International Imaging Technology Council

Feature Article
IMAGING SPECTRUM MAGAZINE

The SOHO Market, Part V: Upsetting the

ApplecartThe Emergence of Dell
Copyright 2005 Imaging Spectrum and its licensors.All rights reserved.

by Luke Goldberg, Future Graphics

Editors Note: This is the fifth article in a six-part series that will provide an in-depth overview of the fastest growing channel in the imaging industry, the SOHO channel. This segment covers the emergence of
Dell as a major player in this market.
The Celtics versus the Lakers; the Yankees versus the Red Soxall
great rivalries for the ages . . . .
But they have nothing on the IT battle of the century that is shaping
up between Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Dell as they fight it out for
supremacy in the PC market and for the golden goose of printer
consumables.

The PC Wars
The genesis of this epic struggle dates back to the PC wars of the late
1990s as HP and Dell fought for profitable PC revenue.When, in 2002,
HP purchased one if its biggest PC rivals, Compaq, PC prices were on
a slow, steady decline towards commoditization. The low profits
derived from PC sales and the unwieldy acquisition of Compaq was

Luke Goldberg is responsible for developing overall market/industry analysis and sales trends, expanding
dealer channels, managing the Future Graphics sales team of professionals as part of the new product
development and marketing/promotions team. He has more than 14 years of experience in the imaging
supplies industry. He may be reached at 800-394-9900.

www.i-itc.org International Imaging Technology Council July 2005 Imaging Spectrum Magazine 47

IMAGING SPECTRUM MAGAZINE

Feature Article
considered by many in the HP brain trust to be a departure from HPs
core business philosophyand would ultimately be the coup de grace
for Carly Fiorina.

International Imaging Technology Council

Dells Strategy
As HP and Dell fought over this PC business, it is clear that Michael
Dell saw that the only way to compete with HP would be to target
the repeat business offered through the sale of consumables.

By 2000, as PC margins started to decline, PCs were viewed in large

measure by HP as vehicles to drive ink and toner consumables revenue. During this period, many of the PCs that were sold were crossmarketed with entry-level inkjet or monochrome printers. By this
time, HPs IPG (Imaging and Printing Group) was already generating more than 75 percent of the companys net profits (see Figure 1).
The importance of maintaining profits from consumables was, and
is, the lifeblood of HP.
Ironically, as recently as 2002, Dell was a great customer for HP and
sold almost two million HP printers between 2002 and 2003. Dell
saw the huge margins that could be made by more closely partnering with another OEM and then unleashing its direct distribution
model with a full-blown sales effort (see Figure 2).
The Innovator versus the Distributor
Having looked at the historical imperatives that have led to the escalating competition between Dell and HP,it is important to understand the
very different corporate philosophies that drive these two behemoths.
HP has always envisioned itself as an innovator. This is underscored
by its corporate tag line, invent. As Fiorina was fond of pointing

48 Imaging Spectrum Magazine July 2005 International Imaging Technology Council www.i-itc.org

Goldberg: The SOHO Market, Part V:

Upsetting the ApplecartThe Emergence of Dell
out, HP files an astounding 11 patents per day with an R&D budget
of more than 2 billion per year. Conversely, in regards to Dell, she
has stated, What Dell has basically perfected is the direct distribution model of other peoples innovation and invention. (HP versus
Dell, Lyra Research Group, Webinar, March 30, 2005.)
Dell, it can safely be said, is laughing all the way to the bank; clearly
their model has served them well. In 2004, they profited $2.65 billion, 1 billion on the printer business alone. HP, on the other hand,
only managed $2.45 billion in profits, on almost $25 billion more in
sales (see Figure 3 on operating expenses). Since they spend virtually zero dollars on R&D, Dell can profit on much lower sales.

The $900 Million Question

In 2004, Dell sold 5 million printers using mostly Lexmark and,
more recently, Samsung and Fuji Xerox technology. HP by comparison is on pace to sell 50+ million printers this year.According to the
departed Fiorina, It takes a $900 million investment for us to produce the next level of printing technology.
The $900 million question then is: Does the consumer care about
how much money is spent on R&D as long as the product works?
The answer, according to numerous consumer reports, is that customers are not convinced that the expense of R&D is worth paying
for. Most rate Dell very favorably against HP and others.
As Michael Dell says, If a company spends a billion to make it so
that nobody can copy what it has, does that help the user or the
manufacturer?
Simply put, what Mr. Dell is stating is that the consumer foots the
bill for all of that innovation by paying exorbitant prices for imaging
consumables.
The Most Expensive Liquid on the Planet
As is the case with all SOHO product categories, printers are getting
cheaper and cheaper and have greater capabilities. However, as has
been shown, consumables are where the lions share of OEM profits
lies. It is this razor-and-blades selling strategy that creates so much
www.i-itc.org International Imaging Technology Council July 2005 Imaging Spectrum Magazine 49

IMAGING SPECTRUM MAGAZINE

Feature Article

International Imaging Technology Council

As this battle matures, it seems that it creates only more

opportunity for the aftermarket.
consumer backlash and plays into the hands of the aftermarket,
which offers to ease the pain with lower-cost alternative supplies.
Dell has become the first OEM to expose this pricing strategy and
upset the apple cart. Undoubtedly, there is a collective yelp heard in
the boardrooms at HP, Epson and others as Dell uses its direct distribution model to enlighten consumers that they are paying too
much to print.
Dell is preaching the message that the aftermarket should capitalize
on: Enlighten customers that they have been taken advantage of,
that they have been suckered into buying low-cost printers and then
paying for cartridges that often cost more than the printers themselves. If anything, Dells message is a boon to the aftermarket. Since
our industry has been offering for 18 years now the type of savings
that Dell is offering, we are also capable of offering even greater savings when coupled with printer service, empties pickup and other
value-added services.
Direct from Dell
It is time to examine Dells direct distribution model and how and
why it poses issues for HP. Dell is practically unassailable to its
competitors. Not because they cant emulate the model, but to do so
means practically discarding the business and organizational models they have today. Most companies dont have the stomach for it,
says Paul Wiefels, author of The Chasm Companion, a guide for
applying popular tech-oriented business principles in a rapidly
changing world. (HP versus Dell, Lyra Research Group, Webinar,
March 30, 2005.)
HP has grown its printer business through distribution partners,
coupled with great marketing and innovative products. Dell, conversely, is not reliant on middlemen to market its products, nor is it
offering other products as alternatives, as is HPs distributors such as
Office Depot or Best Buy.
Checking Out the Battlefield
As an experiment, I often go into one of these distributors to see
how (or if) HP is being represented against its competition. In one
case, I entered the establishment of a consumer electronics retailer
and asked the staff to recommend an entry-level, multi-functional
device for a small business. I told the sales rep that I wanted to spend
less than $250. The products available reminded me of the choices
one is bombarded with in the cereal aisle at the supermarket with all
the confusion created by these seemingly endless options.

every product category at retail there is a profusion of choices, from

HP, Brother, Samsung, Lexmark and so on. However, when the Dell
rep calls on you, he or she is only pitching Dell.
In general, Dell is price-positioned at a 30 to 40 percent lower cost
per page than its competition. Ironically, this even includes its partner Lexmark. How big a threat this model of price and distribution
is to HP and its distributors should be clear by now.
Too Little, Too Late?
On one level, HP is already taking steps to communicate directly
with customers. When Web Jet Admin was introduced, it enabled
remote monitoring of cartridge supplies status as well as online,
direct ordering. Additionally, HP is going after the largest users (it
classifies these as enterprise accounts) with comprehensive print
management programs that encompass hardware, software and
consumables.
It seems unlikelyif not impossiblefor HP to dramatically lower
its prices. As was shown earlier, consumables revenue is the blood
sustaining the body of HP. With much lower margins, it would simply not be a sustainable model. Some think that HP may allow itself
to be more competitive by spinning off the IPG group and unburden itself of the less profitable business units of HP, but this remains
to be seen.
The Aftermarkets Strong Position
As this battle matures, it seems that it creates only more opportunity for the aftermarket. Dells message to the masses preaches the
very benefits of savings on alternative supplies that our industry has
practiced for 20 years. Technologically, Dell products also pose no
major challenges, since they are based on existing engines from Lexmark, Samsung and others (see Figure 4.). Since Dell only sells
direct, their customers today have no choice regarding the consumables they buy. Our industry will create that choice by offering
lower-priced Dell consumables and continue to do what it has done
best: offer choice, value, environmental benefits and service that
cannot be equaled.

The sales person recommended a Samsung. When I asked why, he

replied honestly,We have a sales incentive for them this month. In
50 Imaging Spectrum Magazine July 2005 International Imaging Technology Council www.i-itc.org