T-Shirt Forums

T-Shirt Forums (https://www.t-shirtforums.com/)
-   Brother (https://www.t-shirtforums.com/brother/)
-   -   At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive? (https://www.t-shirtforums.com/brother/t88631.html)

dmfelder June 24th, 2009 07:55 AM

At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
So, the GT-728 is $55,000 or more. If it's true that dark shirts are, on average, $3/shirt, it seems priced way above the competition.

I know it's a different ink, but it seems Brother is like US pharmaceutical companies...charging us for their development costs.

Am I off base?

sharktees June 24th, 2009 08:03 AM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Compared to the Epson based machines its alot more but I don't think their trying to compete with those small table top machines that most people have thrown in the towel on white ink.If you compare it to the Kornit with 2 platens its atleast 150K less so if it works well I think it will be more than worth it,I really don't think its worth talking about yet untill their out in the field being used on a daily basis,that will be the only true test IMO.

kornitguy June 24th, 2009 08:07 AM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Just a thought about this,

Comparing the GT-781 to 931NDS we have,

1) about a 200k price difference.
2) about a $2 difference per print advertised
3) similar speed and quality promises

So assuming that you can afford both you need to look at the break even point of per print cost.

As advertised there is a about a 100k print break even point. If you print M-F for 1 whole year printing 385 prints a day then you will break even in 1 year.

Assuming 100 prints a day average, it will take 3.85 years to break even.

So if you plan on doing around 26k prints per year then it will be cheaper to buy the Brother.

None of these estimates take service, maintenance, downtime, or actual figures into account. Just posted figures.

Don-ColDesi June 24th, 2009 10:41 AM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
One thing that has been bothering me for a while here is the prices being quoted for ink consumption on the new Brother machine. On the Epson based machines the cost per print for the same image on light versus dark shirts is on average an 8-12 times multiplier, meaning that you use about 10 times as much ink to print the same image on a dark shirt as you do print it on a light shirt. It stands to reason that the multiplier should be similar on the Brother as it is on the Epson-based machines. That being said, shouldn't they be quoting an average cost of more like $6-10 per shirt for dark shirt printing? Even Kornit estimates a 4-5 times multiplier. What's the real answer here?

mrbigjack50 June 24th, 2009 05:15 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
I think Mark said that due to Brother inks being thicker than Dupont, that it takes far less ink to lay down an underbase

DAGuide June 24th, 2009 06:17 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don-SWF East (Post 521431)
One thing that has been bothering me for a while here is the prices being quoted for ink consumption on the new Brother machine. On the Epson based machines the cost per print for the same image on light versus dark shirts is on average an 8-12 times multiplier, meaning that you use about 10 times as much ink to print the same image on a dark shirt as you do print it on a light shirt. It stands to reason that the multiplier should be similar on the Brother as it is on the Epson-based machines. That being said, shouldn't they be quoting an average cost of more like $6-10 per shirt for dark shirt printing? Even Kornit estimates a 4-5 times multiplier. What's the real answer here?

Don,

I agree with your numbers on an Epson based printer using the ink calculators in the RIPs. I have seen the numbers based on what the Brother driver displays for ink usage for about four different prints... all of which were done with two passes of white ink. On average, the white ink usage is about 5 times the amount of CMYK. I am not sure how much that will drop if you only do one pass as I am not sure if the second pass is a white highlight layer or a full underbase pass. Since Brother has separate print head carriages for the white & CMYK, the white print head carriage would have to do two passes if you want a white highlight.

The main reason that I can think the ratio of CMYK to white ink is different from the Epson based printers and the Brother printer is the thickness of the ink. I am not sure if the numbers that I have heard are correct, but they say the Epson inks are rated at a 2.7 and the Brother inks are 8.0. Whether these numbers are correct or not, I am not 100% sure. (Hard to believe any numbers in this industry).

Hope that clarifies what Sean mentioned above. The real numbers will be clearer once the Brother is in the market longer.

Mark

Don-ColDesi June 25th, 2009 04:47 AM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Thanks Mark, makes sense. If the white ink is 5 times more than the color then the multiplier is 6. If the average light image costs 60 cents to a dollar then the average dark image will cost $3.60-6.00 plus pre-treatment plus highlight pass - is that a fair assesment?

DAGuide June 25th, 2009 06:22 AM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Don,

I have heard from Brother that the cost will be around $3.00 to $3.50 for an "average" 10" x 12" or so graphic. Because graphics / artwork can be so different from one printer to another, it is going to be hard to predict in my opinion. I once read about a year ago that Brother has the capability of pulling a print log from the firmware in the printer that can tell you the number of prints and ink usage for that specific printer. They used this log to come up with what they call the average ink usage per a print. If this same program is available on the GT-782 (which I am not sure it is or not), then maybe in 6 months or so they could release that average ink usage per a print as well. That would be helpful for prospective buyers.

Ultimately, and just like all the other printers,...time will tell. I remember the ink costs that were first released with the T-Jet and they had to be adjusted as well.

Mark

Justin Walker June 25th, 2009 01:50 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
They say the cost of ink & fixation is .03 per sq. inch (https://www.t-shirtforums.com/brother/t88438.html) for the new Brother GT-782. Just to put some things into perspective:

12" x 12" ('standard' print size) = 144" x .03 = $4.32 per print
14" x 16" = 224" x .03 = $6.72 per print
16" x 18" (max print size) = 288" x .03 = $8.64 per print

Let's hope you never have to use that full platen area!!!

kornitguy June 25th, 2009 02:09 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin Walker (Post 522299)
They say the cost of ink & fixation is .03 per sq. inch (https://www.t-shirtforums.com/brother/t88438.html) for the new Brother GT-782. Just to put some things into perspective:

12" x 12" ('standard' print size) = 144" x .03 = $4.32 per print
14" x 16" = 224" x .03 = $6.72 per print
16" x 18" (max print size) = 288" x .03 = $8.64 per print

Let's hope you never have to use that full platen area!!!


I assume that the estimate is based on solid coverage. I doubt that you will often seen solid coverage 12"x12" designs. So the acutal total sqIN of coverage would probably be at least 75% of those numbers of not lower.

Justin Walker June 25th, 2009 02:21 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Good point: the .03 per sq. in. number is based on solid coverage. However, I print an aweful lot of poster images for local airports that all use pretty damn solid coverage..... Lots of large areas of spot colors, and 14" x 16" box-type images; these prices would cripple me.

Obviously, it is important to know what type of images you spend the most time printing, before applying various formulas. In my case, I have run way too many GIANT images through my shop (once you tell people how big you can go, I find that many people want to fill up as much space as possible), so I wouldn't risk putting myself in a position where my costs "could" get up to that price.

Justin Walker June 25th, 2009 02:23 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Over the last several years, because of all the crap I have had to go through with my previous digital printers, inks, suppliers, etc., I have developed a defensive habit of always planning for the WORST CASE SCENARIO; at least in my case, I almost always see these situations! :rolleyes:

DAGuide June 25th, 2009 02:32 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Why be afraid Justin,

If you are printing a graphic that large, charge appropriately for it. Too many decorators are focused on the cost when all you need to do educate your customer on how many other people can print that large. Maybe 20% (probably closer to 10%) of the dtg printers on the market can print that large. So charge your customer for it. I like to use the multiplier concept when looking at pricing. For example, I used to take my cost to do dye sub and multiplied that time 4.5 to determine my price. Find the right number that works for your business. Then the higher your cost is, the more the profit is! I am familiar with your business concept and doing contract work... and the same concept will apply because how many other places can they go get the same pricing. It was only a couple of years ago when you say there was no way you could use a Brother to support your business plan because of the ink cost. Now look at what you got.

The key is changing the way decorators look at pricing and having a level of confidence in the product they sale. No need to always be the cheapest... especially in this economy where businesses are collapsing every day.

Just a different perspective to looking at things,

Mark

sharktees June 25th, 2009 02:33 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Yet agin I say,These machines are not in the field yet so no-one and I mean No-one knows what the cost per print will be!I swear sometimes this forum is like Paton Place for those of you old enough to know what that show was all about ( basically Gossip and BS) why don't we dicuss this in 6 months when hopefully the machines have been out a while and real users of the machine can tell us about their experiences with this machine.All this speculation does no-one any good.Lets all just go and print some shirts.

sharktees June 25th, 2009 02:45 PM

Re: At $3/shirt, isn't a $55K GT-782 too expensive?
 
Mark is right WE the printers should set the market price not the customers.I'd rather go fishing than work for nothing.Think about who are the worst customers,in my case its the customer that I make the least on,so I've adopted the if you don't want to pay my rate go down the road.Making custom t-shirts is not like pulling them off the rack at Wallmart it takes time and skill and someone needs to pay for that.Look at my contract printing prices its one price plus the actual cost of the ink,I'm done working for free and my customers are always happy with what I print'Why because they pay enough for me to do it right every time.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:55 AM.

vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2014 T-ShirtForums.com. All rights reserved.