For desktop printers, it's never going to be cheaper to buy new printheads but for the expensive ones - like the 4400 - it's probably cheaper than a new printer.
For desktop printers, it's never going to be cheaper to buy new printheads but for the expensive ones - like the 4400 - it's probably cheaper than a new printer.
yes i know but i wonder what make this so dear?? if just the head cost this much then how muc is th rest of the bits?? how comes £150 printer got heads worth £130???
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
<-- How To Print Stuff BLOG
It's pretty obvious. Epson don't make money on the printers, they make money on the inks. When you buy the printer, you're buying it at below-cost because Epson expect to make more profits on the ink than they'll ever make on the printers.
When it comes to buying a replacement part (like the printhead), you're buying a part (usually from a third-party seller) and the cost must cover production costs plus profits.
This is why you can buy third-party ink at £10 for 400ml but OEM ink costs £10 for 10ml. Epson (and HP/Canon/all-the-rest) make all their money on the ink - not on the printer.
This is also why, if you buy an expensive printer (like the 4400), the ink "per ml" is generally cheaper than it is for a desktop printer. They've already made a chunk of profit on the printer, so they don't need to make quite so much on the ink.
Laser printers do the same thing these days. When I bought my first colour laser printer, it cost me £999 - the first colour laser to come below £1000. The ink cost next to nothing in comparison to today's ink. You'd get 10,000 pages for £80. Today colour laser printers can cost ~£100 but you only get 2,000 pages (at most) for £60, which is more expensive to run than an inkjet! They're making their money on the toner, not the printer.
Another example is the Epson Aculaser printers. The printer costs less than £200, but the photoconductor unit will cost you about the same when it expires. The printer is sold at a loss - the parts are not.
It's a ludicrous situation to be in because it encourages the culture of throwaway printers. After all, why maintain a printer if it's cheaper to just chuck it in the bin and buy a new one? Not exactly environmentally-friendly.
we run an epson 4880, we had nothing but trouble with it from day 1, it was replaced twice then epson cottoned on and refused service, under the terms of the warranty you are allowed to use after market ink but any damage caused by such would not be covered by warranty, they said printhead was capoot and that was caused by aftermarket ink, we did numerous headcleans and couple of power cleans and we recovered the system, it has now run faultlessly for over 12 months, we switch it on in the morning and switch it off at night and touch wood we have not had any further trouble with it. thanks to all the help and support from all at novachrome anglesey we are trouble free printing now, wander how the capoot printhead mended itself?
thanks epson! i know which printer we will replace it with when it finally dies and it won't be epson
My local computer shop also happen to be an Epson service centre so I'm going to drop it in there and let them look at it. At worst, it's going to cost me £300 for a new print head plus £40 fitting, which isn't too bad. It's run really well for 4 years.