I recently had to buy a printer. I do civil engineering for a utility company and need the ability to print in color on 11"x17" paper. I looked into the Epson Eco-Tank printers but they are very expensive. Based on my printing volume it would take me years to make up the cost difference between the lower end printers that use cartridges vs the eco-tank. It might have made more sense if I didn’t need the 11"x17" capability. Unfortunately, I think this is where all printer companies will end up going. Hopefully I’ll be retired and no longer need to print by the time this mentality takes over the entire business.
The reason for that is, that printers are usually sold via the razor blade principle: gift them the razor, sell them the blades at twice the price. With no overpriced cartridges to substitute the printers they usually make a loss on, they have to increase the price of the printer.
For A4 paper, the Eco-Tank printers actually aren’t much more expensive than regular printers though.
Though honestly, if I had to buy a printer, it would be a laser printer for sure. Yes, they are a little more expensive but I print very little and every inkjet I’ve owned has dried up between using them and having to buy new ink cartridges for every print job is wasteful and expensive…
If I only needed black and white without 11x17 capability I would definitely have gotten a laser printer. A color laser printer with 11x17 capability start north of $700. The only Epson eco-tank model I could find in stock with 11x17 was over $1000. I bought the workforce model that did what I needed for $200. I know I’m going to be gouged on the ink but I just couldn’t swing the upfront cost. Plus with my low volume of printing an $80 set of cartridges will last about 6-9 months.
I recently had to buy a printer. I do civil engineering for a utility company and need the ability to print in color on 11"x17" paper. I looked into the Epson Eco-Tank printers but they are very expensive. Based on my printing volume it would take me years to make up the cost difference between the lower end printers that use cartridges vs the eco-tank. It might have made more sense if I didn’t need the 11"x17" capability. Unfortunately, I think this is where all printer companies will end up going. Hopefully I’ll be retired and no longer need to print by the time this mentality takes over the entire business.
The reason for that is, that printers are usually sold via the razor blade principle: gift them the razor, sell them the blades at twice the price. With no overpriced cartridges to substitute the printers they usually make a loss on, they have to increase the price of the printer.
For A4 paper, the Eco-Tank printers actually aren’t much more expensive than regular printers though.
Though honestly, if I had to buy a printer, it would be a laser printer for sure. Yes, they are a little more expensive but I print very little and every inkjet I’ve owned has dried up between using them and having to buy new ink cartridges for every print job is wasteful and expensive…
If I only needed black and white without 11x17 capability I would definitely have gotten a laser printer. A color laser printer with 11x17 capability start north of $700. The only Epson eco-tank model I could find in stock with 11x17 was over $1000. I bought the workforce model that did what I needed for $200. I know I’m going to be gouged on the ink but I just couldn’t swing the upfront cost. Plus with my low volume of printing an $80 set of cartridges will last about 6-9 months.