Dear Sir,
Having followed the lively discussion over recent months, concerning the merits or otherwise of print management companies ((PMC’s), I was struck by the ultimately destructive nature of the debate.
Aren’t both factions (“printers” v. PMC’s) both on the same team? Aren’t we all dependent upon expanding the size of the print pie - not quibbling about who gets what share?
My point is: as print generally struggles to retain its share of the advertising / communication / information budgets which clients have at their disposal, shouldn’t we, as an industry, be rewarding initiatives that “steal” print away from other potential avenues of expenditure. We are becoming too consumed in the factional squabble of which is better: printers or PMC’s, to see the bigger issue – which is – how can we expand the total print pie?
During the growth of the self-adhesive label industry during the ‘70’s and ‘80’s, there was vigorous competition between label printers. But some of the leaders took the initiative by stepping outside the square and converting older technologies, e.g. gum-labelling and screen-printing – over to self-adhesive labels. In so doing, they expanded the actual market size, and avoided head-on competition with competitors, which as we all know, only leads to reduced margins.
Our industry, as has been noted, is beset with entrenched over-capacity. The answer is not: are PMCs better than printers? or vice versa, but in how can print increase its share of the discretionary promotional dollar?
We all know print has taken a battering against these “smarter”, young, infant industries – typically in the electronic, digital, multi-media realms. It is these alternatives such as outdoor hoardings, internet-based, (Patrick,…other examples?) which are the real enemy.
Shouldn’t we be encouraging and rewarding those printing organisations, (be they printers or PMC’s) who have proactively gone to clients and convinced them to increase their print-spend, i.e. print’s share of the pie, at the expense of the alternatives.
The question is, do we as an industry, have the mind-set that sees these other technologies as our real competitor? Or do we still see our competitor as the other printer down the street? Unless we lift our vision, to see printing as one player in the game – with no special entitlements, we will preside over a shrinking portion of the total available spend. The advent of new technology such as digital and on-demand printing at the small-end, and large perfecting presses at the big-end are certainly helping make print more attractive.
As an industry, we should officially recognise initiatives that successfully sell print against other alternatives, at forums such as the N.P.A. Instead of our incessant focus on quality, why not shift the emphasis to creative selling of print. Why not introduce a special category rewarding any company that shows how it won over a client that was considering spending $100K on other media options? After all, the printing industry can rightfully claim to have unique expertise as “knowledge managers”, not just as putting ink on paper.
Our dilemma is no different to that of any other industry that experiences changing technology such as passenger liners that perceived themselves to be in shipping, whereas they were really in “travel” or “tourism” and failed to see passenger aircraft as their real competitors.
So, let us not get too carried away by the “printers v. PMC’s” distraction. The real winner is whoever can expand the pie by creative salesmanship, not just by “brand switching” within the existing boundaries.
W. James Cryer
JDA Print Recruitment |
