last week published a list refuting what it calls "myths" about remanufactured toner
. I didn't see any threads on it already so I thought I'd bring it up here.
The myths it claims to dispel are;
-Myth #1: Refilled or remanufactured cartridges save you money.
says that remans will fail and cost you more money because you have to reprint the pages. Apparently as much as twice the cost of a real HP toner
-Myth #2: Alternative cartridges are just as reliable as Original HP cartridges.
says that as much as 40% of reman toner
carts will have some sort of problem.
- Myth #3: Remanufactured cartridge print quality consistently equals that of Original HP cartridges.
says that 35% of pages printed by remans will be unusable.
-Myth #4: Remanufactured cartridges are better for the environment.
And finally, HP
says that 94% of reman carts end up in the landfill, and that resources are also wasted by failed prints.
The full argument for each can be found at the page on the HP
We also wrote about it here; therecycler.com/news/1...80%9D.aspx
As expected, the "myths" are based on research that HP
paid for. There's also some extremely dubious logic.
Something that jumped out at me in the small print is that HP
only tested 7 North American reman brands; a tiny, tiny representation of the industry. Plus the brands are anonymous.
There's also a predictable amount of "can"s and "may"s dotted all over, so once again the fact that there are some unreliable remans out there is being used to pretend that all
of them are.
What do you guys think? I've already seen a lot of responses on blogs around the picking the arguments apart, although some do agree with it.