Reprographics 101

This post is intended for owners and senior managers of reprographics companies. This is going to be a fairly long-winded post. For those of you who have the attention-span of a gnat, don’t read on. For those of you who lack the passion to read anything other that “tweets”, don’t read on. For those of you who do keep an open mind to insights and advice from others, read on…..

In a recent previous post (which, apparently, has disappeared for now due to “issues” Google had (May 11th and 12th with its “blogger” service), I mentioned that there’s been a discussion going on, on LinkedIn (in the “Apprentice Group”), for the past few days. Quite a number of people have been participating in that discussion. The discussion was started off by Trevor Hansen of Thomas Reprographics. He started things off by saying this …..

“Today IRgA announced this years tradeshow will be the last. The cheese has moved… who will adapt and who will go hungry. This is an exciting and scary time for reprographics.”

If you aren’t a member of LinkedIn, I would encourage you to join LinkedIn (basic sign up is free) and to then join the “Apprentice” Group, so that you can follow, and participate in, the discussion that’s going on. (There are other “groups” you might wish to join, such as the IRgA Group.)

Although there have been several very interesting comments – and interesting “food for thought” – in the particular “discussion” I’ve mentioned, one “comment post”, in particular, was not only eloquently written, but very much to the point. I’ve received permission from the author of that post (Roberto Roque) to post his comments on Reprographics 101. However, to put his post-comments in complete context, it would be best if you would read his post-comments (and the other previous and subsequent post-comments) on LinkedIn, but, since I know there are lots of reprographers who are lazy, I’m going to post his post-comments here:

“Not long ago I had a discussion with a principal from a large engineering company in Spain; he was challenging (in a friendly way) the merits of a solution that I proposed. He mentioned that his company had just invested “large sums of money” on a leading edge document management system, and he was wondering what my modest solution could deliver that his recent acquisition could not do.

I asked him who managed the system and he said that it was him and two other trusted individuals because… the system was too complex and they did not want anybody else messing with it. I could not resist… I asked him how much was the hourly rate of a VP and two senior engineers combined and how much time they were all spending on managing projects. The puzzled look was priceless, after a few seconds of silence I told him that I could do some/most/or all of the same work a lot cheaper and just as effectively. More importantly, he followed up by saying that I had a valid point. The key issue in relation to value added is process, not necessarily technology. The same value arguments apply to BIM and IPD.

This experience validates a lot of your comments. Reprographers have always organized and delivered updated construction information. Now the medium has changed; prints may be going out of fashion but there is exponential growth in “information” and someone has to organize it, distribute it and track it. Why not any of you?

Many companies are investing heavy sums of money on systems that they would rather not have given different options, and I believe this is still an opportunity for reprographers.

There are some challenges in the way but many of you have suggested really good and viable approaches; at the end of the day this is less about technology and more about business process redesign for your companies.

Joel brings up the acquisition of new skills such as a CDM certification, not only a great idea but I believe it is absolutely necessary to play in this new environment.


New skills go hand in hand with the implementation / acquisition of document management technology. Plan rooms are obsolete. What kind of solution? Start focusing on Scott’s A B C’s; these are simple but relevant issues.

The next big barrier is image, as in “reprographers are all and only about prints”. This is a great disservice to the industry because the value of proper organization and quality control (so important) are overlooked, but unfortunately paper is the sacrificial lamb and guilt by association is rather inevitable. Repro has to create a new image as “Construction Information Experts” and “Solution Providers”. One of the speakers at the IRgA suggested: “Visualization Experts”. I think he was onto something as well. The answer lies with a good marketing and re-branding effort.

One last key challenge is sales. Paper was relatively easy and straightforward math; its value is self-evident. Solution selling is different; it demands an approach with is counter-intuitive to the traditional repro sale. The objective is not only to find (or train) a qualified sales person, but to create a culture within the organization that supports consultative selling. Some (or a lot) training may be in order across the board.

It was good to see again (and meet) some of you at the IRgA. Despite the news, I do believe that there is a future and plenty of opportunity for reprographers. Let me know if I can be of assistance. “

Roberto Roque

http://www.tritonstreet.com

Joel’s further comments:

Unfortunately, I did not take the opportunity to get to know Roberto when I was at the IRgA Convention. However, based on what he wrote, he’s not only a gifted writer, he, evidently, well-understands the issues that reprographers are facing, in spite of the fact that he’s never owned a reprographics company or, for that matter, never worked for one. I would imagine that he and his TritonStreet associates who attended the IRgA were there to drum up business for the consulting practice they are engaged in. Just my “general observation” about “reprographers vis a vis consultants” ….. there are not many reprographers who will seek consulting advice, even though most (and even larger companies) would benefit from advice and assistance from consultants. No one knows everything. Let me repeat that – no one knows everything. That applies to the owner of the smallest reprographics company – and to the CEO of the largest reprographics company – and to everyone in between. We are all error prone and we are all subject to “missing something.” There’s an old adage that goes something like this, “you can’t see the forest for the trees.”

According to “Answers.com”, this is a literal interpretation of that adage:

“You cannot see the big picture, as your are immersed in the details. You have to get out of the forest to see it, because while you are in the forest, you only see the trees that comprise the forest; but you cannot see the forest as a whole. When you are focusing on details, it is more difficult to see the issue as a whole, as you can only see the details that comprise the issue.”

Or, for those who prefer a “twit” or “tweet” length interpretation:

“You cannot see the big picture.”

Anyone – anyone – who thinks he (or she) “knows it all” is – sorry to put it this way, but I will – an idiot!

It is not wise to rely “just” on your own internal team to review how your business is doing, or to develop (and constantly tweak) your strategic plan, or to finalize your marketing and branding “pitch.” You and your internal team members may well be too close to the trees to see the forest. And, that’s where “knowledgeable, smart” consultants can play an important role for your company. How many of you have hired outside consultants to help you with the “big picture?” How many of you have an “advisory” board of directors, one that includes “outsiders?” ARC’s board of directors includes several people who, before they joined ARC’s board, had not an ounce of experience with the issues reprographers face. Yet, they are in a position to contribute to ARC’s review and planning processes, because they are smart people and because they are not too close to the trees to see the forest. I don’t care how small or large your company is; every company, no matter its size, can reap benefits from having “outsiders” involved in review and planning.

The “key”, though, is selecting the “right” consultant(s) and/or the “right” advisory board members.

After I read the post-comment that Roberto Roque wrote and read TritonStreet’s “consulting services” menu, I corresponded with Roberto to ask him to provide me “five key points” that would address this question, “why would the owner of a reprographics company want to consider engaging Roberto/Triton?”

Roberto’s reply:

“….. given our background, we believe that we understand what is ailing this industry, and we believe we are able to come up with good strategies to bring about change and profitability.

Five key points:

1 – We know reprographics inside and out and we understand its potential as integral part of the construction business.

2 – We can help reprographers to:

a) – Assess their existing business model and propose ways to improving their image, expanding their customer base, and generate new revenue.

b) – Identify needs and create and structure a training/education path to expand executive/employee skills (training and education).

c) – Help to identify, evaluate and align technologies to business needs (technology aligned to opportunity and business needs).

3 – We can assist them to develop a “solution oriented” sales process.

4 – We can help with their writing, presentation skills and overall communications.

5 – We have a track record of results.

Joel’s final comment: the reprographics business isn’t getting easier, it’s getting more difficult. Changes are coming about faster than ever before. Reprographers must thoroughly evaluate their current business models and must make a determined effort to develop appropriate strategies to adapt to change, to remain relevant, and to remain profitable (or to return to profitability.) Reprographers who don’t do these things will not survive. Any “outsiders” viewpoint and assistance may well prove to be the difference between “staying in business” or “failing”.

p.s., giving credit where credit is due. In Roberto’s post-comment, he said…. “Joel brings up the acquisition of new skills such as a CDM certification, not only a great idea but I believe it is absolutely necessary to play in this new environment.” That idea is not mine, but rather was an idea (suggestion) put forth by Jared Willis.

On September 20^th, 2010, an article appeared on MarketWatch that started out with this paragraph:

“WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The U.S. recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009, making the 18-month slump the longest since the Great Depression, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research.”

This morning, I came across some numbers – printing employment per the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – that Dr. Joe Webb published in an article on whattheythink.com. Dr. Joe Webb is a pre-eminent economist/statistician who frequently publishes opinions and statistics about the printing industry; in particular, about the economics of that industry.

I’m going to now share with you the “employment numbers” in the printing industry, 2006 through 2011, and, afterwards, of course, I’m going to make some comments.

NAICS 323 Printing Employment

(source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

“Job losses”, cumulative, 2006-2011 = 116.1 (in thousands)

“Change”, cumulative, 2006-2011 = -25.9%

Joel’s further comments:

I don’t know if these numbers include “reprographics” industry production workers or “just” printing industry production workers. I’m pretty sure, however, that the cumulative percentage change in the reprographics industry, 2006 to 2011, is greater than -25.9%. It’s very likely that the reprographics industry has lost 30-40% of its production workers since 2006. (If you want to take a closer look at this, ARC, in its 10K reports, reports the approximate number of employees on board, so, if you look back at ARC’s 2006 and 2007 and 2010 employee numbers, you should be able to see how large the employment drop-off has been in the “reprographics” industry. What’s happened at ARC, employee-number-wise, 2006-2011, has pretty much happened in the reprographics industry as a whole.)

These numbers are staggering and sobering! And, here’s what’s really bothering me about these numbers.

a) The recession, s-u-p-p-o-s-e-d-l-y, ended in June 2009.

b) Printers (I’m speaking about the “printing” industry, not the “reprographics” industry) have reported improvements in their sales revenue numbers in 2011 vs. 2010; the printing industry is experiencing “a recovery.” Not a great improvement, mind you, but any improvement is better than no improvement.

c) But, in spite of the improvement in their sales revenues, “printers”, apparently, are continuing to reduce jobs. Is “technology” driving further job losses?

Most “reprographers” would, I think, agree that A/E/C customers are printing less (per-project) than they did in the past. “Printers”, I’m sure, realize that their customers are not “printing” as much stuff as they used to. The Internet has reduced the need to print. PDF files have reduced the need to print. Laptops and iPADs (and other similar devices) have reduced the need to print. If printer “sales revenues” are going up, but printer employment numbers are continuing to drop, then what does that say about the future of the “printing” industry … and, likewise, about the future of the “reprographics” industry? This morning, I published an article on the blog to alert my blog-visitors to a discussion – on LinkedIn (in the “Apprentice Group”) – that’s been going on for the last 2 or 3 days. That discussion is about “change”. That discussion is exploring the continuing relevancy of reprographers – and the industry as a whole. A few years ago – at an IRgA Convention – the C.T.O. of BPI Repro, NYC (by then owned by ARC) said during a panel discussion (as best I can recall) that “in the future, reprographers will not be printers, but ‘information managers.’” The BIG QUESTION, BACK THEN AND STILL NOW, is, if reprographers are going to print less in the future than they are now or have in the past, then how will reprographers survive the revenue-loss-impact (not to mention the gross-profit-loss-impact) of this change? If you’re a reprographer and you employed 100 people when things were hot and heavy back in 2006, how many employees do you now have, now that we’re in May 2011? And, if plan and spec printing, per project, continues to decline in the future, even when the A/E/C industry recovers, how many employees (and how much production center space) will you need in the future if your company morphs into a business that generates 50% or more of its revenues from providing “document management” (DM) services and 50% or less of its revenues from “printing services”? And, if your revenue mix, a couple of years beyond that, “splits” 75% DM and 25% prints-on-paper, how many employees (and how much production center space) will you need then? I’m hearing a lot of reprographers say that “DM” is the wave of the future and that, in order to remain relevant to A/E/C customers, reprographers have to be capable of offering , and will have to offer, “DM” services to their A/E/C customers. (And, of course, many are already doing that.) The BIG QUESTION is, will there be enough of a demand – for “DM” services – to support all of the reprographics companies who now operate in the reprographics industry? Or, are we looking at a “further shrinking” of the industry? If in 2006, gross revenues of reprographers, collectively speaking, were around $5 billion, where has that number fallen to at this point? And, where will that number be two or three years from now, even after the A/E/C industry has recovered? Don’t put off planning your future. Not only do you need to figure out how to ensure that your company (your services) will remain relevant to your customer base, you’re also going to need to determine what your company’s needs are going to be, down the road, in terms of production center space and team members. Good luck with your planning process. And, be kind to your production workers.

On May 11^th, 2011, ARC participated in, and presented at, RW Baird’s “Growth Stock Conference,” which was held in Chicago, IL. In conjunction with that conference, ARC updated its Investor Presentation PowerPoint document.

You can use this link to access ARC’s May 2011 Investor Presentation Powerpoint document:

http://tinyurl.com/3q7ys32

On page 6 of the Powerpoint file, ARC provides these comments:

“Current Extraordinary Headwinds:”

– Cyclical drivers: unemployment and vacancy rates – both are improving but still high

– Credit constraints due to financial crisis – improving but still difficult

Two of the definitions of the word “extraordinary” are …..

1. beyond what is usual, ordinary, regular, or established.

2. exceptional in character, amount, extent, degree, etc.; noteworthy; remarkable.

While I would agree with ARC that the word “headwinds” is a very appropriate word, I’m not sure that I would agree with the use of the word “extraordinary”, given the definition of that word and given what all reprographers know, from past experience, about the cyclical nature of the A/E/C reprographics business and industry. As all reprographers know (perhaps with the exception of younger reprographers who are only now learning about the true meaning of the word “cyclical” as it applies to the design/development/construction industry and to the reprographics industry), the A/E/C industry goes through up and down cycles. To me, those up and down cycles are not “extraordinary,” they are “ordinary.” We know that they WILL happen. It’s just that it’s very hard to predict exactly WHEN they will happen, and it is nearly impossible to predict HOW LONG THEY WILL ENDURE (meaning, predicting how long an “upside” cycle will last or predicting how long a “downside” cycle will last, is virtually impossible.) Other than a minor blip in 2000-2001, the A/E/C industry, and the reprographics industry, experienced, from 1993 to 2007, one of the longest, strongest “upside” cycles those industries experienced in my lifetime (and, at 64, I’m old.) Hopefully, the next “up-cycle” will, when it finally begins, be another very long, very strong up-cycle.

And, while “credit constraints” are certainly a “headwind”, they, too, are (in my humble opinion) “ordinary”, not “extraordinary.” They (changes in the availability of project financing) happen from time to time, as lenders raise and lower interest rates and as lenders tighten and loosen up credit and equity requirements.

To me, the extraordinary “headwind” A/E/C reprographers face at this point in the history of reprographics “vis a vis” the A/E/C industry, is not the cyclicality of design / development / construction, nor the cyclicality of financing for A/E/C projects, but, rather, the headwind that’s represented by the single-most extraordinary change the reprographics industry has ever, in my lifetime, experienced. And, I’m speaking about the ‘headwind” that “A/E/C business process automation” represents. More and more A/E/C customers are finding ways to reduce the need to print. More and more A/E/C firms are moving to BIM. As the use of BIM grows, the need to print A/E/C documents will decline. As the use of electronic estimating software programs increases, that, too, will have an adverse impact on “print. Historically, traditionally, virtually all reprographers generated most of their “large-format” revenues from printing “bid sets” (that typically takes place once or twice for each project.) As I’ve pointed out in previous articles on this blog, A/E/C customers are not reducing print quantities because they want to be green, they are reducing print quantities because developments in “business process automation” are enabling them to print less than they printed before. In addition to that change, there has been a very dramatic shift in “where” printing is done. Reprographers who I speak to (and I do speak to a lot of reprographers all over the country) are complaining that, nowadays, they aren’t getting as many “buik” (high-volume) print orders as they used to get and that they are seeing more and more customers, especially GC customers, “send files” to project participants, rather than send “prints.” This typifies the shift from “centralized” printing to “decentralized” printing. As a reprographer, would I rather receive an order for 50 sets of printed plans and specs, or would I rather receive an order for 50 CD’s or, worse yet, would I rather receive an order to put documents (plans and specs) in my plan room with instructions from the customer who placed those files with me to permit “file downloads” to project participants who need the documents? Some will point out, and rightly so, that just because files are transferred, rather than printed “centrally”, does not mean that those files won’t be printed. Most who receive the files will print them (or order prints from the files.) And, this is why reprographers have offered “FM” programs, even down to the sub-contractor level. (Quite frankly, any reprographer who still does not offer “equipment for customer offices” is completely missing the boat.) Offering FM programs allows a reprographer to capture at least some of the revenue from “distributed” printing. But, the main point I’d like to make about this particular issue (the morphing of centralized printing to decentralized printing) is that the highest margin A/E/C print jobs reprographers have traditionally done were the “centralized” high-volume bid set jobs they did. Maintaining that same margin of profitability will, at best, be tough to achieve.

In Investor Presentation Powerpoint document, ARC points out, under the “key investment highlights” on page 7, that it has the ability to acquire more companies to expand market share. ARC certainly has strong experience with that, and, in past articles on this blog, I believe I’ve stated that ARC’s “industry roll-up” was an outstanding, and well-executed, growth strategy. Many reprographers who did not sell to ARC when they were first approached by ARC (prior to the start of the current recession) are remorseful that they did not sell-out to ARC. It is quite likely that those reprographers are looking forward to the resumption of ARC’s reprographer-acquisition initiatives. Personally, I think that “right now” would be a good time for ARC to re-start its acquisition initiatives, for there are likely to be companies available at a price less than half of what ARC would have paid before the recession started. As in the real-estate foreclosure market, if you have the financial wherewithal to buy, the bargains are there to be had. ARC has the knowledge and experience to quickly consolidate acquisitions into its existing business, and there are, most certainly, economies of scale to be gained. Unfortunately, one negative outcome will likely be a further decline in the total number of reprographics industry employees. Anyway, during the past couple of quarters, if not a bit longer, ARC’s been talking about renewing its acquisition activities. We’ll just have to sit back and see if that actually happens.

Also in Investor Presentation Powerpoint document, ARC points out, under the “key investment highlights” on page 7, that it has “explosive growth potential upon economic recovery”. In order to achieve that, I think ARC’s going to have to figure out a) how to rapidly grow its FM/MPS business, b) how to rapidly grow its Riot Color business, c) how to grow its market share(s) in each and every market in which it competes (whether by acquisition or by smart deal-making), and d) most of all, how to effectively deal with the most severe headwind that all reprographers face (I’m speaking about the one I mentioned earlier in this post). And, ARC has to keep its fingers crossed that the A/E/C industry’s recovery will come sooner than later.

ARC also indicates in the Investor Presentation Powerpoint document, under key investment highlights, that it has had solid financial performance. ARC incurred net losses in 2009, in 2010, and in Q1 2011. (per numbers for ARC published by Google Finance.) Given past performance, prior to 2009, ARC does have the ability to generate significant profits, but whether ARC has the ability to grow its business back to, or, or that matter, over and above, what it was before the recession started remains to be seen. So far, 2011, for ARC and for all reprographers, is shaping up to be yet another difficult, stressful year.

I’ve got four “growth” recommendations for ARC’s management team:

a) acquire ABC Imaging

b) acquire Service Point Solutions’ USA subsidiary

c) acquire “LINK DSG” and the companies that formed LINK

d) later on, acquire the remaining ReproMAX companies that you did not purchase prior to the recession.

If ARC follows these “suggestions” it will likely increase its revenues to in excess of $ 1 billion …. and really wind up with “no competition”.

ARC also says in its Investor Presentation Powerpoint document that it has “unmatched ability to serve national/global customers.” In my opinion, that’s absolutely not the case in Europe, where OCE (which does provide reprographics services to A/E/C firms in Europe, even though OCE does not do that in the U.S. market) has a very, very large presence, and, since OCE combined forces with Canon, OCE has very deep financial resources and unmatched geographic coverage in Europe. In addition to OCE, SPS has a significant presence (and network of locations) in Europe. And, in the U.S., ABC Imaging, in spite of the fact that it is a lot smaller than ARC, has, over the past 18-24 months, managed to pick-off at least four prestigious, well-respected, large “national” accounts in the U.S. (Parsons Brinkerhoff, PBSJ Corp, Dewberry, and Perkins & Will.)

Back to the Investor Presentation Powerpoint document, the graphics and numbers on page 16 are both impressive and intriguing. However, the graphics and numbers on page 19 are depressing. Since “the industry goes as ARC goes,” let’s all – all of us – hope that ARC finds a way to make page 19’s graphics and numbers more enjoyable to read … when they are published in future presentations!

I just noticed that NRI has a new management-team member, Russell Genest, who evidently joined NRI’s team just this month. Russell Genest’s title is “Vice President of Solutions Sales” at NRI.

Prior to joining NRI’s team, Russell Genest was “Director of North American Sales” at Satellier, Inc. Below, I’ve posted information about Satellier; interesting stuff.

Just a guess, of course, but I’m guessing that Russell will not only be involved in NRI’s business, but will also be involved in developing business for “LINK”, the company recently formed by NRI, Thomas Reprographics and Callprint.

Best wishes to Russell!

______________________________

“About” Russell Genest’s previous employer:

Satellier is the world’s leading CAD and BIM production and solutions provider to AECO firms, real estate companies, and city governments. Having completed project documentation for over 5,000 projects across more than 50 countries, Satellier is the “Firm of Choice” in the AECO industry and has been featured on CNN, CNBC, and myriads of business, technology, and AEC publications worldwide. Satellier serves markets all over the globe through its office in offices in New Delhi, London, Dubai, Shanghai, Sydney, and Chicago.

Just to let you know …. some of the more recent posts on this blog have “disappeared”, due to Google having “issues” with its “blog-site” (blogger) service. There is a chance those missing posts will reappear, but there’s also the chance that they won’t reappear. I guess I’ll know more in a day (or maybe a few days.)

Frequent visitors to “Reprographics 101” are aware that, from time to time, I post “mentions” of articles and reviews, authored by Dr. Lachmi Khemlani, that appear on the web-site, aecbytes.com.

Today, I noticed that Dr. Khemlani, owner/publisher of aecbytes.com, recently posted an article that provides a very, very extensive review of (and a comparison of) – Adobe Acrobat X Pro and Bluebeam PDF Revu 9.

The headings, below in “bold green” type, show you the four main “sections” of Dr. Khemani’s article.

Adobe Acrobat X Pro and Bluebeam PDF Revu 9

Here’s what Dr. Khemlani says to begin the article she wrote:

“In this review, we will explore the latest versions of the two most commonly used electronic publishing solutions in the AEC industry, Adobe Acrobat and Bluebeam PDF Revu, both of which were recently released.”

In each of the two following sections, Dr. Khemlani provides an extensive review of each product:

Enhancements in Adobe Acrobat X Pro

Enhancements in Bluebeam PDF Revu 9

And, the last “section” of her article contains her analysis and conclusions:

Analysis and Conclusions

Immediately below, you’ll find three items I pulled from the last section of the article; I did this simply to “highlight” some of what she said in the last section:

“Given the long history of Adobe’s work with PDFs and its Acrobat product, it has been very sad to see Adobe retreating from the AEC electronic publishing space that it once helped to revolutionize. It is no longer developing an AEC-focused version of Acrobat, and is instead focused on addressing the needs of businesses in general and their document publishing and collaboration needs.”

“Adobe no longer exhibits at the annual AIA show (the 2011 convention is coming up later this week), and the outsourcing of its 3D PDF development to a third party vendor is a further sign that AEC is no longer one of its key target markets.”

“But as they say, “one person’s loss is another person’s gain,” and this has certainly been true for Bluebeam, which has nicely stepped in to fill the void in the AEC industry left behind by Adobe. Bluebeam was always focused on the PDF needs of AEC firms, but until now, it was missing a critical component—the ability to work with 3D PDF files created from models that the AEC industry is increasingly relying on for design and construction. As shown in this review, this capability is still far from perfect in Revu 9, which was not able to create a 3D PDF file from a U3D file like it was supposed it. But it could view a 3D model in a 3D PDF file and provided most of the capabilities for viewing and navigating it that Acrobat had. The fact that the model navigation interface of Revu is almost identical to that of Acrobat does not give Bluebeam many points for originality—hopefully, it can come up with better and more innovative ways of working with 3D models as it further develops its 3D PDF capabilities.”

Finally, if you are in the reprographics business, you should (let’s just say that I think you would want to) keep up to date on software your A/E customers are using that will affect how you serve the needs of A/E customers. I encourage (if not “urge) you to read the entire article Dr. Khemlani wrote. If you are not technically inclined, then perhaps you might want to get your C.T.O. or “chief” I.T. guy to read the article, so he/she can explain it to you! Here’s a link to the complete article:

http://www.aecbytes.com/review/2011/Acrobat10-Revu9.html

About the Author

Lachmi Khemlani is founder and editor of AECbytes. She has a Ph.D. in Architecture from UC Berkeley, specializing in intelligent building modeling, and consults and writes on AEC technology. She can be reached at lachmi@aecbytes.com.

I would think that reprographers, especially those who are offering – or those who are thinking about offering – “document management” software and services (such as ARC’s PlanWell Collaborate and ReproMAX’s cMAX) would be interested in knowing what Autodesk is doing in that same space.

That said, for those of you who are interested in knowing more about Autodesk’s recently released Autodesk “Vault Collaboration for AEC” products, the first document I think you should take a look at is the one called “Top Ten Reasons to Add Vault Collaboration AEC to Your Workflow”, as this document is one that your A/E/C customers are being exposed to.

Here’s a link to that particular document:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B81al4kFAU9JYjQyNjIzZjktNmU1Zi00YjdjLTgwNmUtNTBlN2M1OGE2OTVj&hl=en&authkey=CKvizpAM

Going a bit further, here’s what Autodesk says about its “Vault” products:

Autodesk Vault “Products”

Data Management for the Workgroup

Autodesk® Vault data management software products include Autodesk® Vault Workgroup, Autodesk® Vault Collaboration, Autodesk Vault Collaboration AEC, and Autodesk® Vault Professional software. Vault software manages data creation, simulation, and documentation processes for design, engineering, and construction workgroups. Enjoy more control over design data with revision management capabilities, and quickly find and reuse design data, for easier management of your design and engineering information. Tightly integrated with Autodesk Digital Prototyping and Building Information Modeling (BIM) applications, Autodesk Vault data management software enables teams to more efficiently collaborate and meet tight deadlines.

• Best-in-class design tool integration—Manage data associated with the digital model throughout the project lifecycle.

• Concurrent design—Multiple users can work collaboratively without overwriting the others’ data.

• Data reuse—Find, organize, copy, and reuse data to save time, so you can spend more of your workday innovating.

• Revision management—Release and track files securely throughout the design cycle to reduce errors.

• Scalable multisite solution—Synchronize design data among distributed workgroups with multisite functionality.

Here’s a link to the Autodesk web-site page where I found this stuff:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=4502718&siteID=123112

We’ve done seven previous posts on “Reprographics 101” about Florida Reprographics’ Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. If you want to review those earlier posts, enter “Florida Reprographics” in the search window on this blog.

Our last article/post about FR’s BK matter was published on Tuesday, April 19^th, 2011.

We just completed a very brief review of additional BK Court filings, since then, and, now, here’s a brief update for those of you who are following (or who have an interest in the outcome of) the FR BK matter.

1. A modification to the previously filed BK Reorganization Plan was filed, but I think the only party the modification affected was PNC Bank, FR’s largest secured creditor.

2. Apparently, very few (only five or six) creditors bothered to “vote” on the BK Reorganization Plan. Those that did vote all voted to confirm (accept) the BK Reorganization Plan.

3. Chris Charles, the owner of FR submitted a filing to confirm that he is in favor of the BK Reorganization Plan (not surprising, at all, since he’s allowed to collect a $4,000 bi-weekly salary from the company!) :):):)

4. I don’t think the BK Court has yet to officially confirm and accept the Reorganization Plan, but I do think that the Court’s formal / official acceptance is a foregone conclusion, and I say that because I did not see any “negative” ballots cast in the creditor voting process.

During the first week of May, Florida Reprographics filed with the Bankruptcy Court its Operating Report for March 2011. In our previous post (on April 19^th), we included a table to show FR’s operating results from December, January and February. The table you’ll next see has been updated to include March 2011:

The “table” below is an at-a-glance summary of the information FR has reported about its business operations since filing BK.

The monthly report that’s required to be filed each month does contain a numerous list of “standard” questions, and, below, I’ve chosen to publish some of the “standard” questions from the most recent monthly report; I decided to do this because I found some of the answers, this month, to be thought provoking. Unfortunately, beyond answering “yes” or “no”, the reporting procedure does not, apparently, require any further details. The lack of detail kind of leaves one wondering, “what’s going on?”

My questions:

a) Did someone new-to-the-scene make an investment in the business?

b) Did the company find a new source of financing (to perhaps fund/finance continuing operations?)

Okay, here are some of the “standard” questions that appear in the monthly report and the “yes” answers that were given to these particular questions in the report filed for the month of March:

Joel’s further comments:

Unless FR’s business achieves a miraculous turnaround, I don’t see how the largest secured creditor is going to be able to collect the full amount of the debt owed to it by FR. And, I certainly don’t see how any of the unsecured creditors are going to be able to collect much, if anything, of the debts they are owed. The reprographics business in the Tampa Bay Market area is “kind of” in the toilet, due to the fact that the A/E/C industry in the area is also in the toilet.

For those of you who want to see the March 2011 Operating Report, you can access it by clicking on this link:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B81al4kFAU9JYTU0ZGViZmQtMjk1OS00MzIxLWEwYzEtNDRjODEyMmEyNWFj&hl=en&authkey=CNqk7d4M

For those of you who want to see the “Modification to the BK Reorg Plan”, you can access it by clicking on this link:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B81al4kFAU9JOTU2M2IzZjgtNjdiYi00YWEyLThmNDQtMzdmNTNmOWZjYTg2&hl=en&authkey=CN-IjsUM

For those of you who want to see the document filed by Chris Charles that shows his support of the BK Reorg Plan, you can access it by clicking on this link:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B81al4kFAU9JMGM1YWE0MGEtODRlZi00OGE0LTgxNjYtNjU4OTQ4ODk4NGEw&hl=en&authkey=COXJgwM

Disclaimer: You should not rely on this article, nor on this blog, for definitive or exact information about a matter that’s in any court. You can, on your own, access court records (and any and all filings) by opening an account at http://www.pacer.gov

This evening, thanks to a heads-up from Art Post (of the blog/web-site www.p4photel.com/), I found another web-site that covers the “imaging” industry. Just what we needed, huh!

Here’s the Internet address – http://www.theweekinimaging.com/

Here’s what it says about “theweekinimaging”….

“The Week in Imaging is an online, interactive one-stop news and information source that targets anyone who sells imaging solutions, including independent dealers, VARs, sales and service personnel in manufacturer direct branches as well as hardware manufacturers and solutions and service providers. 
It was founded by publisher and editor, Scott Cullen, who has been writing about office equipment industry since 1986 and has worked as an editor and writer for numerous industry trade publications. The majority of The Week in Imaging’s readers are imaging solutions resellers although the information we present is pertinent to anyone in the imaging industry. The home page is updated weekly and offers multiple capsule insights on the week’s top story, stories or trends from a variety of sources and perspectives as covered by various industry analysts, bloggers, and writers. Visitors interested in drilling down further can follow the links to the original source material and, if the information is not from a subscription-based publication, read more. In addition, The Week in Imaging includes monthly features, departments, columns, and blogs focusing on all facets of the imaging industry as well as the people and the players involved.”

Joel’s comments:

The above web-site has a lot of information about “MPS”.

And, I’ve discovered where the term “MPS” came from, finally!

Reprographers, you are all, of course, aware that, before we determined there was a need to modernize its name, the “reprographics” industry” used to be called the “blueprinting” industry. Without question, “reprographics” is far sexier than “blueprinting.”!!!

Well, if the word “blueprinting” wasn’t sexy, then the term “copier business” wasn’t sexy either. [Frankly, not much difference between a used car salesperson and a new (or used) copier salesperson.] Anyhow, I think that “MPS” is the acronym that “office copying/printing equipment dealers and manufacturers” are now (and, for a while by now, have been) using to describe “comprehensive” cost-per-copy programs that that industry has been offering for years. “MPS” sounds a lot sexier, but, to me, it certainly isn’t a new business.

Service Point Solutions is back in the black!

RESULTS FOR Q1 2011

Joel’s comment: “Speaking in $USD dollars” (and based on the EURO/USD exchange rate this morning), Service Point Solutions earned a whopping $92,147 bottom line profit on sales of $78,757,100. (Should I have used the term “ekes out” instead of the word, “whopping”? Well, all kidding aside, a profit – any profit – is better than a loss!)

FROM A PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY SERVICE POINT EARLY THIS MORNING:

• First-quarter revenue rose 4.7% to €54.7 million (EURO)

• 1Q11 EBITDA was the highest in seven quarters

• The company expects to post over €20 million (EURO) in EBITDA in 2011

9 May 2011 – Service Point Solutions SA (ticker: SPS.MC) registered growth in all its key income statement headings in 1Q11. The first-quarter release marks the company’s return to profits.

In the first quarter of 2011, Service Point’s revenue rose 4.7% year-on-year to €54.7 million (EURO), ahead of our guidance for topline growth of 3% for the quarter. The recent trends in business volumes, new customer wins and average customer orders, the growth in online sales and the consolidation of Holmbergs in Sweden from May give us the confidence to venture that revenue in 2011 will exceed €230 million, leaving EBITDA of more than €20 million.

Topline growth in 1Q11, coupled with control over operating expenses, drove EBITDA 8% higher year-on-year to €4.7 million, its highest level in seven quarters, while the EBITDA margin expanded. EBIT, meanwhile, jumped 50.4% to €2.0 million. Service Point returned to profits in 1Q11, with net profit of €64 thousand, compared to a loss of €334 thousand in 1Q10.

On 19 April the company closed the €14.5 million equity issue approved at an EGM on 21 February. The issue was oversubscribed by 1.4x, demonstrating shareholder support for the company’s 2011- 2013 business plan. The proceeds will be used to support the Group’s organic growth, prioritising the online segment, and to fund the acquisition of Holmbergs in Sweden, which will reinforce our presence in the important Scandinavian market.

In 1Q11 the company also signed a refinancing agreement with 100% of the banks party to its syndicated loan. Essentially the new agreement extends the loan maturity to a single bullet payment in 3Q13 and establishes new, dynamic financial covenants in line with current earnings and the Group’s business strategy for 2011-2013.

Service Point Solutions (www.servicepoint.net) is a leading provider of document and information management solutions. It services a broad spectrum of industries, including the AEC, corporate, financial, public services and educations segments. It employs 2,400 people across nine countries (the UK, US, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, France and Sweden) via a network of 128 service points worldwide and 794 facilities management programs. SPS is headquartered in Spain and listed on the Madrid and Barcelona stock exchanges (ticker: SPS.MC).

For further information: Service Point Solutions, S.A.

Pablo Divasson del Fraile

pablodivasson@servicepoint.net

Tel +34 93 5082400 / Fax +34 93 5082442