From what I've seen offered currently, it seems all the products offered are focused on placing weight on editing and composition of new items. While this technically solves the clients needs, it solves nothing in the real world.
I've identified where this technology needs to be used in my particular situation. As it stands, a client who wants an array of printed products is unaware of the associated overhead for each product. Let me explain... If a client requests a catalog or brochure, either they provide a file, or just content + specification - in the hopes we can provide layout services to their liking. A job like these has built-in costs for developing a press-ready file, and that's great. The ratio of print cost to layout cost is favorable to the client and to the provider. However, when smaller items come down the pipe, these are the ones that simply kill you.
Everyone has been there many times. Sure the catalog was quoted to have 6 hours to compose + 2 sets of proofs. Once signed off, it hits the press (digital or traditional - no matter). The same client then has 4 business cards they need. Sure, no problem. Only a business card suddenly has a personal connection to the client. They care more about it then the catalog. They have your pre-press turning in circles for AAs on those 4 names until it's time to go home. The ratio isn't so favourable anymore, and the client complains about the price of business cards - and tell you they can get it done down the street for next to nothing.
White this may not always be the case, even a happy customer does not equal a happy printer. Let's say you cover your pre-press costs properly and charge the client for every AA and colour change. What have you got at the end of the day? A happy client, a profitable pre-press department, but ... other clients are upset they haven't seen their proofs yet, and the press operators are pushing brooms.
The thing that kills us the most are the small things. The things that don't represent any significant slice of income to the operation. Some wave this off as "the cost of keeping the client". Sorry, some client's only order junk like that, and never any real printing. The margin is so small on the little stuff, you can't justify additional pre-press operators - nor should you. As that would clearly make you a player for the race to the bottom.
We require a more intelligent approach. When a job comes it under the category of GIGO, yes, we will do it... once. I want the client to log into our site, see ALL their assets (not created online, just a record) and choose the items they have purchased before, and order a reprint. Updated information can and should be offered at that stage. A structure where they can update THEIR standing material (GIGO) and self-approve the work. If they have a large staff structure (they are the worst) with 1500 employees over 12 locations, they should have director approval. The managers order the self-proofed cards/LH/#10s, and the director approves the order. The manager gets a notification, and places the order.
We would then receive the order in the form of a press-ready PDF - all ganged with offset allowances for whatever press its going to. If it's a short-run digital job, the PDF is in full colour. If there are standing shells, Only the names will show on the PDF. The idea is to remove the overhead on the items that you would normally lose production time on or where margins are too small to support the amount of operator time needed to bring the file to press.
Customers should have whatever design they like (no limits) and not limited to the composition abilities of an on-line layout UI. To me, that's reinventing the wheel (a wooden one at that). Additionally, an on-line UI composer represents a closed solution. Once the client accepts it, you're married to it. If anything goes amiss with the vendor, good luck. Clients don't like to be locked into doing something (for the most part) The idea that they have to do more then call in the order (for the GIGO items), would put them off from the service completely.
The Web-2-Print model should be there as a SUPPORT measure for the industry needs, not as a new player in a crowded room. Besides, I would rather generate a proper layout to show the client (and support it) than make an "attempt" at selling the client a confined method of asset development - much less have them do it themselves. I can just see it now, swash wedding text dropped out of a process image a hairs breath away from the cut.
True asset management, revision to standing materials on-line (text layer in PDF), smart UI features like location selection (for multi-office operations), normalized naming conventions (dashes or dots between numbers), IMPO output templates, and history control.
