Words: 746
B2B Marketing. OCE and CROON case. Q1. XES| OCE| Points of Parity| Inbuilt scanner| Inbuilt scanner| Standard stacker can hold 100 folded-sheets. (can be upgraded up to additional 9 – ???30 each. | Standard stacker can hold 100 folded-sheets. (can be upgraded up to additional 9 – ???30 each| Data can be routed from draftsman workstation to XES without operator| Data can be routed from draftsman workstation to Oce without operator| | | | | Points of Difference| Modular system ??? all new Xerox stuff can be added afterwards| 16 different configurations| Two paper trays| Three paper trays|
One paper cutter| Three paper cutters| Three paper rolls (for an extra ???3500)| Five paper rolls (add/drop +/- ???10′)| Xerox, AccXES OS, works with Croon current system. | Windows NT OS, works with Croon current system. | Data is automatic transferred to ERP-system| Data is automatic transferred to ERP-system| Prints 400×400 dpi (also applicable on jet-blacks| Prints 400×200(400) dpi| Current Croon (Oce system applications) can easily be replaced by Xerox systems used by XES. Easy accessed via Internet. | Run on Croons current system (Oce). Staff already know how to use. Speed 240| Speed 270| Points of Contention (Oce’s version) * The claim that modular system is unique is not true since in that case the whole system of Croon does not be replaced by XES. * Xerox will probably not produce any new modules since they are in a financial mess. * 400×400 dpi is not as important as H claims. Furthermore are printing on jet-blacks not a common thing at Croons. Q3. Recommended (by me) configurations + NVP in table below: Xes * 5 paper rolls, therefore two extra, to eliminate risks with paper jam and have the machine ready for some night shift working.
This will give an additional cost of ???3500×2=???7000 * Fix the ventilation system since I know that Croon care about their staff and want to have good marginal when it comes to working environment requirements of ARBO. Cost ???10 000 Oce * Standard model that are presented in the case. I would not do any modifications or extra alterations with for instance the working environment. Oce actually meets Croons requirements and the staff are used to the system and likes it. Cost of capital| 10,00%| | Life time| 5| years| | | | | | | Year 0| Xes| Oce| | | | List price| 68 000,00 ???| 85 000,00 ???|
Customization| 7 000,00 ???| 0,00 ???| Cooling system| 10 000,00 ???| 0,00 ???| Maintenance| 5 500,00 ???| 7 000,00 ???| | | | cost year0| 90 500,00 ???| 92 000,00 ???| | | | *Cost savings| 120 000,00 ???| 124 000,00 ???| * based on that the either go for Xes or Oce and not the Incumbent| | | | Net Present Value based on Cost of capital 10%| | | | YEAR| | | 0| -90 500,00 ???| -92 000,00 ???| 1| 29 500,00 ???| 32 000,00 ???| 2| 29 500,00 ???| 32 000,00 ???| 3| 29 500,00 ???| 32 000,00 ???| 4| 29 500,00 ???| 32 000,00 ???| 5| 29 500,00 ???| 32 000,00 ???| | -90500,00| -92000,00| | 26818,18| 29090,91| | 24380,17| 26446,28| 22163,79| 24042,07| | 20148,90| 21856,43| | 18317,18| 19869,48| NVP| 21 328,21 ???| 29 305,18 ???| Q3. Croons internal preferences| Demands that the machine| Machine that answer to that| Overnight printing| Can be unsupervised during printing. | To have 100% secure printing both Xes and Oce need 5 paper rolls. | Paper jam during night| Rarely have paper jams and in worst case can be fixed by non-specialist. | Oce is has a good reputation regarding this additionally paper jam is an easy fix with Oce. | Ease of use| (1) Requires as few specialists as possible. 2) Less hassle when loading machine with paper| (1) Oce and Xes. (2)Oce is rear loaded which is better. | ARBO| Is in an environment that is well ventilated and in general do not generate that much heat. | (A) Oce meets the ARBO req. (B) XES – Unknown. Croon probably need to spend ???10′ to solve the issue. | Lowe ozone emissions| Eco friendliness| Oce use less electricity than Xes and creates less heat. | Service organization quality| Technician on the spot. Customer able to visit/call. | Oce| Non direct monetary value POD’s worth having in mind when presenting XES| OCE|
Modularity| Is flexible in how many rolls you want. (4-6)| Flexibility with no of rolls 3-4| Less problems with paper jam for overnight printing| Job interrupt button| Three paper cutters as standard| | Rear loaded. | Risks/concerns XES| OCE| Xerox might cease to exist in the near future| | Using standard no of paper rolls is a risk, Croon would prefer to have four. However three would not be efficient to print 100% overnight. (risk elimination will cost ???3500)| | Can probably not met ARBO requirements. (risk elimination will cost ???10 000 extra)| | | |
Final answer to question 3 (kind of 5 suggestions depending how you see it): * In some way (indirect) communicate the concerns with the Xes machine as listed above. The reasons are the high cost for the risk elimination plus the eventual problems in the future. * Overnight printing intertwined with the paper jam issue ??? explaining this would emphasize the efficiency with Oce. * Ease of use, Arbo issue, ozone emissions and service organization I would recommend Oce to present as HR issues and therefore motivation and efficiency outcomes.