The U.S. Reprographics Industry needs a barometer of wide-format b/w A/E/C plan printing volume

Yesterday, I ran into someone I know who works for OCE “wide-format”. I asked him about OCE’s wide-format “black and white” click volume.

He said:

(1) On a U.S.-country-wide-basis, OCE’s wide-format “black & white click volume” in 2010 was 50% off its peak (peak, meaning, before the recession kicked in.)

(2) On a Florida-wide basis, OCE’s wide-format “black & white click volume” in 2010 was 70% off its peak.

“Click volume” = in the U.S, most OCE (and KIP and Xerox wide-format black & white, toner-based) printing systems record “square foot usage”.

In the U.S., OCE sells direct to customers and OCE also sells through “dealers”. Quite a number of reprographics companies are OCE wide-format printing systems dealers. It is my understanding that the “percentage” numbers, peak to 2010, that I mentioned above, are for systems OCE, itself, provides service for. The numbers would not, therefore, include the click volumes (square foot usage) of all OCE wide-format b/w systems in the U.S., because I seriously doubt that OCE’s reprographer/dealers, some of whom provide service on the systems they sell, lease, rent and “FM”, provide their click volume numbers to OCE.

Xerox and KIP are the other two equipment manufacturers who offer “wide-format black & white, toner-based, printing systems” on the U.S. market. (Yes, I know that there are other brands who offer wide-format, b/w, toner-based systems in the U.S., such as Ricoh, but OCE, KIP and Xerox systems probably add up to 90% of total market – click - volume.) I’ve not heard anything about the click volumes of KIP and Xerox systems in the U.S. Like OCE, KIP and Xerox sell direct to end-user customers and to dealers who sell to end-user customers.

To me, the absolute “best barometer” of “A/E/C plan printing” in the U.S. would be the “total click” volume (square foot usage) of “all” (well, maybe not all, but most of the) wide-format, black & white, toner-based printing systems, OCE + KIP + Xerox + all reprographers who are “servicing” dealers of OCE, KIP and Xerox equipment (and, as to reprographers who are “servicing” dealers, both IRgA members and non-members as well.)

How about the IRgA suggesting to the industry’s major equipment vendors, OCE, KIP and Xerox, that they report (to someone at the IRgA) their respective monthly “click volume” (square foot usage) numbers – for the wide-format, b/w, toner-based systems that they directly service?

And, how about the IRgA suggesting to all reprographers who are OCE, KIP and/or Xerox “servicing” dealers that they report (to someone at the IRgA) their monthly “click volume” (square foot usage) numbers – for the wide-format, b/w, toner-based systems that they directly service?

The compiling and publishing of those numbers would, in my opinion, be a fantastic way for reprographers to track trends (up and down) in “A/E/C plan printing” volumes. As I said, the “best barometer.”

The compilation would have to be done by someone who will keep totally confidential the individual numbers reported by OCE, KIP and Xerox and who will keep totally confidential the individual numbers reported by all of the servicing dealers. The number that would be published monthly would be the total U.S.-wide click volume (square foot usage) number, without any further breakdown.

This is the type of barometer that is very much needed for reprographers and for the reprographics industry as a whole.