FSC certification

[kdonegan]

Hi
We are researching becoming FSC certified. We are a digital print facility w/ revs < 1million.
Smartwood budget estimate was $7100.
I thought I have heard others mention $3-5k. Any info appreciated.
Thanks
Kevin

 

[Green Printer]

What does the certification do for you?

 

[bprint]

We did ours through Smartwood last year and I think I remember it being around $4,000. There is yearly maintenance for 5 years. The $7,100 could be the $3-4k plus the yearly fee over 5 years and they are showing what the total would be over that time. It took a long time for us to get certified. I would be sure to get another quote, maybe SCS.

 

[kdonegan]

I inquired with Smartwood and they resonded that the price is higher as they have had to increase to cover internal costs.....

 

[Craig]

What does the certification do for you?

It's legalized extortion, think about it. Your going to pay 7 grand so you can print a stupid logo, keep a separate inventory, tracking information, and all the rest of the hoops you need to jump through. Then there are maintenance fees too!!!

God I wish I would have thought of it!

 

[kdonegan]

indeed, would like to create a disclaimer that says we adhere to all the FSC guidelines BUT we can't print the logo because we sent the money to UNICEF instead.
I'm sure it began with good intentions but now it's about making some $$$

 

[Craig]

indeed, would like to create a disclaimer that says we adhere to all the FSC guidelines BUT we can't print the logo because we sent the money to UNICEF instead.
I'm sure it began with good intentions but now it's about making some $$$

Not a bad idea actually, it would make for a good conversation starter with a potential customer. I think folks can see through this kind of crap for the most part, at least I hope.

I'm all for a cleaner environment, and am doing my part, but the next time a tree huger complains, I'll ask them if they ever wiped with synthetic toilet paper.

 

[mattf]

Not a bad idea actually, it would make for a good conversation starter with a potential customer. I think folks can see through this kind of crap for the most part, at least I hope.

I'm all for a cleaner environment, and am doing my part, but the next time a tree huger complains, I'll ask them if they ever wiped with synthetic toilet paper.

Many customers do not see through it. Our company is about a month away from an audit and we have customers left and right asking about if we have been certified yet. Its kind of ridiculous.

But what are ya gonna do? I wouldn't want to lose a $300K a year account just because we didn't take the time to do a silly certification.

 

[[email protected]]

I heard FSC just changed to a "3 year minimum" deal, probably to "lock in" those who pay $$$ to get Certified.... because many are reporting NOT getting much of any increase in new "green" sales these days (and FSC is probably facing declining "printer fees" as more 'drop out' or close). No one wants to lose a good account, but these days "costs" really matter, and FSC Certification expense (which is based upon, for no logical reason, a printer's employee "head count") goes on year/year. While many printers desperate to market themsleves in tough times still believe "greenwashing" alone will help them survive, others are telling customers a fundamental truth: "We can and do buy and use FSC papers all the time, but we're reluctant to pay thousands per year to FSC simply for the priviledge of printing their logo...because our customers are telling us they'd prefer we keep our costs - and their prices - as low as possible right now. We think your decision to use FSC papers is GREAT, and we're pleased to do that, but we suggest this really isn't the time to 'add cost.'

Those print buyers more concerned about "appearance" than substance...have already drunk FSC's Koolaid and are unlikely to drop their logo demands. Their primary concern is "branding themselves" Green, and "simply doing the right thing" isn't enough to satisfy them. The cost of "getting" or "keeping"
these may make sense, but think carefully. If you sign on to a multi-year deal...and that customer
"goes away" for any reason in this economy, you could be stuck with non-recoverable costs at the worst possible time.

 

[mattf]

I heard FSC just changed to a "3 year minimum" deal, probably to "lock in" those who pay $$$ to get Certified.... because many are reporting NOT getting much of any increase in new "green" sales these days (and FSC is probably facing declining "printer fees" as more 'drop out' or close). No one wants to lose a good account, but these days "costs" really matter, and FSC Certification expense (which is based upon, for no logical reason, a printer's employee "head count") goes on year/year. While many printers desperate to market themsleves in tough times still believe "greenwashing" alone will help them survive, others are telling customers a fundamental truth: "We can and do buy and use FSC papers all the time, but we're reluctant to pay thousands per year to FSC simply for the priviledge of printing their logo...because our customers are telling us they'd prefer we keep our costs - and their prices - as low as possible right now. We think your decision to use FSC papers is GREAT, and we're pleased to do that, but we suggest this really isn't the time to 'add cost.'

Those print buyers more concerned about "appearance" than substance...have already drunk FSC's Koolaid and are unlikely to drop their logo demands. Their primary concern is "branding themselves" Green, and "simply doing the right thing" isn't enough to satisfy them. The cost of "getting" or "keeping"
these may make sense, but think carefully. If you sign on to a multi-year deal...and that customer
"goes away" for any reason in this economy, you could be stuck with non-recoverable costs at the worst possible time.

Thanks for your input.

Our customers of course are worried about costs within this economy, but there are many industries that are requiring their jobs to run on paper that is Chain of Custody certified. We deal with many who are heading in that direction, so its logical for us to stay ahead of the curve and get certified. I completely understand your view of customers and businesses reducing immediate un-needed costs, but the fact remains some industries do not have an option to NOT use certified paper. Sadly, our print company deals with a lot of those industries.

Putting forward a mindset to customers on how to manage their projects is a nice little thing, but when you deal with certain industries, and its not just print buyers, a lot of times they have no choice. Government work is a great example, state and federal. Same with certain education, financial and medical institutions.

 

[doubting_thomas]

I'll stick to my opinion that FSC is a 4 letter word. We are
certified, and I felt that the whole auditing process was at
best a joke. For one, it was an internal audit since there
isn't a chapter in our area (California is the closest place).
So really all we were doing was reviewing the stocking and
paperwork process in a meeting and giving them a check.
We have not yet sold a single FSC job (6 months now) in part
because of additional cost for the paper and also in part
because we can't promise how long it will take to get our
layout approved by the FSC. We run tight deadlines as a rule.

It seems to me that it is being marketed in a way that is
inconsistent with what I feel is going on behind the scenes.
I think it's a way to move wood that normally wouldn't
be sellable in The United States because of tariffs. But that's
only my opinion.

Good luck to you with the FSC. As long as your check clears you're in!!

 

[mattf]

I'll stick to my opinion that FSC is a 4 letter word. We are
certified, and I felt that the whole auditing process was at
best a joke. For one, it was an internal audit since there
isn't a chapter in our area (California is the closest place).
So really all we were doing was reviewing the stocking and
paperwork process in a meeting and giving them a check.
We have not yet sold a single FSC job (6 months now) in part
because of additional cost for the paper and also in part
because we can't promise how long it will take to get our
layout approved by the FSC. We run tight deadlines as a rule.

It seems to me that it is being marketed in a way that is
inconsistent with what I feel is going on behind the scenes.
I think it's a way to move wood that normally wouldn't
be sellable in The United States because of tariffs. But that's
only my opinion.

Good luck to you with the FSC. As long as your check clears you're in!!

I hear you about FSC jobs not selling, it really depends on your customer base and what their needs are. Right now a lot of people want to place the logo on their product to be viewed as "green". Is this really the best thing for them at this present time? To some yes, to others no. This is just my take, I am in a printing company within the Boston area and there is a lot of interest within the Chain of Custody material procedure.

Also, the paper companies we deal with are actually putting their paper back to normal cost because their whole lines are either FSC or SFI. So we don't absorb any extra cost, and we will not push any extra cost to customers either. An incentive in this economy for anything as small is helpful to customers I must say.

The selling of wood because of tariffs or not isn't the issue, its to insure there is "transparency" and "open-source" thinking for where the wood came from, how does that company manage their forests and so on. Granted, I believe E-Flower is a better solution to the whole process and not just paper production, but nothing in the U.S. has matched that. The market will eventually create a US version, but its all about acknowledging the fact that people want documented proof of their "green" initiatives. FSC, SFI and PEFC is one way and there are many others. FSC is just so popular because they are pushing their marketing efforts a lot more then SFI, and PEFC is more along the lines of private holders of land in Europe. It all has a place.

 

[doubting_thomas]

I understand the FSC's CoC transparency, what it means and what it ensures.
How much integrity can it have if we were not audited by a certified auditor?
Who else was not audited externally? Is that included in one's CoC number,
or published? No, it's not. That is not transparent and it has little integrity.

It is my opinion that many mills were generally practicing sustainable forestry
because it made good business sense, yet they received little or no credit
for their efforts unless they jumped through the FSC's hoops and payed their
money.

 

[oxburger]

The funniest part to me, aside from the cost and the hoops you have to jump through, is the fact that they say that through the christmas holidays there will be no rush jobs and to allow for a one to two week approval time. Like, right, the client is going to want to let their job sit for two weeks. We usually don't even have two days or even hours sometimes to get a job to press and they want us to wait for two weeks?!!!!!

 

[mattf]

I understand the FSC's CoC transparency, what it means and what it ensures.
How much integrity can it have if we were not audited by a certified auditor?
Who else was not audited externally? Is that included in one's CoC number,
or published? No, it's not. That is not transparent and it has little integrity.

It is my opinion that many mills were generally practicing sustainable forestry
because it made good business sense, yet they received little or no credit
for their efforts unless they jumped through the FSC's hoops and payed their
money.

Not sure why your company wasn't audited by a certified auditor. We had to go through a separate agency who does the audit itself and they give the Chain of Custody agencies the go ahead for our certified jobs.

Now for our audit process we HAVE to do an internal audit and give that as evidence, but we still have to do the external audit by an independent auditor.

Our deadlines are tight as well, but if a job wants to be certified and customers wish to place the logo on their work then extra time needs to be allowed, and our customers will accept that. If they want it so bad they'll see no problem with that extra step.

And yes, mills, suppliers and printers have always done these initiatives because its "good business" but in the end some customers want more then that. Company Sustainability Reports are a great example.

I'm not sure about how you got your certification but for all the printers I've talked to locally who are certified it was with an external auditor representing an auditing company who represents the agencies interest in the certification. The internal audit was just one step in the many.

Also, when the economy gets brighter in the future there will be call for this type of thing again. With that, customers will get back on it and the companies who have already become certified will have an edge compared to the rest who waited.

 

[mattf]

The funniest part to me, aside from the cost and the hoops you have to jump through, is the fact that they say that through the christmas holidays there will be no rush jobs and to allow for a one to two week approval time. Like, right, the client is going to want to let their job sit for two weeks. We usually don't even have two days or even hours sometimes to get a job to press and they want us to wait for two weeks?!!!!!

I assume this is mainly within FSC, and I've heard and seen a lot of ridiculous stories concerning their approval process on jobs. They have said they are getting "better", but it becomes convoluted at times to deal with their agency. I'd much prefer to handle SFI, but what can ya do. If the customer, and I stress the customer, wants this certification they have to follow the same rules you have to follow, so you both are in this together

 

[doubting_thomas]

mattf,

I guess we didn't have an external auditor because there isn't an agency
here that is certified (tongue in cheek) to audit us. Seriously though,
I would have thought that they'd fly a representative out for what it cost us
for the use of the logo. Boston is much larger than Seattle so I'm not shocked
that there is at least a third party there.

I agree that it's another arrow in the sales rep's quiver to be certified,
but I don't like how the FSC runs it's game. I think that our logo should
look different than yours because there was no external review of our
process. That would at least be honest and have some integrity.

 

[mattf]

mattf,

I guess we didn't have an external auditor because there isn't an agency
here that is certified (tongue in cheek) to audit us. Seriously though,
I would have thought that they'd fly a representative out for what it cost us
for the use of the logo. Boston is much larger than Seattle so I'm not shocked
that there is at least a third party there.

I agree that it's another arrow in the sales rep's quiver to be certified,
but I don't like how the FSC runs it's game. I think that our logo should
look different than yours because there was no external review of our
process. That would at least be honest and have some integrity.

The screwed up part is, the external auditor we were assigned was retired before he got hired into this. He was located in New Jersey as well, so there was a lot of strings to get this guy going because the eastern seaboard has very little auditors.

If only we had the capitol ourselves to become auditors we'd be swimming in money

 

[Craig]

I wonder if my toilet paper is FSC certified? As far as I'm concerned that's spot they can put their logo!

Doubting Thomas, why don't I find it hard to believe all the auditors are in California???

I just don't get it, trees for pulp are a sustainable product, cut one down plant one to replace it. It's just like the corn used in Ethanol. Maybe Green Peace will start a certification for Corn, because I want to make sure my Ethanol didn't come from old growth crop lands! It's a frigging scam that you are all getting sucked into, but if that makes you all "feel good", it's your money.

 

[mattf]

I wonder if my toilet paper is FSC certified? As far as I'm concerned that's spot they can put their logo!

Doubting Thomas, why don't I find it hard to believe all the auditors are in California???

I just don't get it, trees for pulp are a sustainable product, cut one down plant one to replace it. It's just like the corn used in Ethanol. Maybe Green Peace will start a certification for Corn, because I want to make sure my Ethanol didn't come from old growth crop lands! It's a frigging scam that you are all getting sucked into, but if that makes you all "feel good", it's your money.

Not making us "feel good", but making our customers feel good. Customers drive this concept and if they want the product they will buy it.