# Texas Original Graphics --> Sawgrass



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

Has anyone else been to TOG's website of lately? Here is a direct link to the page that talks about the settlement of the lawsuit - Letter to TOG customers.

I guess the Courts held up the Sawgrass patent.


----------



## COEDS (Oct 4, 2006)

I feel that is a travsty of justice. How can a company copyright the method of printing when they were not in existence when the method was discovered. Big money and Attorneys have ruined this country. I will never support sawgrass because , I feel they are a monopoly, How sad. ....JB


----------



## charles95405 (Feb 1, 2007)

I was just going to post this...and Mark beat me!!...I have been following this for some time and since the info on TOG site made references to 'later this summer' I sort of felt this would happen. They did the same for Rotech (2005) and for Artainium...(2003 or so) It is not the 'method of printing' as I understand it but the formulation of the inks...in any case....big $ runs down the little guy


----------



## COEDS (Oct 4, 2006)

charles95405 said:


> I was just going to post this...and Mark beat me!!...I have been following this for some time and since the info on TOG site made references to 'later this summer' I sort of felt this would happen. They did the same for Rotech (2005) and for Artainium...(2003 or so) It is not the 'method of printing' as I understand it but the formulation of the inks...in any case....big $ runs down the little guy


Slam the little guy. ..... JB


----------



## charles95405 (Feb 1, 2007)

I guess I can save some $$...since Sawgrass will support a 25% reduction in price for Artainium for a year and since I have Artainium CIS...that would be about $35 a bag discount...I was sure hoping for a different outcome.


----------



## COEDS (Oct 4, 2006)

charles95405 said:


> I guess I can save some $$...since Sawgrass will support a 25% reduction in price for Artainium for a year and since I have Artainium CIS...that would be about $35 a bag discount...I was sure hoping for a different outcome.


I plan to save money too.I will no longer do Sublimation.I can't in good concious support a company that destroyed the chance for others to compete with them. I guess it's ok for Sawgrass to be a monopoly in the Sublimation arena. I'm ashamed of our court system that allowed this to happen. ..... JB


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

I think there are some things that are important to remember. First, this was a settlement according to the TOG website. That means that at some time during this whole trial that has been going on for years... the two parties came to an agreement. Thus, the settlement is outside the court's decision process. We don't really know what pressures were put on either of the parties or their reasoning to come to this agreement. I am sure people are going to speculate though.

Also, it was not that long ago when Sawgrass was "the small guy" and worked their way up. I actually got the opportunity to meet with one of the individuals that helped with the patents that Sawgrass owns. He is an incredible smart guy. They took a chance and invested money in creating the inks - which is what I am told the patent is about, not the process. They did the same thing that any of us could have done if we had the knowledge and were willing to invest the money. We have to respect the willingness of companies to do Research and Development if we are going to want to stay on the cutting edge of things. The only real way to reward these companies is through the use of patents.

I am not defending Sawgrass, but they have created partnerships with other companies like BASF, Nazdar/Lyson,... to allow them to manufacture dye sub ink. So, they do work with other companies under some type of restrictions. Just some things to consider.

Mark


----------



## Susie (Oct 19, 2007)

Damn. When does the patent expire?


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

I am not sure if anyone really knows (but maybe senior management at Sawgrass and the patent office) because they have a ton of patents. If you do a search in the USPTO's website for Sawgrass Systems as the Assignee, you will get this list:

- Patent Database Search Results: AN/"Sawgrass Systems" in US Patent Collection

The earliest ones expire in 2010. Others were filed just a couple of years ago. So it depends on what is being used in the different patents that they own to create sublimation ink. I don't have a chemist background and the stuff in the patents is pretty detailed.


----------



## charles95405 (Feb 1, 2007)

The appears from the info at TOG website. Letter to TOG customers click on bottom of the page to see..

And I agree with Mark...this was a settlement between adversaries and not a court ordered decision..as in most cases...money is surely the deciding factor for TOG to settle


----------



## Ramsee1 (Mar 24, 2008)

Unfortunately the way our legal system is set up, it's not about who's right or wrong. It's about who can afford to fight the longest. I completely agree this violates the antitrust laws and if sawgrass gets big enough, it would behoove them to have someone else around (read microsoft and apple) so they don't get split up. 
And on the other hand they absolutely have every right to defend what they've worked hard for. 

The problem I have is the prices they charge. The markup is absolutely insane and that is the real issue at hand and what makes monopolies so dangerous. And I am sure prices of ink will go up to cover their attorney's fees.


----------



## plan b (Feb 21, 2007)

I agree with ramsee1, we are paying for the law suits that have happened worldwide so it realy doesn't matter to sawgrass in the end they just pass cost to us, thats a shame.


----------



## COEDS (Oct 4, 2006)

Why is this Monopoly Legal and others are not allowed. I think this is just plain wrong. .... JB


----------



## Ramsee1 (Mar 24, 2008)

If I'm not mistaken, there's still room for manufacturers to make sublimation ink as long as they use a different technology to make them, or if they use the same technology, they have to dramatically improve upon the process. Regardless, as stated above, once the patent runs it's course, it's fair game again.
Usually you can't stop someone from making a similar product. But in this case, it looks like they've patented so many things, it's difficult for other companies to get around them. I think that's where the monopoly starts to come into play. 
Anyone remember last year McDonalds wanted exclusive rights and usage to making a "sandwich". rediculous.


----------



## milabix (Apr 18, 2008)

COEDS said:


> I plan to save money too.I will no longer do Sublimation. ..... JB


Sorry to hear that, but there are alternatives. Find a used or refurbished Epson 9000, 9600 or 9800 printer (you can often find them for less than $2000). These are 44" printers, nothing however prevents you from printing on 17" rolls of paper. Once you have a "wide format printer" as defined by Sawgrass as being above 42" in width you can buy ink from a number of other ink manufacturers such as US Sublimation, BASF, Kiian etc... and their prices are significantly lower than the prices for desktop printers. The price of paper is also lower when you buy it in rolls... If you do the math based on the ammount of ink you use on a monthly basis I am sure you will realize that in most cases you can payoff the extra cost of the printer in a manner of months...

The way I figured it is as follows:
220ml bag of AR Tainium ink $140 or $0.63 x ml ($636 x liter).

1 liter of wide format ink about $220 with little variation between manufacturers ($0.22 x ml).

That is a $416 difference per liter. If you use 5 liters of ink (4 220ml bags x month) in 6 months you have paid for the used printer and in 12 months you would have paid for a new printer, after that you would just be poketing that ammount of money in profits! 

Of course you need to do the math based on your actual ink consumption to see if it makes sense for you.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

Mike is right. Once you go to a printer large enough, you can use other inks that have been licensed by Sawgrass. You just need to look at your overall production and determine if you want to invest in the larger printer and bulk feed cartridges. Each person would have to determine what their ROI is on the printer. If you are not printing that much, it might not be the best thing to do.

By the way, I think your cost on a 220 ML bag of ArTainium might be off. That sounds really close to the cost of a 110 ML bag from what I remember. But I understand the concept you are talking about.

Mark


----------



## digi168 (Oct 14, 2007)

I think you are right about the pricing that $140 is for a 110ml bag, which means you save even more going to a large format printer, but if you know where to get 220ml bags for $140 please let me know.


----------



## CUSTOM UK (Jun 28, 2008)

*My understanding of the patent (I may be wrong), is that it applies to sublimation ink being used in small format printers?*


*I initially used sublimation ink designed for large format printers, with no problems at all. It didn't clog and gave out good results.*


*We have a different legal system in Europe, where restrictive trade practices are dealt with quite harshly. *

*Maybe it's just me, but how did a company develop a philosophy, where it potentially alienates and criminalises its customers ??*


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

I would just like to thank Milibrix for a work around that not only makes sense is alot cheaper than his own quote just found an epson 9000 for 300 bucks. My biggest question is why do the sublimatealbe shirts cost 5 bucks what are they made out of? I thought that any 50/50 shirt would work. But shows how much I don't understand yet. ANY way thank you for a work around. And thank you for saving me a few thousand.


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

Sorry about the name Milabix. :>


----------



## CUSTOM UK (Jun 28, 2008)

Other brands of sublimation ink are being produced in volume in far eastern countries where the Sawgrass patent counts for zilch. These will potentially flood the market unless fair competition is opened up in the sublimation ink sector.

However politely it's worded, prices of sublimation ink are way off beat at the moment, as are the prices of most sublimation garments.


----------



## sid (Oct 6, 2007)

What I find interesting is every distributor sells the ink a the same price, no discount. Think of it, if a distributor discounted the ink would you start buying other things from them. If Sawgrass is controlling the price of their ink by forcing the distributor to sell at a certain price it is illegal. If all the distributors got together and decided to sell the ink at the same price thats illegal. So I ask the question again, "Why is everyone selling Sawgrass ink at the same price?"


----------



## CUSTOM UK (Jun 28, 2008)

It would appear Sawgrass has also been getting EBay to remove listings on EBay UK, unless the seller can prove the sublimation tanks are filled with Sawgrass ink. This is private individuals we are talking about, selling their own secondhand printers. This reason has been specifically stated in at least three relisted items in the last six weeks. There is also a powerseller on there stating that Sawgrass has intervened in the past, even though they are selling *unfilled* sublimation systems??


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

Unfortunatly it is not price collusion if your license says you must sell at that particular price. IE Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony Playstation. Becouse they controll the patent for the product they sell it with a lisence that states the retailer must sell it at a particular price or must ask to discount. Most of the discounts can only be free offers that is why right know if you buy a set from many of the resellers of sawgrass you can get one or two bags free. If all of the resellers got together and desided to do this sawgrass would simply sell direct until the reseller had enough heat from the guys that need the ink for daily sells. Wish it wasn't so I don't like price fixing. But there it is.


----------



## CUSTOM UK (Jun 28, 2008)

By making the cost of sublimation ink (and consumables) so high, it creates a product which is expensive to produce when compared to other print methods. I have no doubt that people will eventually start to import sublimation ink direct from the far eastern countries for use in their printers and just ignore the Sawgrass monopoly. That will disasterous for the distributors, but they are the very ones that should confront the people that are making them charge such high prices. 

A lot of people are put off sublimation by the high costs involved. Some people within the industry are doing zilch to help that situation.


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

The only way the price goes down is not buying the product or producing with it. If you buy from the middle east you are violating the patents for production methods if you put it on soft media. Then Sawgrass can come after you. It's counter intuitive but not just the ink process has been patented by them also the production when you buy there product they are passing the right to do with as you want, through the rule of first purchase. But go around them and they can come after you. Just don't use the process and go with laser for hard media and other ink for soft and use only cotton. Soon some company will legaly reverse engineer or signifigantly improve, or add a single feature no one has thought of and the game of competition will be on. I am sure that once hp and cannon realize there is true market that they are not filling they will invest in new process tech to fill the hole unless the market is never big enough then why would they. I figure soon an on demand print process will come out that puts down as much ink as screen then we will truely have the wearability everyone wants. But untill the the distributors will continue to pass on the cost, becouse they are selling the product.


----------



## CUSTOM UK (Jun 28, 2008)

The sublimation process appears to have been around decades before Sawgrass even existed. Sooner ot later some judge is going to wake up, smell the coffee and reverse a patent decision that is blatantly wrong. People like Texas Original Graphics had the guts to challenge these wrongs. What's to stop Sawgrass saying you can only print on products approved by them, in the future?

If far eastern countries are now producing heat presses, vinyl cutters and inks, it would be fair to assume that they will also at some stage, start selling finished sublimation garments. If it isn't careful, the sublimation industry in the west, could soon price itself out of the market.

Other printing technologies are moving forward. I predict the price of DTG systems will become much more affordable in the near future. There are people on this forum, that have even made their own, from inkjet printers. Once DTG becomes more widespread and secondhand models become available, what will become of the sublimation tee market then?


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

Once those price come down or an alternative product then Sawgrass will drop there prices;.>
Until then now one can do anything other than organize a mass boycott but that also boycotts,
there pocketbook. And there is nothing to stop Sawgrass from specifying products on the basis of compatibility. lol Then people would really get mad. I with you not against you but I will be receiving an epson 9600 and going around the issue and cuting my cost by half up front. Would have done sooner but until I saw the post from milabix I didn't know that option existed. So I bought my products from another producer for the last 9 months. In a week I can stop. Thanks again milabi:.>


----------



## milabix (Apr 18, 2008)

Pyroshouse said:


> In a week I can stop. Thanks again milabi:.>


Happy I could help, let me know if you need help with that 9600...


----------



## voicis (Feb 4, 2009)

Hello,
which price will be good for You all to buy sublimation ink? for example for 100ml?


----------



## Pyroshouse (Mar 4, 2008)

That is a pretty easy question the ink price has to become competitive with other white only processes. Ie Direct to garment, Eco-Solvent, heat transfer ink (standard injet printer). You look at those other methods and you will find the ink is only about 15cents per square foot to 65cents, where as dye sub in small format runs up over $2.oo per square foot. But to add insult to injury all of the other soft methods work on 100% cotton shirt, that only cost $1.00, were as a 100percent polyester shirt is 4.25-6.5. So minimum print per white shirt is 1.25 vs. dye sub at 6.25 for a one square foot print. I however print large format so my dye sub ink cost is much more in line with competitive pricing, this is an effect of saw grass realizing they had to make compromises in pricing to keep large companies paying them. With that said I only use it for hard substrates because they are price commutatively with other print methods ie laser for mugs, tile. For shirts I now use eco solvent transfer or jet pro with heat transfer rated inkjet ink. My production cost for a white shirt is around 1.85-2.5 depending on print density and cost of shirt at the time. lol

so to answer your question 100mil $20 dollars per color or 20cents per mil, Which btw is what I pay large format.


Hope that helps


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

milabix said:


> Sorry to hear that, but there are alternatives. Find a used or refurbished Epson 9000, 9600 or 9800 printer (you can often find them for less than $2000). These are 44" printers, nothing however prevents you from printing on 17" rolls of paper. Once you have a "wide format printer" as defined by Sawgrass as being above 42" in width you can buy ink from a number of other ink manufacturers such as US Sublimation, BASF, Kiian etc... and their prices are significantly lower than the prices for desktop printers. The price of paper is also lower when you buy it in rolls... If you do the math based on the ammount of ink you use on a monthly basis I am sure you will realize that in most cases you can payoff the extra cost of the printer in a manner of months...
> 
> The way I figured it is as follows:
> 220ml bag of AR Tainium ink $140 or $0.63 x ml ($636 x liter).
> ...


Thats what i was talking about in my post 
great info dude


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

Pyroshouse said:


> That is a pretty easy question the ink price has to become competitive with other white only processes. Ie Direct to garment, Eco-Solvent, heat transfer ink (standard injet printer). You look at those other methods and you will find the ink is only about 15cents per square foot to 65cents, where as dye sub in small format runs up over $2.oo per square foot. But to add insult to injury all of the other soft methods work on 100% cotton shirt, that only cost $1.00, were as a 100percent polyester shirt is 4.25-6.5. So minimum print per white shirt is 1.25 vs. dye sub at 6.25 for a one square foot print. I however print large format so my dye sub ink cost is much more in line with competitive pricing, this is an effect of saw grass realizing they had to make compromises in pricing to keep large companies paying them. With that said I only use it for hard substrates because they are price commutatively with other print methods ie laser for mugs, tile. For shirts I now use eco solvent transfer or jet pro with heat transfer rated inkjet ink. My production cost for a white shirt is around 1.85-2.5 depending on print density and cost of shirt at the time. lol
> 
> so to answer your question 100mil $20 dollars per color or 20cents per mil, Which btw is what I pay large format.
> 
> ...


Thans so much for the info very informative 
just what i wanted t hear


----------



## jiarby (Feb 8, 2007)

you are having a conversation with a guy that has not posted here in a year... he does not care anymore.


----------

