Mlink in the building.

[GraphicDisorder]

The only way you'd ever get a truly 100% unbiased for sure review is to take someone that has never printed a shirt before, teach them how to use an mlink and a brother for free and then get feedback. (Not saying Brandt is slanted but at the same time you couldn't be sure mk162 wouldn't be biased towards brother, again not saying that is the case.)

Ive never printed a DTG shirt before either of these machines. This is about DTG.  So I am not sure how the fact I am a screen printer relates.  I am biased if anything TO the Brother because I have skin in that game folks. I am disappointed the M&R is better. Listen people like Gilligan would have a bone to pick in either case here.  If I was telling you all the Brother was better, he would claim it was because I was biased to it since I bought the Brother.  This guy will troll the opposite direction just to see keystrokes on the screen. If anyone doesn't believe I have told the truth, get on over here and use them both and tell everyone what you think. 

Perhaps the case just happens to be that the M&R is better? I would hope it is. It's kind of like comparing a Toyota to a BMW, both very fine vehicles but one should just be better.

I don't follow you on this one, Brother is a company that builds printers. Shouldn't theirs be better?

From what I've read, the idot didn't work out so great. It doesn't seem very M&R like to not learn from that and make the next generation much better.

I never heard much good about the iDot so to your point it was one reason I didn't look at the Mlink (other than hearing it was 75k which later found out they had 2 models). M&R doesn't do everything as well as they do Screen Print Presses and Dryers. Period.

And, if I had to guess, Rich probably knows you like to troll so he probably doesn't want to engage.

 

[GraphicDisorder]

Now, that was a hypothetical with something that is 95% based on pure emotion.  We are talking about trying to take as much emotion out and I think when it comes down to machines that make us money, finding the guy that has 5 different brand pieces of equipment in his shop is probably the better "unbiased" equipment than a guy that has been well taken care of by one particular brand like Brandt has.

Again, any bias towards the competition that is squelched in the shootout only further proves their claim to be a better machine.  I know I'd be sitting here with my mouth shut.

Again, you have no data that I have skewed anything and if you believe as such and really care about this issue outside the trolling and drama....get in a car or on a plane and come see for yourself. You can start by helping me get the brother running since after 2+hrs yesterday it still wouldn't clear its print heads... Ill even come in on Thursday and Friday if you want, my shop is closed those days for the holiday and we can just play with DTG's all day long. What say you?

It kinda baffles me in one respect you claim ive been so well taken care of and that I am so biased to M&R yet I BOUGHT A BROTHER DTG.  Doesn't that sorta silence your claim? 

BTW I have had Vastex, Ryonet, and Ameragraph as well as various other random equipment in my screen printing departments for years. Forgive me for going to something that works better from actual experience. 

[GraphicDisorder]

I'd rather see a discussion like this where all the pros and cons are laid out there. Everything Brandt has said about the Brother so far jives with all the research I have done. Not to say it can't get better, and I'm sure lots of people make good money with Brother printers.

Of course it jives, I am telling nothing but the truth based on our experiences so far as NEW DTG users. I feel I have laid out the pros and cons pretty well so far. I will do a summary over time or updates to this post of my opinion if it changes or info becomes more stable as we use them over time. For example in the beginning the M&R seemed so much faster as the head was moving faster on prints, but it turns out the time it takes to start printing and the time it holds the garment in the machine are longer than the Brother so in some prints the M&R is slower in that respect. I have pointed that out which is a negative to the M&R.  The Brother in the beginning I mentioned I thought was easier to run. I now disagree with that as the maintenance alone is drastically more on the Brother.  This is a fluid situation, as we change our opinion from use we will post that.  As we see things pop up good or bad ill post that. 

I also have no doubt that the Brother will get better actually and I hope it does. I dont know how many more times I need to say it but I don't WANT to buy another DTG. I want the Brother to be the answer for us as I like that price point and over all I hear mostly good things about the 381. Brother will be here Monday. He's bringing new software and he claims he will get the ink use in check some more. This will bring the machines closer.  We will compare the two with the closer numbers. This wont be good for the M&R if they get a lot closer. Ink cost will be the big one at the end of the day. Even if they are the same the Brother ink remains 3x the price.

Brother sent me a picture and info of one of my files where they got the ink use from around 11cc's down to around 7 cc's. Which without it in person I am not sure if the white is bright enough but that is a big drop in ink use for sure. I am curious to see it in person.  BUT the M&R was only using around 4cc's for that print so nearly half the ink use at 1/3 the ink cost.  So again even if the Brother uses the SAME amount of ink, the costs are way off for the ink.

[Gilligan]

The irony is that I've never said you have lied, I've never even said that you have pulled punches.

I've only simply stated that I think most on the forum might have a hard time believing that you would be "brutally honest" like Rich says.  I'm only speaking of the perception you have as such a "Blue Baller".  I don't fault you or your process at all for such... just letting you know of the perception.

I'm not going off on some tangent because Bulldog made a comment that he feels like I'd be biased AGAINST M&R.  I feel like such a claim is ridiculous, but I'm not going to go off crying wolf because I understand that people on the forum might have such a perception of me as I have been critical of some of the "over reaching" claims (in my opinion) on some issues.  I would be absolutely unbiased as well... but yet, many would think I'm too much of a Blue hater to be unbiased.  Yet, if I'm such a blue hater then why is two of my most critical pieces of gear Blue? Also, I'm likely to buy a Starlight if the time comes for us to go LED.  "Doesn't that sorta silence your claim?"

Speaking of that quote, that is exactly the point I'm making about between what you "typically" say vs this "I'm super unbiased".  You just said above that you didn't even really look at MLink because it was 75k and you didn't know of the second machine.  So, that was a solid reason not to have really given the M&R a look and to focus on the next best known brand for your needs.  Same reason you didn't get a Kornit, though it's a better machine, it's not really at a price point that makes sense.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, I've only been stating my observations.

I'm not sure that an inexperienced user is the best way to demo such a machine.  Would anyone on this forum really suggest that giving a newbie to screen printing a couple of auto's and having them evaluate which is better makes a lot of sense?  VS giving a guy like Alan the same two presses to evaluate?  Which review will we get better (and more) feedback from.  I get the "newbie" angle... but in the end we won't be newbie's for long and we want to know what these machines can do when run as a professional.  We aren't TSF and hobbyist on this forum.

[pwalsh]

If anyone doesn't believe I am telling the truth my shop is wide open and BOTH machines are sitting here doing nothing this whole week. Come by and throw shirts though them and share your opinion. 

As of today, right now, this is what I see-
Brother is a lower cost machine, so Brother has the advantage there by a lot.

Speed is a push, each printing some prints faster/slower than each other.

Quality is a push, each printing detail better and worse than the other on various prints.

Ink cost is drastically cheaper on the M&R.

Ink use is a good bit more so far on the Brother, Brother suggests they can get us closer to M&R's ink use, but even if it was the same the M&R ink is 1/3rd the cost.  They say we are using too much ink, maybe so, we played with those settings in training PRIOR to M&R's machine showing up and we selected settings that we felt looked the best, which had nothing to do with Ink cost. First and foremost we want a quality print.  Maybe they will have some tricks to make the ink use/costs closer which I welcome.

Keep in mind when Rich asked me to do this I bluntly told him I would pull no punches or sugar coat anything on this machine. If this thing blows up tomorrow you cats will know. Brother I am sure isn't thrilled about this but I have been as transparent as I can be and I have pointed out I like their machine just fine and I am not upset at them or Nazdar.

Brandt:  I want to thank you again for your commitment of time and resources to conduct this side by side evaluation of the Brother  GT381, and the M&R M-Link DTG Printers.  As I stated in an earlier post I don't recall anyone ever providing this level of detailed performance data on two different units.  One comment that I would offer regards making a final judgment on the performance of both DTG printers is that all of the data gathered has come from running the machines in either a training, or a sampling mode. 

I'm not saying that the results will be different, but I would be very interested in seeing a report on the Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) for both DTG printers over a period of one week, to a month running under typical production conditions for this type of equipment.  In fact, the advantage(s) that one DTG printer has over another should be amplified in a production environment.  Beyond these comments I am going to restate a couple of points from my earlier post on this subject (see Reply #147 from page 10 of this thread)

Ink Volume Usage:  The reality is the chemistry of the ink used in both the Brother and the M&R DTG printers is very similar, and the ink volume usage on a properly calibrated and color corrected image, printed at a common resolution is going to be comparable for both machines.  For this reason I would argue that the issue of the volume of ink being used will be a non-factor.  (assumes that a RIP will be used to drive the GT-381)

Ink Cost Comparison: The Brother DTG ink cartridges are more expensive per CC or ML, than the bulk packaged inks for the M&R M-Link.  With that said, they are not 3X the price of the M&R inks as previously reported.  Detail on MSRP ink pricing and packaging for both DTG printers is as follows;     
Brother CMYK Inks for GT series printers $194.67 per 380CC Cartridge = $0.51 per CC
M&R CMYK Inks for M-Link printers $229.00 per 1 Liter of bulk ink      =  $0.23 per CC
Brother White Inks for GT series printers $153.18 per 380CC Cartridge =  $0.40 per CC
M&R White Inks for M-Link printers $249.00 per 1 Liter of bulk ink        = $0.25 per CC

Raw Ink Pricing Comparison:
Brother CMYK inks are +$0.28 higher cost per CC, or 2.2 times the cost of M-Link CMYK inks 
Brother White inks are +$0.15 higher cost per CC or 1.6 times the cost of   M-Link White ink 

Equipment Purchase / initial Acquisition Cost: 
Brother GT-381 $24,999 vs. M&R M-Link $39,995 represents a +$14,996 or +60%  higher initial cost for the M-Link over the GT-381. The monthly payments based on a 36-Month Lease term also show an advantage to the Brother DTG with an estimated monthly payment for GT-381 $772 vs. M-Link $1,236, representing a $436 lower monthly payment for the GT-381.
*Note:  Pricing comparison based on MSRP pricing, although in this case Brother was running a promotion so the cost of the GT381 was lower than regular published list price

Equipment Operating Cost Comparison:  When comparing a machine from one company versus another, it can be extremely limiting to only consider the initial equipment purchase price, or even the amount of the monthly lease payment, which in this case both strongly favor the GT-381.  A more interesting picture emerges when the review is extended to be more focused on equipment operating cost. For example, the $436 higher monthly lease payment for the M-Link represents an higher operating cost of approximately $24 per production day.  You would need to print 5 additional shirts at a Gross Margin of $5.00 per garment to offset the higher monthly lease payment.   

The Impact of Ink Price on Operating Cost:  The ink cost differential to a moderate ink user, purchasing a total (6) Brother Ink Cartridges per month to include (2) x C.M.Y. or K inks & (4) x White compared to an equivalent volume of the same C.M.Y.K & White bulk packaged inks for the M&R M-Link   would offset the higher monthly lease payment of the higher priced M-Link Printer

Equipment Cost Per Garment: Another way to compare operating cost is to allocate a portion of the annual equipment acquisition cost against the total number of garments printed per year.
 
GT-381 Monthly Lease Payment $772 = Annual Lease Expense $9,264
Print 30 Garments per day x 250 days  = 7,500 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.24 

M-link Monthly Lease Payment $1,236 = Annual Lease Expense $14,832
Print 30 Garments per day x 250 days  = 7,500 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.98   

GT-381 Monthly Lease Payment $772 = Annual Lease Expense $9,264
Print 48 Garments per day x 250 days  = 12,000 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $0.77   

M-link Monthly Lease Payment $1,236 = Annual Lease Expense $14,832
Print 48 Garments per day x 250 days  = 12,000 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.24   





   

[GraphicDisorder]

So I monkeyed with the Brother this AM, I did 2 white tube flushes, head cleanings, shook carts, white agitation and 4-5 nozzle checks and it looked pretty damn good on the nozzle check after that. Did a shirt prior to this one on the Brother before this one that wasn't so awesome. The M&R hasn't printed a shirt since last Wednesday.

See attached.  Left is Brother, right in M&R

Pros:
Red is more correct in shade on the Brother.
M&R has more detail in the red and other colors..
Gold and white are way better on the M&R.

Cons:
Brother boosted/blew the grey out, its more exaggerated.
M&R has noticeable color tones in the grey, barely there but you can see it and that would be wrong.

Info:
We printed the Brother print with settings closer to what Brother recently suggested via email. The white suffered as I suspected. But yes it used less ink than it would have. One would have to decide...more correct white/brightness that costs more to print or less correct print and but cheaper to print.

Ink use:
Brother total ink used was 8.96cc (CMYK 1.75 and White 7.21)
M&R total ink used was 2.48cc (CMYK .94 and White 1.54)

Ink Cost:
Brother $3.80
M&R $.60

Print time, forgot to time them both.  So no data. My bad.

Overall I can sell either of these prints. General person would probably not care about these differences much.  Again I hate to be a broken record, but all things equal I am making $3.20 more on the M&R print. On a $20 shirt, that is drastic.

[blue moon]

let's please keep this thread on topic from now on. Gilligan brought up some valid points on perspectives while reading this and let's not put words in his mouth about calling Brandt a liar. I think he said few things some of us were thinking, but not expressing. Now with that said, lets gt back to the comparison of the units. Brandt is doing a phenomenal job here giving us the information many, many of us here would really love to have. He is also taking a considerable amount of time to report his findings and even run the test we ask him for. The added wrinkle of the manufacturers working with him makes this even more valuable!

So thank you Brandt and please keep us informed on your progress!

pierre

[cbjamel]

Yes, Brandt keep doing what you are doing giving us a fair and honest report with numbers and picture to show what he is seeing.

Thanks for all the hard work,
Shane

[GraphicDisorder]

The irony is that I've never said you have lied, I've never even said that you have pulled punches.

I've only simply stated that I think most on the forum might have a hard time believing that you would be "brutally honest" like Rich says.  I'm only speaking of the perception you have as such a "Blue Baller".  I don't fault you or your process at all for such... just letting you know of the perception.

Perception of people who don't know a thing about me other than what they read on the internet (with bias generally). I have in fact pulled no punches and will pull no punches, again my shop is open for you to come see yourself. Offer is to anyone. I was clear to Rich about that from go. I was worried about it in fact as M&R hasn't been a bright shining light in the DTG market prior to this. I even made it a point to say to Rich that I was going to be brutally honest and I hoped it wouldn't affect our friendship/business relationship with printing.  He said tell it like you see it. Period. So he had confidence of these results it sounds like.

I'm not going off on some tangent because Bulldog made a comment that he feels like I'd be biased AGAINST M&R.  I feel like such a claim is ridiculous, but I'm not going to go off crying wolf because I understand that people on the forum might have such a perception of me as I have been critical of some of the "over reaching" claims (in my opinion) on some issues.  I would be absolutely unbiased as well... but yet, many would think I'm too much of a Blue hater to be unbiased.  Yet, if I'm such a blue hater then why is two of my most critical pieces of gear Blue? Also, I'm likely to buy a Starlight if the time comes for us to go LED.  "Doesn't that sorta silence your claim?"

I don't think you have a particular problem with M&R, more so you seem to like drama and since many threads are about M&R you find yourself creating or attempting to create some drama around it and often you have to be on the other side to do that. Just my observation. I am sure you have but I can't remember you siding with something relating to M&R.

Speaking of that quote, that is exactly the point I'm making about between what you "typically" say vs this "I'm super unbiased".  You just said above that you didn't even really look at MLink because it was 75k and you didn't know of the second machine.  So, that was a solid reason not to have really given the M&R a look and to focus on the next best known brand for your needs.  Same reason you didn't get a Kornit, though it's a better machine, it's not really at a price point that makes sense.

Fact is I have been looking at DTG for years, I dismissed the iDot among other brands. I even dismissed previous prints/samples off the 782 Brother. Of course if I was super rich and was going to get into high volume id be buying a Kornit. I don't find the difference between 25k and 40k as drastic as 25k and say 60-70-100-300k like some of those Kornits cost. So Kornit wasn't a option. I didn't know the Mlink was only 40k. After all I heard about it what days before I made the choice to buy a Brother and its a unproven machine. If I was so biased to M&R I would have looked at it harder don't you think once I heard about it? I didn't even look hard enough at it because M&R hasn't been a DTG force to look at. But now one is sitting here and I am seeing first hand I should have looked at it harder instead of just being about the bottom dollar cost of the machine. After all there is so much more here than just cost of the equipment that I and others clearly have ignored.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, I've only been stating my observations.

Well I wasn't the only one to point out your a troll generally. So I guess perception works both ways.

I'm not sure that an inexperienced user is the best way to demo such a machine.  Would anyone on this forum really suggest that giving a newbie to screen printing a couple of auto's and having them evaluate which is better makes a lot of sense?  VS giving a guy like Alan the same two presses to evaluate?  Which review will we get better (and more) feedback from.  I get the "newbie" angle... but in the end we won't be newbie's for long and we want to know what these machines can do when run as a professional.  We aren't TSF and hobbyist on this forum.

Inexperienced user is relevant to someone who's new to the DTG game, its really so far a play by play as to what they can expect as new users of either machine. Everyone learns from there. I am sure Brad has tricks to make his Brother run so much better than it did day one. I am sure ill pick up on those as well.  I doubt we overcome the ink differences and the extra time it takes to keep that Brother running so far.

[GraphicDisorder]

let's please keep this thread on topic from now on. Gilligan brought up some valid points on perspectives while reading this and let's not put words in his mouth about calling Brandt a liar. I think he said few things some of us were thinking, but not expressing. Now with that said, lets gt back to the comparison of the units. Brandt is doing a phenomenal job here giving us the information many, many of us here would really love to have. He is also taking a considerable amount of time to report his findings and even run the test we ask him for. The added wrinkle of the manufacturers working with him makes this even more valuable!

So thank you Brandt and please keep us informed on your progress!

pierre

Anyone that suggests that I won't be brutally honest doesn't know me and is attempting to create doubt to this process in my opinion.  What value are they to this thread at that point? They are basically in nicest way they can are calling me a liar. If I am omitting something or skewing it in some way that means I am being dishonest. But the truth is I have done this in the most fair way I know how at least with the time we have. I have nothing to hide and my shop is wide open for your doubters. Hope on a plane or get in the car. Come see for yourself. Seriously.  Hell at this point this whole process is costing me money/time.  I haven't sold a single shirt off either because we are slammed in our business right now. Im fine with that for now but if we have to keep defending our reported info then this is going to get pointless at some point.

It's sad that these guys would find fault in no matter the outcome of this. If I had loved the Brother the most they would say it was because I bought the Brother and was biased in that way. We've seen the peanut gallery do just that here when someone defends a product they have. "It's because you own it, yadda yadda".  You can't have it both ways.

The way some of them approach this stuff turns off people to doing things like this.  I don't really have the time to do this, but I like the idea of someone finally putting it out there. Not even so much as a comparison but even just hard data from a machine. Its few and far between.  People protect the info it seems like at times.

[Gilligan]

let's please keep this thread on topic from now on. Gilligan brought up some valid points on perspectives while reading this and let's not put words in his mouth about calling Brandt a liar. I think he said few things some of us were thinking, but not expressing. Now with that said, lets gt back to the comparison of the units. Brandt is doing a phenomenal job here giving us the information many, many of us here would really love to have. He is also taking a considerable amount of time to report his findings and even run the test we ask him for. The added wrinkle of the manufacturers working with him makes this even more valuable!

So thank you Brandt and please keep us informed on your progress!

pierre

Well said!  100% agree.

[GraphicDisorder]

If anyone doesn't believe I am telling the truth my shop is wide open and BOTH machines are sitting here doing nothing this whole week. Come by and throw shirts though them and share your opinion. 

As of today, right now, this is what I see-
Brother is a lower cost machine, so Brother has the advantage there by a lot.

Speed is a push, each printing some prints faster/slower than each other.

Quality is a push, each printing detail better and worse than the other on various prints.

Ink cost is drastically cheaper on the M&R.

Ink use is a good bit more so far on the Brother, Brother suggests they can get us closer to M&R's ink use, but even if it was the same the M&R ink is 1/3rd the cost.  They say we are using too much ink, maybe so, we played with those settings in training PRIOR to M&R's machine showing up and we selected settings that we felt looked the best, which had nothing to do with Ink cost. First and foremost we want a quality print.  Maybe they will have some tricks to make the ink use/costs closer which I welcome.

Keep in mind when Rich asked me to do this I bluntly told him I would pull no punches or sugar coat anything on this machine. If this thing blows up tomorrow you cats will know. Brother I am sure isn't thrilled about this but I have been as transparent as I can be and I have pointed out I like their machine just fine and I am not upset at them or Nazdar.

Brandt:  I want to thank you again for your commitment of time and resources to conduct this side by side evaluation of the Brother  GT381, and the M&R M-Link DTG Printers.  As I stated in an earlier post I don't recall anyone ever providing this level of detailed performance data on two different units.  One comment that I would offer regards making a final judgment on the performance of both DTG printers is that all of the data gathered has come from running the machines in either a training, or a sampling mode. 

I'm not saying that the results will be different, but I would be very interested in seeing a report on the Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) for both DTG printers over a period of one week, to a month running under typical production conditions for this type of equipment.  In fact, the advantage(s) that one DTG printer has over another should be amplified in a production environment.  Beyond these comments I am going to restate a couple of points from my earlier post on this subject (see Reply #147 from page 10 of this thread)

Ink Volume Usage:  The reality is the chemistry of the ink used in both the Brother and the M&R DTG printers is very similar, and the ink volume usage on a properly calibrated and color corrected image, printed at a common resolution is going to be comparable for both machines.  For this reason I would argue that the issue of the volume of ink being used will be a non-factor.  (assumes that a RIP will be used to drive the GT-381)

Ink Cost Comparison: The Brother DTG ink cartridges are more expensive per CC or ML, than the bulk packaged inks for the M&R M-Link.  With that said, they are not 3X the price of the M&R inks as previously reported.  Detail on MSRP ink pricing and packaging for both DTG printers is as follows;     
Brother CMYK Inks for GT series printers $194.67 per 380CC Cartridge = $0.51 per CC
M&R CMYK Inks for M-Link printers $229.00 per 1 Liter of bulk ink      =  $0.23 per CC
Brother White Inks for GT series printers $153.18 per 380CC Cartridge =  $0.40 per CC
M&R White Inks for M-Link printers $249.00 per 1 Liter of bulk ink        = $0.25 per CC

Raw Ink Pricing Comparison:
Brother CMYK inks are +$0.28 higher cost per CC, or 2.2 times the cost of M-Link CMYK inks 
Brother White inks are +$0.15 higher cost per CC or 1.6 times the cost of   M-Link White ink 

Equipment Purchase / initial Acquisition Cost: 
Brother GT-381 $24,999 vs. M&R M-Link $39,995 represents a +$14,996 or +60%  higher initial cost for the M-Link over the GT-381. The monthly payments based on a 36-Month Lease term also show an advantage to the Brother DTG with an estimated monthly payment for GT-381 $772 vs. M-Link $1,236, representing a $436 lower monthly payment for the GT-381.
*Note:  Pricing comparison based on MSRP pricing, although in this case Brother was running a promotion so the cost of the GT381 was lower than regular published list price

Equipment Operating Cost Comparison:  When comparing a machine from one company versus another, it can be extremely limiting to only consider the initial equipment purchase price, or even the amount of the monthly lease payment, which in this case both strongly favor the GT-381.  A more interesting picture emerges when the review is extended to be more focused on equipment operating cost. For example, the $436 higher monthly lease payment for the M-Link represents an higher operating cost of approximately $24 per production day.  You would need to print 5 additional shirts at a Gross Margin of $5.00 per garment to offset the higher monthly lease payment.   

The Impact of Ink Price on Operating Cost:  The ink cost differential to a moderate ink user, purchasing a total (6) Brother Ink Cartridges per month to include (2) x C.M.Y. or K inks & (4) x White compared to an equivalent volume of the same C.M.Y.K & White bulk packaged inks for the M&R M-Link   would offset the higher monthly lease payment of the higher priced M-Link Printer

Equipment Cost Per Garment: Another way to compare operating cost is to allocate a portion of the annual equipment acquisition cost against the total number of garments printed per year.
 
GT-381 Monthly Lease Payment $772 = Annual Lease Expense $9,264
Print 30 Garments per day x 250 days  = 7,500 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.24 

M-link Monthly Lease Payment $1,236 = Annual Lease Expense $14,832
Print 30 Garments per day x 250 days  = 7,500 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.98   

GT-381 Monthly Lease Payment $772 = Annual Lease Expense $9,264
Print 48 Garments per day x 250 days  = 12,000 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $0.77   

M-link Monthly Lease Payment $1,236 = Annual Lease Expense $14,832
Print 48 Garments per day x 250 days  = 12,000 Garments per year
Equipment Lease Cost per Garment = $1.24   





 

Peter thanks for your post. I am not going to dispute your info other than to say that not only is the ink more expensive, the Brother is using and wasting more of it. This info isn't in your numbers.  I have thrown around the number 3x the cost as it seems every print costs at least 3x more. That's been my general context of that.  See my latest post with print, 6x the cost on that Brother and that was with settings near what Brother suggested for less ink use.  The white isn't bright enough, so to me it needs more white, which will just make that gap even bigger with more ink used.

Id love to discuss these machines in a production situation. Right now we can't even seem to find the time to set our site up to begin to sell anything off these machines. I hope by next weeks end we are very close to that after we have Brother and M&R both come by. 

[GraphicDisorder]

Yes, Brandt keep doing what you are doing giving us a fair and honest report with numbers and picture to show what he is seeing.

Thanks for all the hard work,
Shane

Thanks!

[jvieira]

Perhaps the case just happens to be that the M&R is better? I would hope it is. It's kind of like comparing a Toyota to a BMW, both very fine vehicles but one should just be better.

I don't follow you on this one, Brother is a company that builds printers. Shouldn't theirs be better?

In all fairness, M&R has been in this business for a long long (looong) time. They have contacts and knowledge in the industry. Brother is pretty new in the garment decoration business and it is not their main biz.

[Dottonedan]

Perhaps the case just happens to be that the M&R is better? I would hope it is. It's kind of like comparing a Toyota to a BMW, both very fine vehicles but one should just be better.

I don't follow you on this one, Brother is a company that builds printers. Shouldn't theirs be better?

In all fairness, M&R has been in this business for a long long (looong) time. They have contacts and knowledge in the industry. Brother is pretty new in the garment decoration business and it is not their main biz.

To be more precise, it's just the opposite. Brother has been in business since 1954 producing a variety of products (as is M&R) but not as long as Brother.

As it pertains to DTG. Brother was/are a digital garment printer manufacturer since 2005 and earlier.

SOURCE: https://printaura.com/dtg-printing/
History of DTG. DTG printing is a relatively new technology (within the last 10 or so years.)  Direct to garment printing was introduced around 1996 at a trade show in Tampa, Florida.  In 1998, Brother, Intl. began to develop proprietary DTG printers, beta testing them until 2003, with a first showing at an Atlantic City, NJ trade show in 2005.

SOURCE: http://www.coldesi.com/learning-center/learn-about-t-shirt-printing/history-of-digital-garment-printing
Early 2005 brought the first large traditional printer company into the marketplace as Brother introduced thier GT-541 - a light shirt only printing solution that eventually became the Brother Graffittee DTG printer line.


They are great but is not the only thing they have been developing printers to print on...for a long long time. They are large in size and history, towering over M&R in that area of business.

About Brother
With a dedication to product quality and excellent customer service, Brother International Corporation, the US subsidiary of Japan-based Brother Industries Ltd., is committed to an At Your Side philosophy with its customers, business partners and colleagues. Established in 1954, Brother International Corporation is a premier provider of home, home office, and business products, as well as industrial solutions that revolutionize the way we live and work. Headquartered in Bridgewater, NJ, the company employs approximately 1,200 colleagues in the Americas. The globally-recognized Brother product line includes an award-winning range of printers and Multi-Function Center® all-in-ones, the CES and CHA Award-winning ScanNCut, the market-leading P-touch® electronic labeling line, OmniJoin™ web and video conferencing, document management solutions, industrial and home sewing equipment, and the number one line of facsimile machines in the United States.
 In 2014, for the sixth year in a row, consumers voted Brother Printers and All-in-Ones #1 in overall satisfaction and reliability in the PCMag.com Readers’ Choice Awards. Additionally, for the second year in a row, Brother Printers and All-in-Ones were awarded #1 honors in overall satisfaction and reliability in the 2014 PCMag.com Business Choice Awards.