Since the dawn of A3 and production machines capable of copying or printing an 11×17 sized page, we have dealt with the market demand of counting this larger page as one 8.5×11 sized page. It is not hard to understand the ramifications of this marketing only tactic. Measuring the REAL effects of this is much more difficult.
Most A3 devices have the ability to count this large page as either one page or two in Segments 1-5. Now, Production Print customers (segments 6-7) have dictated the need for most, if not all manufacturers to default the page counter to one 8.5×11 page per 11×17 page produced. Keep in mind the cost “basis” has not changed; it remains based on LTR size.
Until the advent of color, most dealer ERP systems only billed on the total meter; now most ERPs can bill one amount for black and white, another for color, and even a different amount for scans. So in practice it is possible to set up the recording of 11×17 page counts and bill accordingly. But we all know that is not happening. In fact, very few dealers even collect the page counter that reflects the number of 11×17 pages produced and this “oversight” continues even as manufacturers state that costs are based on LTR size.
There is little doubt that this is a precedence set in stone by years of mismarketing and as such isn’t likely to change anytime soon. But after detailed discussions with representatives of Ricoh Americas Corporation, we at BEI Services believe it is time we start an industry dialog about this issue. Not that we’re delusional enough to think we’ll change this process, but more to discuss the importance of quantifying the data as to make better business decisions. If you are not “converting” meter reads from all your MIF that is set to single-click 11×17, then your CCP (cost per page) analysis will “exaggerate” your costs and “understate” any/all part yield analysis. I am sure you will agree this will take you down the wrong path.
Cost per page charges have consistently been getting pressured downward year over year. In part because devices are becoming more reliable, in part because dealers have begun to recognize the impact of technician efficiency on their bottom line. This downward margin pressure is making the 11×17 phenomenon much more severe. There are numerous reasons for the high percentage of 11×17 usages in the production arena. One being that A3 customers who produce a large number of 11×17 pages are in fact cutting them to get two 8.5×11 pages, so they are getting the toner and wear and tear on the equipment for half price. So if you are charging .008 per page for example, the customers are actually paying .004 per 11×17 page. Here is the math: If the customer produces 1000 – 8.5×11 pages at .008, that is 8 dollars in revenue, if they also produce 10,000 pages of 11×17, they are paying 80 dollars, but are getting 160 dollars in value. So they are billed for 11,000 pages at .008 and paid 88 dollars. They actually got 21,000 pages for that same 88 dollars, which is .004.
It is safe to say that virtually every 11×17 single click page is “potentially” a money loser. But most dealers may not be totally aware what percent of their total pages are 11×17 pages produced by their customers and as a result cannot begin to quantify the loss.
We at BEI Services would like to encourage all of our customers and everyone who services A3 devices to set up a specific 11×17 meter in their ERP and begin requiring this meter to be reported on every service event. This will begin the process of collecting data that can then be used to quantify the volume of these pages and the impact on CPP and a dealer’s profitability.
