjet inks as they do not have to meet anywhere near the same tolerance levels.
> 
> Jeff has asked for a Walmart/K-Mart of the direct to garment ink world - the ink manufacturers will in turn ask for a Walmart/K-Mart demand for their product to justify Walmart/K-Mart pricing. Kind of a catch 22 - but it is the same way with all specialty inks (look at pricing on solvent & eco solvent inks 10 years ago versus now). When direct to garment inks get to $100 retail per liter across the board we will also see very low support printers that sell for lower prices. When this happens the Kinko's, Office Depot's, Walmarts & the like will all begin printing shirts onsite as will the moderate size decorated garment consumers. It is a choice to purchase new technology in the earlier stages (more costly and more challenging) when the potential for profits are much higher - or wait until you have to have the technology because everyone else does and margins are minimal because the output is commoditized.


Guess ill wait for these cost reductions then, along with many others.. Heck screen printing has been around since moby **** was a minow, and if i can make a decent profit now on screen print, cant wait till dtg is in the same state this isnt exactly a new technolgy 8-10 years in? seems a tired no change/advancement industry regarding consumable cost!! bet theres quite a few printers have been sold since then and much higher demand of ink from its inception! wheres the cost drop in consumables? just more suppliers competing for the profit maybe this is why those margins stay high, to many middle men/ third party sellers taking a piece of the pie keeping ink cost up? theres alot of room to move on this, maybe the suppliers are not confident in its survival and are taking what they can?


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

I like the conspiracy theories, seems like you think that all of the distributors of the ink get together on some remote island and plot to take over the world by fixing dtg ink prices. Next thing you know we will see an Occupy DTG Street movement!

To clarify, white ink printing with Epson-based direct to garment printers was introduced at the Atlanta ISS show in October 2005 & didn't really start selling until first quarter 2006. White ink for printers other than the Fast-T Jet was not available until late 2006-early 2007 [US Screen had a one year exclusive on the product] with the first installs of non-T-Jet machines with white ink not coming until second quarter 2007. We are really less than five years into the technology - not 8-10 as you infer. In regards to street price of inks - they have come down 30% or so over the last 3-4 years. Average price for ink for Epson-based machines three years ago was in the $350-400 per liter range, now it is in the $250 range - most of that reduction has come at the expense of profits to the distributor, not in price reductions from the manufacturer.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> I like the conspiracy theories, seems like you think that all of the distributors of the ink get together on some remote island and plot to take over the world by fixing dtg ink prices. Next thing you know we will see an Occupy DTG Street movement!
> 
> To clarify, white ink printing with Epson-based direct to garment printers was introduced at the Atlanta ISS show in October 2005 & didn't really start selling until first quarter 2006. White ink for printers other than the Fast-T Jet was not available until late 2006-early 2007 [US Screen had a one year exclusive on the product] with the first installs of non-T-Jet machines with white ink not coming until second quarter 2007. We are really less than five years into the technology - not 8-10 as you infer. In regards to street price of inks - they have come down 30% or so over the last 3-4 years. Average price for ink for Epson-based machines three years ago was in the $350-400 per liter range, now it is in the $250 range - most of that reduction has come at the expense of profits to the distributor, not in price reductions from the manufacturer.


 I love it conspiracy theory!
call it what you want but smoke and mirrors dont work with me im a little smarter than that..just a little Im basing my info on my knowlege of whoesale ink cost from various suppliers!! and really its no sweat off my back, as i will simply grow and add equipt in the screen print atmosphere! where you can currently make a few bucks!!! then revisit dtg in the future as consumable cost come down to earth!! JMHO.. I have proven to myself theres no doubt a guy with a small press can far exceed profits realized by a dtg machine at far less entry equipt/consumable cost, this is your competetion aswell!! as most come to realize the bread and butter is in the 1-3 color simple stuff not the multi color dream coat dtgs, tauted strength..IMO I just feel dtg has a hard road to travel at current consumable cost! call me a pessamist but everyone needs to make a decent buck vs investment...

Thanks for the history timeline of the dtg clarification!


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Jeff,

Screen print press sales have drastically declined the past 6 years - far more new direct to garment printers are sold than screen print presses. I don't really consider screen print presses (which we also sell) as competition - because they are not when both are properly positioned in the marketplace. They are simply different decoration tools - as you have learned. I always try to help guide my customers to the best decoration method for their needs. You would be amazed at the number of inquiries that are dead set against screen printing - no matter how well it fits their needs. Lastly, a well set up 6/6 manual press with good belt dryer, flash cure unit, exposure unit, washout sink, printer & RIP for film positives, decent mix of screens and inks as well as training can easily cost you in the same area as a mid-priced Epson-based direct to garment printer.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Screen print press sales have drastically declined the past 6 years - far more new direct to garment printers are sold than screen print presses. I don't really consider screen print presses (which we also sell) as competition - because they are not when both are properly positioned in the marketplace. They are simply different decoration tools - as you have learned. I always try to help guide my customers to the best decoration method for their needs. You would be amazed at the number of inquiries that are dead set against screen printing - no matter how well it fits their needs. Lastly, a well set up 6/6 manual press with good belt dryer, flash cure unit, exposure unit, washout sink, printer & RIP for film positives, decent mix of screens and inks as well as training can easily cost you in the same area as a mid-priced Epson-based direct to garment printer.


Interesting.. Are these numbers listed between dtg/screen print just within in your company or was there some survey done to calculate these? 

you can screen with much less equipt starting out than what you have listed and cheaper presses, you can also add the auto pretreater, conveyor dryer, heat presses, humidy climate controlled needs for dtg and the seperate pretreat space etc, and realize dtgs purchase price is not what the ownership cost is like printheads/capping stations/boards etc "another thread" for that matter, but the real difference is the profit margins from this screen press vs dtg set up, and screen printing on that set up will far exceed production and profit of a dtg given eqaul cost set up as you have it.. then we get right back to consumable cost and screen print wins hands down.. 

I agree not alot of folks like the idea of screen printing with its mess, including me at first.. to realize what we wanted/needed to make and compete we had to make this move.. the misconception is that dtg printing is easy,clean and hassle free which is far from reality especially with white ink in the mix of things pretreat etc.. everyone learns eventually although!!


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Add the fact that in most urban areas it is not lawful to operate a screen printing operation in a residential area (at least that is the case here in Florida). That is a huge deciding factor for many urbanites.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

Starting to sound like the old chicken or egg debate. On one hand, you have people stating I am not going to be able to do more dtg business till the ink price comes down. The other hand you have distributors saying the price can come down when you do more business (i.e. the big online guys). Yet there are really no guidelines or numbers from either side as to their merits to help bridge the gap. What does a dtg printer mean by "doing more business" in terms of the additional amount of ink they will purchase in a month, quarter or a year? If Don's numbers are correct that the average user goes through a liter of ink a month, then what is the increase going to be? 2 liters per a month? 5 liters per a month? Many of the manufacturers / distributors already off bulk buying discounts that would cut the cost per a print down. The question is how many dtg users are buying in bulk (whether it is a multiple liters of white ink or 10 cartridges / case of cartridges at a time) or are still buying at the lower quantity? Any dtg printers willing to make a minimum monthly purchase agreement with a distributor that accounts for the increased usage at a lower price? Willing to bet at least some of the distributors would entertain this option if someone approached them with a good deal.

Bottom line, I don't see this being resolved unless it is a win-win-win relationship. The first win is the equipment manufacturers must have a product that will allow them to drop their overall cost (don't underestimate the cost of tech support and how the lack of it can affect sales). In my opinion, this only comes with reliable equipment and intelligent users (which I hate to say it, but there are a lot of people that are "playing" with this equipment that should not be until they educate themselves on the entire process - artwork, pretreating, maintenance,...). Second win is the ink manufacturers being able to make the product in a much larger size. Like it or not, it is inappropriate to compare the consumable costs for screen printing or solvent printing because the numbers are so far apart in the amount of equipment. Third win is the dtg printers are able to sell their services appropriate and differentiate themselves when necessary. 

Market conditions will balance out the relationship between all these parties over time... but dtg printing is still a very young process. I do agree with Don that if dtg consumables get anywhere close to what people want in this thread, the level of competition is going to skyrocket and will create a double-edge sword for those companies that don't have unique artwork and only compete on price.

Mark


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

DAGuide said:


> Starting to sound like the old chicken or egg debate. On one hand, you have people stating I am not going to be able to do more dtg business till the ink price comes down. The other hand you have distributors saying the price can come down when you do more business (i.e. the big online guys). Yet there are really no guidelines or numbers from either side as to their merits to help bridge the gap. What does a dtg printer mean by "doing more business" in terms of the additional amount of ink they will purchase in a month, quarter or a year? If Don's numbers are correct that the average user goes through a liter of ink a month, then what is the increase going to be? 2 liters per a month? 5 liters per a month? Many of the manufacturers / distributors already off bulk buying discounts that would cut the cost per a print down. The question is how many dtg users are buying in bulk (whether it is a multiple liters of white ink or 10 cartridges / case of cartridges at a time) or are still buying at the lower quantity? Any dtg printers willing to make a minimum monthly purchase agreement with a distributor that accounts for the increased usage at a lower price? Willing to bet at least some of the distributors would entertain this option if someone approached them with a good deal.
> 
> Bottom line, I don't see this being resolved unless it is a win-win-win relationship. The first win is the equipment manufacturers must have a product that will allow them to drop their overall cost (don't underestimate the cost of tech support and how the lack of it can affect sales). In my opinion, this only comes with reliable equipment and intelligent users (which I hate to say it, but there are a lot of people that are "playing" with this equipment that should not be until they educate themselves on the entire process - artwork, pretreating, maintenance,...). Second win is the ink manufacturers being able to make the product in a much larger size. Like it or not, it is inappropriate to compare the consumable costs for screen printing or solvent printing because the numbers are so far apart in the amount of equipment. Third win is the dtg printers are able to sell their services appropriate and differentiate themselves when necessary.
> 
> ...


There cant be any fair resolve based on the fact that wholesale ink costs cant be disscussed, the printer could post all there numbers costs and are expected to do so etc, talk till there blue in the face but this accomplishes nothing without seeing the whole picture "as far as a collective bargaining agreement would go" thats just where it must stand until the market demands something different in this respect or a "giant" ink retailer enters the game.. jmho That and or a oem starts a new trend... highly unlikely


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

german13 said:


> There cant be any fair resolve based on the fact that wholesale ink costs cant be disscussed, the printer could post all there numbers costs and are expected to do so etc, talk till there blue in the face but this accomplishes nothing without seeing the whole picture "as far as a collective bargaining agreement would go" thats just where it must stand until the market demands something different in this respect or a "giant" ink retailer enters the game.. jmho That and or a oem starts a new trend... highly unlikely


Not sure I agree with this. Companies make minimum purchase agreements all the time without knowing the costs or selling prices of the other party. With dtg users charging a different price to their customers depending on their geographical location, target markets, competition, amount of ink usage and other important factors... the cost per ink could differ from one dtg user to another. 

However, in some cases... some business / marketing plans are more suitable for another type of decorating technique. In other cases, dtg printing is more appropriate.

Mark


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Jeff,

We can't & shouldn't discuss distributor pricing here - anymore than you would want to hold a discussion in front of your customers of exactly what it costs you to print a t-shirt for them. I will state this, however, the lowest priced ink retailers are already selling ink below the pricing paid by the lowest volume ink retailers.


----------



## abmcdan (Sep 14, 2007)

Yes some ink resellers will make better deals based on volume. Over the years I've had a couple of these deals. Mine required buying at least 5 liters at a time but this got me prices alittle lower than published prices.

It didn't make the ink cheap but it was alittle something that helped.


----------



## ROYAL SAVAGE (Feb 18, 2009)

abmcdan said:


> Yes some ink resellers will make better deals based on volume. Over the years I've had a couple of these deals. Mine required buying at least 5 liters at a time but this got me prices alittle lower than published prices.
> 
> It didn't make the ink cheap but it was alittle something that helped.


Imagine buing $50,000.00 worth of ink and paying one price fits all. Fact of life. There is no other product I know of that doesn't get discounted. Tees do big time.


----------



## zoom_monster (Sep 20, 2006)

ROYAL SAVAGE said:


> The problem is that too many people are chasing down bad business.
> A one color tee may not be the best example but some people don't offer screen printing they only have DTG So ink really kills them.


Cheap DTG machines and people not understanding "cost" make this worse. Cheap ink will not make it better. I think that high volume users should get a better deal on ink cost. Since we are a captive audience of just a few small vendors, I'm sure they have thoughts about that.

I still say if you consider pre-press (art, film, screen) on small runs for 4CP, DTG is reasonable. Chemical companies have zero incentive to lower prices. If someone were to "legislate" that they make less percentage on their raw materials, there would be no incentive to come out with better ink. In fact, after Gen 2 inks came out and the price drop over the last few years, I doubt they're investing much in R&D. That to me, This is more problematic than high prices.

If there is a Savior that is developing ink that will stick to poly and cotton without any pretreat and will block sublimation, please step forward...don't worry about pricing, we'll ask someone else to foot the bill.....


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Don-ColDesi said:


> Jeff,
> 
> We can't & shouldn't discuss distributor pricing here - anymore than you would want to hold a discussion in front of your customers of exactly what it costs you to print a t-shirt for them. I will state this, however, the lowest priced ink retailers are already selling ink below the pricing paid by the lowest volume ink retailers.


Yep the hands are tied on this subject and why it will always be a mystery.. I have to keep myself from getting in these conversations.. there is no point, with exception of sharing your learning experience to those interested in start up dtg.. Maybe i picked the wrong end of this business, im certain i could make more selling printers and ink but couldnt bring myself to sell something i didnt believe in myself due to the end user cost involved..

My intent was to share my experience as a start-up and that we could not realize a sustainable income due to screen print competition and IMO the cost of dtg consumables.. this is just our experience, in our towns market.. the senario has dictated a biz model change from the intended model that was needed if we intended to compete.. I can also say i have heard this same senario a million times over from others.. I think andy said it best, until the cost comes down on consumables dtg will only get the screen printers scraps and fill the niche markets...

I will leave it at that for now!!!


----------



## Don-ColDesi (Oct 18, 2006)

Jeff,

Thanks for your input. I'm sorry that direct to garment did not work out for you. I do sleep good at night as I see the other side, the folks who have successful businesses and are happy with the process. Problem is that most of the successful folks are not forum dwellers - the few that are often get labeled as "plants" for a specific brand. I'll hold you to the cheap printer/cheap commitment to buy. Of course when that becomes a reality companies like Best Buy & Office Depot will be selling them instead.


----------

