424
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
424 points (94.9% liked)
Technology
59217 readers
2864 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Eh, sure, that sounds accurate if a bit blunt.
If they are selling their printers at a small loss because they want to make money on selling ink that's basically fine. Sell the ink, make money. If they want to overcharge for the ink people will look elsewhere. If they have to DRM the printers to force people to buy their ink then that's just fucked up.
To the downvoters, I mean this in a factual sense, since HP sells printers ar a loss, which is a sort of investment, since they sell the ink at a high markup to recoup their costs and earn money.
So if customers buy their cheap printer, but not their expensive ink, then the investment HP made in the customer is a bad investment for HP.
It's a bad investment because it's unethical and people care about this sort of stuff (especially when every company under the sun is trying to replicate HP's vampiric nature).
"I disagree" - HP CEO
He can disagree all he wants but the article is about their ink pricing plan underperforming.