CDHC PPG Meeting 10th February 2014

Please click to read the minutes:  CDHC-PPG-Minutes-10th February-2014

This document is an PDF file which requires PDF reader software to be read.  Adobe Reader is a free program for this purpose and can be downloaded and installed here

4 comments to CDHC PPG Meeting 10th February 2014

  • I was interested to read in your 10th February minutes that a now color printer would cost the committee, on behalf of the PPG membership, the sum of £1,600 plus associated photocoping costs.

    What justifaction can be give for the purchase of such a printer, when one can be purchased from Currys/PC World for a fraction of the cost, that would still fulfil the communication need for those without internet?

    • Glynn Roche

      Thanks Mike for your note.

      At the time of the meeting we were looking at being able to print A3 as well as A4 and this is the market price for a device that can print, in colour, double sided, reasonably quickly and reliably and with a good warranty for what could be thousands of sheets for one newsletter distribution:

      1. Speed was important as time is precious and asking a volunteer to wait on, un-jam and refill a budget printer would be unrealistic. I personally have been there and got that T Shirt. We would quickly use up the good will involved in printing say, 2000 sheets at a net rate of 3-5 sheets a minute (factoring in double siding, toner changes, paper changes, jams etc) and the lost 12 – 15 hours..

      2. Colour is important to make the newsletter attractive and more effective

      3. Double sided printing is important as the newsletter requires it and cheap printers rely on the operator re-inserting the block of printed sheets to achieve this. Getting this right every time and the waste associated with paper jams make this a non-starter for volume activity.

      4. Reliability is also important for the obvious reasons of repair cost and good will waiting for engineers etc

      We weighed all of these things up along with the costs and also compared this with the conventional way of asking a print shop to do the whole task. The outcome is the decision recorded in the minutes.

      Since that time we identified an alternative very low cost solution for A3 printing (which would be low volume anyway) and this enabled the selection of a considerably lower cost A4 machine.

      I hope this provides the basis for the justification.

      • Hi Glynn and thanks for your reply, especially the last paragraph referring to the “very low cost alternative solution”

        I am sure that others may also be interested and will read your comprehensive reply, especially as the April minutes will not be published until June.

        If I can be of any help with the news letter please do not hesitate to ask.

        Mike

  • The suspense is killing me!