PRINT 05

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14433084.post-1126983604859434552005-09-17T11:34:00.000-07:002005-09-19T07:54:43.246-07:00PRINT 05Trade shows typically present unique opportunities to assess the validity of various assumptions many print providers claim as gospel. PRINT 05 concluded this week in Chicago. This writer had the opportunity to attend and these are some of my observations. The overwhelming conclusion was simply this isn't your father's printing business. Our industry has seen billions of dollars of value flee since 9/11/01. This was plainly evident at the show. Kodak, Epson, Canon, Enfocus, Xerox, H-P, and Adobe created more on-the-floor activity per square foot than the “big iron” folks. Other peripheral vendors dealing with mailing, color management, web-to-print, and pdf editing/proofing tools were popular also. Certainly it is hard for any “ink-in-the-blood” printer to walk past a brand new Heidelberg 105 running at 18,000 s/p/h with 100# ink coverage and not get a bit emotional. Then reality strikes, about $4MM in cash and the awesome task of loading it with work 7 days a week. The good news is that print is alive and will live for a long time. Nonetheless today’s print provider has to confront the many choices the buyer has. The output solutions must fit the buyer’s quality expectations, budget and time-to-market requirements. Those expectations can vary from crude toner products to 300 line litho. With online image repositories for photos, value statements, product specifications or special offers, promotions and even campaigns can be constructed on line in minutes. Aggressive "time-to-benefit" (read competitive advantage) loops are easily constructed. Many "web-to-print" solutions were on display also. Print has and will continue to be the supreme "closer". No other medium provides the buyer with the tactile and visual representation of the product like print. No other medium can represent the soul of the enterprise like print. Smart marketers are buying less print but know abandoning print entirely would be imprudent.Alan Rossnoreply@blogger.com