This is the typical rhetoric

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by measekit » Sun, 24 Apr 2005 11:30:40

When asked who the manufacturer/formulator of what they sells is and the
BRAND that they sell this is the typical response from the majority of
the hawkers. That is why it is a *** s business that needs to be
cleaned up. Oh yet it is compatible and if your printhead clogs we will
take care of it. Try and collect.

Typical answer:

We sell the ink bottles individually, the price is $3.95 for 60 ml plus
$6.50 shipping and handling. Unfortunately, I cannot give you the other
information you are asking. Please call in for sales. 888-304-6125

Best Regards,

John, Customer Service
888-304-6125 ext 207

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Kevi » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:32:02

I take it you are referring to third-party, non OEM ink manufacturers? This
comes as a surprise?


This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Tony » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:09

easekite < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote:

I have been pondering this post and some others from the same person and would
like to offer some thoughts.

Firstly there are legitimate reasons why vendors may not advise who their
supplier is -
1. They may believe they have an edge in quality and/or cost of material and
don't want their competitors to know.
2. They may change suppliers from time to time after careful research into
quality and compatibility.
3. They may be annoyed by the way some people demand confidential information!
The business is not a whores business, it is a legitimate extremely large
industry that has been in existence for more than 2 decades, many of todays
compatible cartridge manufacturers/remanufacturers have been in business all of
that time and have tens of thousands of satisfied customers otherwise they
would no longer exist, the margins are very small indeed. The logic is
inescapable, at least to somebody with more than one brain cell. I don't know
many in this business that make guarantees about head clogging that are in any
way superior to the OEM guarantees (which don't really exist) - think about it!
There is no evidence at all other than the tenuous bits and pieces in this and
similar forums that non OEM ink causes more problems than OEM ink; these forums
are in no way a measure of the quality of inks OEM or otherwise, to understand
this needs three brain cells. Actual comparisons are done by manufacturers of
all persuasions who in most cases do detailed and scientific research into the
quality of their products, this includes listening to their customers some of
whom are giant corporations who are careful about the way they spend their
money (believe me they are!).

The word brand properly applies to anybody who makes something and sells it
under their own name, whether they be a large or small company and ink is by no
means the only constituent in a properly made or refilled cartridge, there are
many other factors including the container design, the filling process, the
sealing of the head/nozzle and the packaging (not the marketing, but the way
the cartridge is protected during its shelf life - this is absolutely critical
and difficult to achieve with some cartridges). I have seen more failed
cartridges from one particular OEM than from all of their refilling competitors
combined and they have a massive chunk of the market, so even they struggle!
Two other OEM's have struggled to achieve quality, one has made it and another
has a way to go. It is a hard industry but no complaints after all most of the
easy businesses are illegal!!!

The other thought I had is that it is oh so easy to be anonymously rude and
discourteous in news groups, clearly it needs someone of huge intellect to blag
an entire industry about which they know almost nothing. Printheads fail
sometimes, mostly they are recoverable. The causes are very well understood and
rarely have anything to do with ink quality unless the customer buys at the
bottom of the market (true of just about all industries right? Sorry that needs
five brain cells to understand!) - that is based on years of experience not
just an opinion based on one or two printer problems.

Most of the OEM's talk to each other in an attempt to keep the industry fair,
clearly they do not share all information with their competitors but these are
often formal meetings to se

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Fran » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:50:03

So because they didn't tell you who their manufacturers are you label
them *** s and say that is why it is a *** s business that needs to be
cleaned up. You who have never used 3rd's tell that to this ng. What are
you thinking? You ever wonder why no one in this ng believes or respects
you or your groundless opinions?
You really are either one stupid idiot, or a glutton for punishment who
is determined to prove it with each and every one of your misguided,
factually incorrect post.
Obviously you work for someone else so you have no real idea about the
wholesale, retail or manufacturing business.
Let me fill you in.
Many times manufacturers of products will if possible, offer private
labeling deals unknown to the gp. It increases their profits and cuts
their losses. Retailers taking advantage of these private label deals
generally must do so under NDA's.
So you can ask all you want but they'll never tell.
I myself have been party to private label deals with identical retail
products (not ink) whose main client was high profile, retail. I have
been under constant NDA since '88.
I own an ad/marketing agency and have never had a printing problem
related to 3rd ink/carts. Never! I purchase a min of 80 carts per order.
I have Epson, Canon and HP printers. They never clog but they do wear
out. Mainly on the paper feed/pickup. I also do outside printing with
one of the largest and finest flat sheet printers in the world who are
open 24/7, have had continuous ink on paper for over 125 yrs and need
railroad cars to deliver their rolls of paper directly into their
printing facility.
I do know a little bit about which I speak.
Your continued psychobabble about 3rd's indicates a need for help as you
have fixated on this subject for quite some time and cannot accept the
fact that your opinion on the subject is simply not true.
Please get some help.
Life can be wonderful.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by measekit » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:22:01

Tony wrote:

So they expect you to purchase an unknown because they do not want you
to know or be able to track the real quality of what they are selling.

That is one of the reasons that the OEMs have an advantage - Consistency.

Bullshit. Go ask Toyota who makes the engine in their cars. In the
80's General Motors tried bullshit like this by putting Chevrolet
Engines in some Oldsmobile without disclosing this to the buyer. When
caught they were sued and lost.

Many exist because of the turnover of people. There are a couple of ink
formulators that may be OK. Unfortunately this ink is sold under a
bunch of labels and not adequately disclosed. Some of the hawkers will
tell you if you call and ask because they do not want to loose a
potential customer but they do not disclose this on their website. All
they do is say buy buy buy and here is the price and say how compatible
it is but they do not adequately describe what you are getting. I
resent this unprofessional sales tactics and that is why I think of then
as whores.

And I take it you think you are above an amoeba.

Do the math. More people who report head clogs admit they use non OEM
inks. Sure some use the OEM inks and get clogged heads but the vast
majority on this NG say they are using after market inks. Also when
asked they do not know the
BRAND they are using. The best they can say is either the label or the

PCWORLD did a review on after market inks and concluded that they caused
more problems than OEM and recommended not to use them. Yes, I know
they take advertising from Canon, HP, and Epson.

That is the definition of a private label or label. It is not a BRAND.

Most of the head clogs involve the drying of ink in the print head.
Most of the instances of this occurs when the person was not using OEM
ink. I said most of the instances not all. And sure some of them use
bottom of the barrel cheap o inks but not all. And their may be one or
two formulators that produce a reasonable product but unfortunately they
do not package and brand their stuff and sell them through all marketing
channels. That is a shame.

This borders against anti trust laws.

I am not asking for any renumeration for setting you straight. Think
about it.


This is the typical rhetoric

Post by measekit » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:25:03

You are such a jerk. Go play in the traffic.

If you cannot see through the *** s tactics then you are real stupid.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Tony » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:41:21

easekite < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote:

The word is remuneration not renumeration.
Sorry to hear that you can't be reasonable.
I give up; some battles can't be won and even if they could be they are not
worth it. Let others who read this be the judge.
Love and kisses


This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Sigg » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:22:20


What a refreshingly sensible analysis and opinion, tinged with a delightful
smidgen of ire. I enjoyed reading that very much, and thank you for going to
so much trouble over it. Let's hope just one iota of it sinks in somewhere,
but I for one shan't hold my breath. :-(

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Sigg » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:37:12

There you go. If you can't win the argument, then denigrate the person
instead. Sign of a sure loser.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Tony » Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:41:22

Thank you Siggy, I wasn't sure it was worth the effort but once I had started
it was hard to stop!!!
Please don't hold your breath, we need to retain balanced people on this earth.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Fran » Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:22:44

He proves it with his every post. I did break one cardinal rule: never
wise up a fool.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Dougla » Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:22:02

I was going to filter measekite out of the newsgroup but it is fun to read
such ill-informed statements! I belong to a couple of forums,and moderate
one.We have been asked about our strict policies on foul lanluage,and use
some of his posts to demonstrate.He would never be allowed to join our
forums,we screen our members,and they need at least 5 refs.If you check my
posts here,or any of the forums,you will see I never resort to his type of
language.I just am happy as he does this more and more,everyone will know
what a fraud he is!Some expert,doesn't print photos,never tried after market
inks,tried maybe 3 different papers,but he knows everything printer related!

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by measekit » Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:47:27

But my print head is not clogged like your head.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Burt » Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:41:14

What is really sad about Measekite's contiual rant against the aftermarket
ink vendors is that he takes every opportunity to answer honest questions
people pose on this NG with his distorted responsed It is sad they are
scared off by this rude, pseudo-expert and don't go to the next step to
purchase and use products that others have found to be safe and equal to OEM
inks. I feel compelled to respond to the people who ask about third party
inks and include a sentence or two identifying Measekite as a spreader of
misinformation! So much time is wasted while trying to help people. I
finally set up a (too long) response which I feel compelled to just paste in
to any question on third party inks.

For years I was disuaded from trying third party inks by the same type of
responses. Now that I do refilling I couldn't be happier. The quality of
my photo prints is excellent and, not so incidentally, the price is right!
For those of us who try to give people an objective answer based on our own
experience in this area - we will just have to continue our efforts in spite
of the irrational rant.

I appreciate seeing the number of people who have joined this thread in
identifying Measekite's rant as just that. BTW, I didn't see one person
post a response that either agreed with him or joined in his criticism of
third party inks or their vendors. Does that tell all of us something? If
the vendors or their products were the crap, *** s, and unprofessional
hawkers that he describes I would expect several posts agreeing with him.

This is the typical rhetoric

Post by Fran » Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:42:57

In truth, if 3rd's where anywhere near as bad as he says/wants them to
be the suppliers would have long ago gone out of business.
I'm beginning to believe that he is an actual oem plant. Maybe even a
rogue plant.