Production Printroom & Print Procurement Optimisation · Data Sheet
Production Print Financial Results
Result architecture across outsourced print, in-house production equipment and paper sourcing — separated by evidence and implementation status.
1 · Result classification
What each workstream produced, and how it may be described
Scroll table sideways →
| Workstream | Status | Published treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Outsourced-print pricing | Negotiated, rate schedule implemented | Included in the principal result. Supplier correspondence states the new rates applied immediately; operating controls were added afterwards. |
| Preferred-supplier concentration | Negotiated operating model | Included as a structural result. It does not imply every historical supplier was eliminated. |
| Production printer replacement — Scenario A | Identified and modelled | Shown separately. No implementation claim is made from the supplied evidence. |
| Production printer replacement — Scenario B | Identified and modelled | Shown separately. No implementation claim is made from the supplied evidence. |
| Paper sourcing replacement route | Modelled after due diligence | Shown separately from negotiated print savings. The prior lower-cost route was deliberately withdrawn. |
| Operational supplier controls | Agreed and implemented | A non-financial result: delivery documentation, partial-delivery tracking, invoice support, package identification and account contact. |
2 · The negotiated result
Including the correction that reduced it
Scroll table sideways →
| Measure | Indexed result | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Addressed outsourced-print baseline | 100.0 | Final comparison population, after correction. |
| Negotiated position | 89.6 | Equivalent to a 10.4% reduction across addressed spend. |
| Preferred external print route | 9.3% reduction | The negotiated price effect on the largest addressed supplier population. |
| Other tested supplier lines | 14.4% reduction | Line-by-line alternative pricing across the remaining addressed population. |
| Earlier saving estimate | 100.0 | The initial headline, before full correction. |
| Final negotiated saving | 93.2 | The headline reduced by approximately 6.8% after data correction. |
The published result uses the revised workbook, not the earlier higher submission. The correction record shows several quantity, unit-cost and grouping issues repaired before the result was retained.
3 · Production economics
Click cost is not the whole cost
Average production throughput ran at approximately 924,000 impressions a month across the in-house estate. Six meter streams across four devices were modelled, with click charges separated from rental, software and service.
That separation produces two different answers. On variable click cost alone, the modelled reduction is approximately 16.3% to 18.3%. On full equipment scenarios including rental, the modelled range is approximately 19.2% to 30.2% — wider, because the device decision changes the fixed cost as well as the per-impression cost.
Both remain modelled. No implementation claim is made from the supplied evidence for either production scenario.
The paper route that was withdrawn
An unusually low-cost paper supply route was identified and then deliberately dropped when due diligence failed. It does not appear in any published figure.
The 55.4% paper model describes the replacement route, qualified on references and product-authenticity controls. A sourcing option that cannot survive diligence is not a cheaper option; it is an unpriced risk.
Scale of the evidence
What the result was built from
- ~1,100 source transactions. Historic rows used in baseline reconstruction.
- 153 comparison lines. In the final outsourced-print savings workbooks, after correction.
- 17 historical outsource suppliers. The fragmented external environment at baseline.
- 6 meter streams across 4 devices. The in-house production estate, modelled with fixed and variable cost split.