OT: Update on printers

Page 2 of 2  
DerbyDad03 wrote:

Quite a bit.
An example of an "innocent bystander" would be, say, a supplier of pencils to the firm. The pencil-provider had no idea what the firm made or the decisions involved in the firm's output, and certainly had no input to the firm's decisions.
"Collateral damage" would be, for instance, the killing of Ben Laden's bodyguards in an effort to reach the main target.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll ask the same question that I asked before:
"Do you really think that the secretary for the lady in the purchasing department that negotiated the contract for the boxes that the ink cartridges will be shipped in played any role in the decision to use chips in the cartridges?"
Now I'll ask it in a different way, using your example of an "innocent bystander":
Do you think that the secretary for the lady in the purchasing department that negotiated the contract for the boxes that the ink cartridges will be shipped in had any more of an idea about the decisions involved in the firm's output or had any more input to the firm's decisions than the pencil supplier?
If they both had zero idea and zero input, how is that secretary any less of an innocent bystander than the pencil supplier?
BTW...it's OK to admit that you were wrong. It might actually feel good.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DerbyDad03 wrote:

No, I don't think the janitor or the secretary or the guard at the parking lot entrance had any input on the chip plan - I never said they did. I DID say the voluntarily went to work, and continued to work, for an evil and wicked company. They knew, or should have known, about the scandalous actions of their betters and absented themselves from the place.
It's pretty much the same as all the Enron employees who had their IRA's wiped out when the company went bust. Poor devils! Some had hundreds of thousands of dollars disappear! Down in the weeds was the fact that these workers had invested their money in ENRON STOCK!
My empathy needle hovered at near zero.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh I see...the guy that cleans the toilets at 4 AM for minimum wage and minimal (if any) benefits "knew, or should have known, about the scandalous actions of their betters and absented themselves from the place."
And those "scandalous actions" you refer to, those pesky chips in the ink cartridge.. yep, that's something a guy with a toilet brush in his hands would be well-versed about.
Goodness gracious, what goes on in that head of yours?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/30/2012 4:49 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

You didn't know all of those people in the plant in the Philippines making $10/day were enriching themselves just like enron employees?
You didn't know the "free market" was a bad thing when "heybub" couldn't get cheap ink cartridges for a $39 printer that was designed to have the low entry price subsidized by the consumables. Thats a different "free market" than the one limbagh preaches about.
The only think I can is "heybub" intentionally plays both sides to screw with people or something is really broken.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DerbyDad03 wrote:

Yes. I think you've wrapped your mind around the concept.

No, I don't think he would be "well versed." In any event, it's unlikely he would be dismissed in the announced down-sizing.

Wondering where you come up with your metaphors. In the case of Lexmark, the guy cleaning the toilets was probably an employee of a contract company. He's not completely absolved of collusion, just one step removed. In many way, similar to a clean-up company being called to tidy-up a Mafia hit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

...and watched it ride every step down the hill.

Ditto.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you really think that the secretary for the lady in the purchasing department that negotiated the contract for the boxes that the ink cartridges will be shipped in played any role in the decision to use chips in the cartridges? Do you really that the lady in the purchasing department herself played any role in that decision?
I could list so many job functions in the Inkjet department that played no role in the decision, yet will be eliminated when the layoffs occur.

Another way to look at it is that the company attempted to ensure that the inkjet department was profitable by ensuring that only their cartridges were used in their product. You can't sell printers as loss leaders and then not take steps to make the money back on ink. This could be interpreted as showing loyalty to the employees by trying to be a profitable as possible. The fact that it didn't work out doesn't change the fact that they tried.
Besides, even you used the words "SOME of the employees ". Fine, call it "retribution" for those that actually played a part in the decision, but the vast majority of the 1700 workers were simply doing their jobs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Do you really think that the secretary for the lady in the purchasing department that negotiated the contract for the boxes that the ink cartridges will be shipped in played any role in the decision to use chips in the cartridges? Do you really that the lady in the purchasing department herself played any role in that decision?
I could list so many job functions in the Inkjet department that played no role in the decision, yet will be eliminated when the layoffs occur.

Another way to look at it is that the company attempted to ensure that the inkjet department was profitable by ensuring that only their cartridges were used in their product. You can't sell printers as loss leaders and then not take steps to make the money back on ink. This could be interpreted as showing loyalty to the employees by trying to be a profitable as possible. The fact that it didn't work out doesn't change the fact that they tried.
{{
Based on the business plans/models I've read I expect the end game was exactly as it played out. Too many towns and counties get played by MBAs for what they are worth. End up investing in facilities and accommodations in the hope of long term employment for their citizens with the result that both employees and the citizens are well screwed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You can't blame the employees as often as not the company is the only game in town.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bullshit. They don't have to live in a one-horse town (now zero-horse).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

See my post involving the town of Illian, NY.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/28/2012 2:26 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

And it is a business model choice. Lots of people want to think they are getting a deal when they find $39 dollar printers stacked up in a pile at the bigbox store so the manufacturers provide that "experience" . Then somehow you actually need to pay for the printer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2012/08/28/lexmark-to-slice-1700-jobs-in-restructuring/?test=latestnews#ixzz24rklkuBM
Unwise greed on the part of management. Folk I know may buy a Lexmark or it's Dell Clone once but not a second time.
HP is almost as bad with their proprietary games.
And yes it's the troops on the ground that get it in the neck.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:13:14 AM UTC-7, HeyBub wrote:

As I remember it I was one of the first to buy Lexmark when they first came out. It broke down about a year later and when I called them they wouldnt help me fix it but insisted that I ship it to Texas. So I did, and all they did was clean it and ship it back to me. The cost to me was almost the price of a new printer at the time. If they had been a little more consumer friendly and told me WHAT to do to fix it I wouldnt have switched to a different brand.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

out. It broke down about a year later and when I called them they wouldnt help me fix it but insisted that I ship it to Texas. So I did, and all they did was clean it and ship it back to me. The cost to me was almost the price of a new printer at the time. If they had been a little more consumer friendly and told me WHAT to do to fix it I wouldnt have switched to a different brand.

I hope so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

out. It broke down about a year later and when I called them they wouldnt help me fix it but insisted that I ship it to Texas. So I did, and all they did was clean it and ship it back to me. The cost to me was almost the price of a new printer at the time. If they had been a little more consumer friendly and told me WHAT to do to fix it I wouldnt have switched to a different brand.

The beginning of the end was before that. IBM wouldn't have sold off the division (a management buyout, actually) if it weren't already a loser.

Yep.
One word; Kodak. OK, two; Xerox.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.