Discussion

By Clint Bolte on Feb 17, 2010

It is totally predictable that (1) with the United States economy in the tank, (2) the economies of the rest of the developed world rebounding nicely, (3) printer attendees at Graph Expo and Print '09 at abysmal numbers for much of the past decade, and (4) McCormick Place awash in wasteful and unnecessary costs to exhibitors of all sizes that there be a major correction and realign in this North American printing trade show.

Even a 15% discount in McCormick Place contracted prices is silly. Move the entire venue to Rosemont for a couple of years until the McCormick Place unions become realistic.

GASC would be wise to drop Graph Expo off to two shows in between the Print Show every five years. Manufacturers and suppliers simply cannot be expected to continue to support every conference, trade show, and gathering that might reward them with face time before only a few dozen clients.

By John Henry on Feb 18, 2010

In the small printing market (under 3 million in sales) I talk with many others in my segment. Not one has plans to buy a "new press" All our investing in digital presses and workflow.

Some will replace equipment as it wears out, but I have not found anyone who is looking to buy as part of their planed growth.

I go to the shows to see things in one place, learn and network. If two major players are not there it only weakens the value to me.

Chicago is easy to get into for most of us but if McCormick is getting to costly move it around.

By Vern Kellie on Feb 18, 2010

I think you can point fingers to the economy, union costs, and many other factors for poor attendance at this show -- but strongly consider where a lot of the real blame lies -- the format of the show itself. This show hasn't changed (significantly) in the last 25 years, but certainly print's place at the media table has. I think some serious re-thinking needs to be done by GASC, vendor council(s), and industry groups and leaders about putting a new face on print at it's banner show.

By Erik Nikkanen on Feb 18, 2010

John,

In this economy, where printers are not willing to buy new presses I would have though it a great opportunity for press manufacturers to develop and sell my Ink Transfer Blade (ITB) concept.

With all the legacy presses out in the field, applying a low cost retrofitable technology that actually improves performance in a fundamental way, would be a great way for a press manufacturer to introduce a new advancement, gain some sales income, improve the conditions for their customers, and also learn about the potential of doing things differently.

It would have been a great way to transition through this economic mess and come out the other side with a very competitive advantage by having more revenue during the down period and having superior technology to take market share as economic conditions improved.

The lack of strategic thinking of the press manufacturers is appalling.

By John Ritter on Feb 18, 2010

Erik,

Maybe you should be at the show with your great device. The only place I see you advertize is in forums like this. Anyway smart move at $2,000,000 plus for the kind of space they use it is well thought out.

By Erik Nikkanen on Feb 18, 2010

My target market is the press manufacturing groups. If they won't be interested, then probably the ITB concept will never get to printers. I am not a manufacturer and therefore I am not selling a product to printers. If they want to develop the concept that is different but I am not providing a product.

I do comment a lot in forums about the potential of getting rid of the problem of ink water balance and density variation via the ITB. It is hoped that if the general printing community starts to understand that there is a potential for improvement, this will affect press manufacturers.

If the printing community has no interest then nothing will change. I only make money if it works and if there is demand. It is not like selling snake oil solutions to the community. It won't get to printers unless it works.

I see my responsibility as providing the technology and knowledge to solve some critical problems. If the community really wants solutions, it is their responsibility to pressure their suppliers to take some action. You are right, an expensive booth is no place to teach high school physics to press manufacturers. :-)

By Andrew Tribute on Feb 18, 2010

I wrote an article in WTT a short time ago suggesting GASC should drop GraphExpo and switch to a four-year concept with Print, in the same way as drupa, Ipex etc. GASC told me I did not know what I was talking about and was talking rubbish! I write articles when I have suitable information and the articles reflect on what I am being told. It is a shame that GASC don't listen to the vendors as I do.

I think from the feedback I get that Komori and Heidelberg are the tip of the iceberg. This year the only show the vendors want is Ipex and apart from small suppliers there is no demand for GraphExpo. I'm sure that there wil be further drop outs or stand size reductions from many vendors, digital suppliers included.

My advise for printers planning to invest. Book your ticket for Ipex in May in the UK and move forward with the rest of the world.

By Michael J on Feb 18, 2010

Erik-

My $.02 on the Transfer Blade. I read that over 100 Chinese vendors will be at IPEX, which by the way as I understand it is pretty well filled up.

The real threat to most of the Heavy Metal folks are going to be from China. You might want to consider making the trip.

An under appreciated reality is that the US and Europe are no longer the the growth engine of the global economy. Graph Expo in it's present form is a legacy show from the times when we were.

Tinkering around the edges with time, format, venue is rearranging deck chairs. Meanwhile I read that PIA San Diego is having a pretty good show and DSCOOP is larger than last year.

To be clear EuroAmerica is not in decline. It's merely re inventing itself to start growing again under new conditions.

It seems that IPEX and Drupa will be the centers of Euro/American Printing Industries. My bet is that the show in China will be the center of the Asian region.

When Andy Tribute made his suggestion a while ago, I strongly agreed with him. This latest data point should not really be a surprise.

By Erik Nikkanen on Feb 18, 2010

Michael,

Thanks for the suggestion. The largest press manufacturer in China has its North American head quarters right here in Toronto. My effort to get them interested has not worked. I guess I can get rejected here for a lot lower cost than going over to Ipex to get rejected. :-)

It seems the Chinese press manufacturers are just as western as everyone else in this respects. This is a shame because I am sure they do not want to be seen as just copying the German and Japanese press designs but would prefer to be viewed as being innovators themselves. They have missed an opportunity and I guess it just proves that they are in copy mode.

It annoys me so much that the offset industry just gives up and thinks there is no possible chances for advance. They assume it is a mature process. There is no fight left in the old guard. There is no fire in their blood. Just ready for the rocking chair. There is no great interest to beat the competition but just to outlive them. They are just hoping that they can safely get to the point where they can retire.

Where are the young Turks? Where are the guys who want to make breakthroughs and make history and make the future. I'll tell you they aren't in the German engineering schools that specialize in printing. Those guys have left offset for the printing of electronic circuits. They didn't fully understand offset and now they have moved on.

The industry needs a kick in the ass and if I get the chance, I will give it. But I can not do that alone. I need others who want to do something new and get the industry out of this mental swamp it has found itself in. It seems the Chinese are not going to be the ones to do it, but hopefully someone else will. I am still looking for those groups of people.

By Randy Davidson on Feb 19, 2010

Andy - I have a lot of respect for your views and they echo many of the offset vendors and some printers. But companies like HP, KBA, manroland, Oce and others I have spoken to can't wait to be at Graph Expo this year. And the smaller suppliers that can not traditionally afford the marketing ventures larger firms can depend on the show in North America. Some would be devastated without the show. While I agree changes need to be made, I believe GASC is doing a great job of transforming. Even without some of the big players, the show can be successful. Reports from Dscoop (HP's user group) indicate that HP views themselves as the new anchor of Graph Expo and they are proud to take that role. Time will tell though.

At one time I leaned toward your views that maybe every other year was better. But after talking to printers and other suppliers I think this market is big enough to have at least one exhibit show a year. Maybe everyone can not attend or exhibit, maybe a bit smaller. No big deal.

However - interesting to read the comments. If you missed Andy's initial commentary on the topic take a look here. Also see the response from Ralph Nappi of GASC. http://members.whattheythink.com/articles/article.cfm?id=41324

Randy Davidson, CEO
WhatTheyThink

By Chris H on Feb 23, 2010

As someone who has both attended the show as a sales prospect and also exhibited as a vendor (including the dismally attended Print09) there are two points I would like to make:

1. The future of printing in America is no longer big iron. The Heidelbergs of the world have been dying a slow death for a decade, but only the big companies themselves don't seem to realize it.
2. The future belongs to emedia. Whether it's Iphones, Ipads, Facebook, or plain old websites, younger consumers are digital only. This is a trend that will not reverse back to "killing trees" as the current White House calls it. We need to stop fighting this technology, embrace it, and indeed, migrate to it.
Printing is now only a means to an end, not the end result itself. As catalogs and sales brochures go the way of hot lead, we need to get out of dinosaur thinking and leap into this new century. The future is not ink under your fingernails; it's the keyboard or touch screen under your fingertips.

By Andrew Tribute on Mar 03, 2010

Just a brief follow up to this subject. My video interview with Bernard Schreier, Chairman of the Management Board is Heidelberg will be published in the next few days on whattheythink.com. Listen to this and hear the real reasons why Heidelberg is not attending GraphExpo this year. Incidentally one point that comes out of the interview is that following Ipex, Heidelberg at this time has only committed to attending one trade show and this is drupa in 2012. Apart from that their plans are fluid.

By Erik Nikkanen on Mar 03, 2010

"hear the real reasons why Heidelberg is not attending GraphExpo"

Andrew, I am pretty sure you think that what Mr. Schreier says might be true but I tend to think that upper managers use a special language (Management Speak) that hides the truth and is intended to portray the company in the best way that it can. That is their job. :-)

I believe it was announced today that in Canada, Heidelberg is substantially reducing its head count. I think that they have acknowledged that they are shrinking. It will be interesting to hear how the top manager describes the situation.

By Andrew Tribute on Mar 04, 2010

It is not surprising they have reduced their head count. North America is the worst performing area in the world for Heidelberg with a huge drop in equipment sales in that area. Other areas like China are increasing their sales. Luckily Heidelberg has been successful in developing its service and consumables business in North America. Normally this generates 30% of annual income however in the past year this has generated 60% of the income.

The offset market is shrinking although we are now starting to see the market picking up. I hate to say it Eric but it is not due to managers not updating their systems with new technology as you claim, as all the suppliers are doing really excellent technological developments, but it is a changing market. Not even your technology would have the slightest impact on reversing this change.

By Erik Nikkanen on Mar 04, 2010

Andrew, of course my technology would have no affect on reversing the change for the whole market. That is not the point. The goal is to reverse the change of a few press manufacturers and their customers relative to others. The point is to get a competitive advantage. At this time most press technology from different suppliers is basically the same and you are implying that no one should try to do something different because it won't reverse the shrinking market. That does not make sense to me.

Printers have no control over pricing but there is an opportunity to lower costs. If a press supplier can reduce the costs for printers at a reasonable cost, where other press suppliers can't, then that should be an advantage to them.

How do you justify the lack of interest in understanding the process in more depth? This is one of the few industries that thinks less control is better than more control. So many people are impressed with the expensive technology offered but have little interest understanding that some of these technologies are band aid and not fully effective remedies to faults in the process that can be corrected at relatively low cost.

I have never heard any one of the experts or gurus come out publicly and say my technology will not work. They probably don't dare because they would have a hard time coming up with rational reasons. I do have an email from a top Heidelberg engineer agreeing that it would work but without showing interest to do anything.

And this is the problem in the industry. It does not take advantage of potential opportunities. That has always been my point. If one wants to gain a competitive advantage one needs to investigate opportunities. I have been trying to offer some.