Any source on that? I find it hard to believe that something as commonplace as a printer, a technology that has been around for so many decades, is hard to manufacture profitably.
Maybe I'm wrong, since I have nothing to go by besides a gut feeling mixed with assumptions and a sprinkling of common sense, so I would love a source.
The only scenario I can think of which makes sense to me is that making printers is a patent minefield, making it difficult/impossible for a competitor to come in and disrupt anything (plus it's not a very attractive industry anyways). There's probably also a lot of anti-competitive stuff going on too, like supplier contracts that prohibit working with other printer companies, etc.
The problem isn't manufacturing. You can perfectly manufacture a great printer, but when HP and the like are selling printers at loss to make money off cartgridges, many consumers will simply buy the cheaper one: HP.
Sure, you'll have some smarter customers who made their research and picked you, but it will probably not enough of a margin to compensate against a giant like HP.
It doesn’t matter how cheaply you make it, HP can make it just as cheaply… and then they will sell it for even less because they sell at a loss.
You then have two printers, one selling for a lot more than the other but having all this ink shenanigans… and consumers will buy the ink shenanigans every time, because the sticker price is all that matters.
Maybe I'm wrong, since I have nothing to go by besides a gut feeling mixed with assumptions and a sprinkling of common sense, so I would love a source.
The only scenario I can think of which makes sense to me is that making printers is a patent minefield, making it difficult/impossible for a competitor to come in and disrupt anything (plus it's not a very attractive industry anyways). There's probably also a lot of anti-competitive stuff going on too, like supplier contracts that prohibit working with other printer companies, etc.