How Can Stratasys and 3D Systems Turn it all Around

[Brian_Krassenstein]

As Stratasys (NASDAQ:SSYS) and 3D Systems (NYSEDD) have continued to show signs of struggle and with their stocks trading down, it's easy to wonder just what factors have led to these poor performances. Rick Twiggs, who runs his own consulting company, Unchained Thought, was able to provide 3DPrint.com with some insights on the recent performance of the 3D printing industry. From views following what happened in the early days of the 2D printing industry, Twiggs' insights provide deeper perspective on the place of large companies in a growing industry. Read about his thoughts in the full article: http://3dprint.com/64251/stratasys-3d-systems-sales/

[Placebo]

That is definitely and interesting point of view on the industry as a whole. One thing to consider is the extreme difference in technologies and how that effects cost to purchase. So comparing the higher end machines to the rep raps, makerbots, cubes, etc. is like comparing apples to oranges. The cost of getting into the high end machines is certainly going to stagnate the market once you start approaching saturation. Add to that both 3D Systems and Stratasys were gobbling up competitors at an astonishing rate that has only just begun to slow. I'm shocked they haven't invested more time and money into advertising the consumer level printers. It seems to me that should have begun about a year ago when 3D printing was making the rounds on the local TV news stations. Their "HP" approach to proprietary filament cartridges would be much more effective if marketed to the masses. The DIY people will never be on board with those type printers but millions of other people would if they just simply pushed advertising.

[curious aardvark]

yeah there are only so many £300,000 pound machines you can sell before the market is saturated.
And for everyone who buys a brand new objet 300, there's a second hand objet 200 on the market for someone with slightly less money to buy.

The consumer market and drm protected files are where the big longterm money will be at.

Interesting bit about print bureaus. I guess 3d hubs and similiar companies is partly responsible, as is the fact that for under $300 you can get a kit and buils your own machine. Getting things printed by 3rd parties is still very expensive. If you use such services regularly - then it's a no brainer to get your own machine.

The other thing to bear in mind is how fast the technology is progressing. There are no doubt a lot of fence sitters who are waiting to see what the next gen will do, and with rapid prototyping they'll be out next year, not in 5 years.

[Mike]

Well written article, Eddie.

I'm not in complete agreement with Twiggs' theory, although some of it is certainly valid.

I'm aging myself badly here, but I was working in the magazine business prior to desktop publishing's existence. I remember typesetting machines and paste-up boards, so I'm pretty tuned into the old paper printing market. I can see the analogy, but it isn't entirely accurate, because it doesn't take the Printing Press into account. Professional results could not be achieved at Kinkos or Staples. If you wanted a magazine, book or newspaper printed, you had to go to a printing press house. This industry still exists today. It has shrunken radically, but the crash in demand was a result of what is arguably the most disruptive technological advancement in history (the internet), as opposed to natural market size limitations vs. over-supply.

Stratasys and 3D Systems stock prices are tanking because 3D printing is experiencing the classic Gartner Hype Graph. The bubble started bursting at the beginning of 2014 and we are near the Trough of Disillusionment. Printer sales are still growing. It is similar to the dot com boom, only less economically destructive because it doesn't play as big a role in society. When the dot com bubble burst, the internet didn't go away. Amazon proceeded to destroy millions of brick and mortar retail jobs. The Web has continued to grow, but investors view it realistically, which they didn't during the bubble. The same could be said for the 3D printing bubble. 3D printing stocks were simply overvalued and we are seeing the predictable correction.

Long story short, the industry is fine, but I'm glad I wasn't hanging onto a bunch of SSYS and DDD stock during the past 16 months. That being said, If I did have the stocks, I wouldn't sell them now, because I believe under-valued territory isn't far away.

[3DJohn]

Nailed it.

[NoahSH]

3D print bureaus are not viable long term because they are a service market in an arena of shifting technology. The best thing they can do is sell the novelty of 3d printing that will eventually wear off. Without a product line of their own, they have a hard time establishing / distinguishing brand identity.

The money is going to be made by the first artists and designers who only print their own products instead of outsourcing. A small shop with big technology making products that no one else has rights to make has no competition. In this rare instance, the technology is feeding the development of the small art studio-turned-production-facility, while the 'big guys' struggle to sell more printers.

At a certain point, I am willing to toss the whole industry away and keep the technology as a vehicle for pioneering my own ideas. I could really care less about how a certain 3d printer manufacturer performs, as long as someone stays around to make a quality machine

[Mike]

3D print bureaus are not viable long term because they are a service market in an arena of shifting technology. The best thing they can do is sell the novelty of 3d printing that will eventually wear off. Without a product line of their own, they have a hard time establishing / distinguishing brand identity.

3D printing service bureaus are not selling the novelty of 3D printing (which is more than 30 years old). They are selling 3D printing's ability to accomplish things that cannot be accomplished via other manufacturing methods. Frequently, it's just rapid prototyping, but sometimes it is also superior cost-effectiveness for short production runs or the inability to produce an object any other way.

All technology is eventually replaced by better technology, but that can take a very long time. Magazines and newspapers are still printed on $1m+ printing presses at service bureaus and the current technology has been around since 1875, with previous printing press technologies dated centuries earlier. I don't foresee a personal 3D printer supplanting something like an Optomec LENS system ($3m+) any time soon, so I believe 3D printing services bureaus could be with us for quite a while – somewhere between 20 and 200 more years.

[cadpro78]

That is definitely and interesting point of view on the industry as a whole. One thing to consider is the extreme difference in technologies and how that effects cost to purchase. So comparing the higher end machines to the rep raps, makerbots, cubes, etc. is like comparing apples to oranges. The cost of getting into the high end machines is certainly going to stagnate the market once you start approaching saturation. Add to that both 3D Systems and Stratasys were gobbling up competitors at an astonishing rate that has only just begun to slow. I'm shocked they haven't invested more time and money into advertising the consumer level printers. It seems to me that should have begun about a year ago when 3D printing was making the rounds on the local TV news stations. Their "HP" approach to proprietary filament cartridges would be much more effective if marketed to the masses. The DIY people will never be on board with those type printers but millions of other people would if they just simply pushed advertising.

This kind seems like 'the banks being too big to fail syndrome' with 3D Systems and Stratasy.

[Roxy]

The cost of getting into the high end machines is certainly going to stagnate the market once you start approaching saturation.

Which is why they want to outlaw using anything but their over priced filament. Did you know you have committed a felony if you print with out using their filament?

I'm shocked they haven't invested more time and money into advertising the consumer level printers.

They are spending a lot of time, effort and money to advertise that you are a felon if you don't print using their over priced filament.

It seems to me that should have begun about a year ago when 3D printing was making the rounds on the local TV news stations. Their "HP" approach to proprietary filament cartridges would be much more effective if marketed to the masses. The DIY people will never be on board with those type printers but millions of other people would if they just simply pushed advertising.

Maybe they will 'invent' some technology to tell them when the printer is being used without their filament. Maybe it could call the local police department and have a squad car sent out to arrest the people? That would help sales.