999A21

BRITISH COLUMBIA BOX LIMITED (REVISED)

Professor Kenneth G. Hardy wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The author does not intend to illustrate
either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The author may have disguised certain names and other identifying
information to protect confidentiality.

This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized, or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the
permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights
organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western
University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) cases@ivey.ca; www.iveycases.com.

Copyright © 1999, Ivey Business School Foundation Version: 2020-01-13

In December 2016, Mr. Paul Flynn, the Vancouver plant manager of British Columbia Box Limited, was
about to make a half-million dollar decision. He and Mr. Wood, the plant industrial engineer, had
narrowed the choice of suppliers for a new flexo folder gluing machine down to Andrews and Bale. In the
final week of discussions the price cuts, negotiated by Flynn, had lowered the prices of the machines by
$15,000 to $20,000 from earlier quotations. However, Flynn had to make a final decision in order to get a
purchase order out before Christmas.

The British Columbia Box (BCB) plant was located in Vancouver with sister plants in Burnaby, Victoria
and Toronto. BCB was part of a large international company which specialized in packages of all types.
The main product of the Vancouver plant was folded cartons for consumer goods companies such as beer,
foods, cosmetics and toys. The raw material for cartons was rolled paper which was combined to form
corrugated board which was cut, slotted, printed, folded and glued. One of the main machines in these
operations was the folder gluer.

As early as2012, Flynn and Wood had been conscious of the need for a flexo folder gluer machine which
would combine flexographic printing with the folding and gluing operations. The existing machine was
more than 18 years old, did not print and needed frequent repairs. Wood had analyzed the financial
payout for a flexo folder gluer based on the volume of business going through the box plant. To his
surprise, Wood discovered that the volume of business was not sufficient to justify the machine. All of
Wood’s estimates were based on the standard size machine which was 30” x 80”.

In mid-2015, Flynn and the sales manager, Mr. Ray Dover, were developing a five-year plan which
included a significant plant expansion for the Vancouver operation. Dover had assured Flynn that he
could generate an additional $1,000,000 in sales, particularly if there was a larger flexo folder gluer such
as 50” × 110”. Dover said that he was turning down business because of the absence of a larger machine.

In August2015, Flynn had attended a conference put on by the Technical Association of the Pulp and
Paper Industry (TAPPI) in which the major manufacturers of heavy equipment displayed their machines.
The Bale brochure showed a new computer numerically controlled flexo folder gluer which was available
in 38” x 80” and 50” × 110”. The brochure stressed the low set-up time possible with computer numerical
control and the benefits of process monitoring. Computer numerical control (CNC) is a control system
which provides automatic instructions, sensing and feedback to a machine.

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 2 9A99A021

Flynn returned to Vancouver and asked Wood to do a new analysis based on a 50” × 110” CNC flexo
folder gluer. Wood discovered that the savings on set-up time alone, from 36 minutes to 18 minutes,
could almost justify the larger machine. Run times would remain about the same but glue rate, ink rate,
and jam detection features would mean less waste, less supervision, and a higher quality product. A 50” ×
110” machine would eliminate two existing machines in the Vancouver plant and would cost
approximately $450,000 based on the phone calls which Wood had placed to several of the major
manufacturers. At the conclusion of these phone calls, Flynn and Wood had concluded that they could
justify a CNC 50” × 110” flexo folder gluer. Flynn issued a memo dated September 25, 2015which is
shown in Exhibit 1.

Two months later, the task took on a new urgency when Flynn received a memo signed by his plant
superintendent and quality control supervisor. The memo said that the existing folder gluer could break
down any day which would throw the plant onto one shift and jeopardize the beer business. Flynn
responded to this warning in a memo dated December 17, 2015 which is shown in Exhibit 2.

In April of 2016, Flynn wrote a capital request of $586,800 for a CNC flexo folder gluer. In order to put
appropriate prices in the capital request, Flynn asked the four major equipment manufacturers for serious
quotations based on delivery of May 2017. Exhibit 3 shows the detailed capital request forms prepared by
Flynn to justify the CNC flexo folder gluer.

In July 2016, a new division general manager was appointed and he began to question the entire need for
a CNC flexo folder gluer in the Vancouver plant. However, by late August, Flynn had persuaded the
division general manager that such a machine was warranted and the capital expenditure request was
forwarded to Canadian Division headquarters in Toronto and then to the parent company head offices in
Los Angeles.

Even though the capital expenditure request had not been returned to him, Flynn heard “on the grapevine”
in early September that his capital request had been approved in Los Angeles. In mid-September, the
division general manager suggested that Flynn consider using one of the under-utilized 38” × 80” flexo
folder gluers from the BCB plant in Victoria, B.C. It was early October before Flynn persuaded the
general manager that the Victoria machine (which did not have numerical controls) would not be suitable
for the volume and type of business which Flynn hoped to do in the Vancouver plant. Finally, in
November, formal approval was received to purchase a CNC 50” × 110” flexo folder gluer. In the
meantime, the four main suppliers had been active in attempting to persuade Flynn to specify their
machine.

SUPPLIERS

Each of the four main equipment manufacturers had been in the business for some time and maintained
technically qualified sales representatives who travelled large territories. These representatives typically
would telephone Flynn each month and visit his plant three or four times each year.

Each company produced several other pieces of equipment for the paper and box industry, such as
corrugators, folders and die cutters. In any one year approximately a dozen large flexo folder gluers
would be sold in all of North America.

In August 2015, one of the well respected companies was the Bale company based in Pittsburgh. Flynn
had been attending a TAPPI conference when he talked with Dick Bateman, the Bale representative.

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 3 9A99A021

Bateman had handed him a brochure on the newest Bale CNC flexo folder gluer and commented that Bale
had three of these CNC machines out in the field. When Flynn had indicated some interest, Bateman had
immediately made an appointment to visit the Vancouver plant. When he was in Vancouver, Bateman
showed a video, offered approximate sizes and gave rough prices. As he toured the plant he made some
suggestions on new layouts which could be used if the Bale machine was purchased. By this time, the
new Bale machine had received considerable publicity in the industry’s trade journal, Boxboard
Container.

A few weeks later, Jim Castrelli, the Andrews salesperson, visited the Vancouver plant. He mentioned
that he had heard of BCB’s interest in a CNC flexo folder gluer. Although Andrews’ first CNC flexo
folder gluer was known to be problematic, Castrelli’s comment was “just wait six months and we will
have a good new CNC machine on the market.” Andrews had an excellent manually controlled flexo
folder gluer and had successfully designed other computer controlled equipment. Castrelli showed a video
and left brochures. In addition, he indicated the ways in which the new Andrews CNC machine would be
better than the newest Bale machines. He invited Wood and the plant manager to see the Andrews
manufacturing facility in Cleveland and installations of similar machines. Wood took up the offer and he
was on the road for more than a week with Castrelli.

The Rhone salesperson, Mr. Dunnell, dropped in one day without any warning and mentioned that he had
learned of BCB’s interest in a CNC flexo folder gluer. The Rhone company had a reputation for waiting
until the specifications were well developed and then putting in a low bid. Flynn and Wood felt that
Rhone had lost some of its reputation for high quality machines. Moreover, its CNC flexo folder gluer
did not have process-monitoring functions. Flynn would be obliged to let Rhone bid simply because the
company was a major manufacturer but he would have to justify paying more for some other machine. It
was not always easy to explain higher quality to non-production managers who were not familiar with the
machines. The BCB Burnaby plant had several standard Rhone flexo folder gluers and the Burnaby plant
manager was pleased with them.

The Kalder company had sent in a good salesperson who made several visits regarding BCB’s need for a
CNC flexo folder gluer, but he died from a sudden heart attack. He was replaced by an equally good
representative who made only one or two visits before he was promoted to sales manager. The
replacement salesperson was relatively new to corrugated board machinery and he regaled Wood and
Flynn with stories of his experiences from his time serving in the armed forces. Kalder was ruled out
early because the company had not developed any expertise in numerically controlled machines.

A few weeks after Wood had visited plant sites with Castrelli of the Andrews Company, Dick Bateman
appeared at the Vancouver plant and jokingly said to Wood, “I heard that you were out around the
country with Jim Castrelli—I hope you’ll see our three installations!” After some discussion of who
should go on this trip, Flynn agreed to go with Bateman and he spent the better part of a week inspecting
Bale machines and the Bale headquarters in Pittsburgh. Later, Flynn made a similar inspection of
Andrews installations.

PURCHASE PROCESS

When the official request for prices had been issued in April 2016, the specifications had essentially been
built around the Bale machine. However, each request for quotation had stipulated that the various
options be priced separately so that Wood and Flynn could change options if necessary. Exhibit 4 shows
the comparison of CNC features available from Rhone, Andrews and Bale. Exhibit 5 shows their

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 4 9A99A021

quotations as of April 2016. There were Japanese and European manufacturers of similar equipment but
Flynn had eliminated any non-North American suppliers because he wanted service and parts close at
hand.

Andrews and Rhone could provide a variety of machines for the corrugated industry while Bale had
concentrated on converting machines. There were several older manually controlled Bale machines in the
U.S. plants of BCB’s parent company and all of them had performed satisfactorily.

In January 2016, Andrews had produced its first CNC flexo folder gluer. The main difference between the
Andrews and Bales machines was that Andrews offered a Scotsman vacuum feeder, a safer and more
reliable feeder. Bale had its own vacuum feed but it was judged to have a lesser capability than the
Scotsman. Andrews had an ink wash-up system which appeared to work well, whereas the Bale wash-up
system was reputed to be less than 100 per cent satisfactory. On the other hand, Bale had more experience
in numerically controlled functions which were developed, supplied and serviced by the Cummings and
Allen Company, which was headquartered in Minnesota. Any adjustments to the numerically controlled
functions would be done by Cummings and Allen via an internet connection to their computer. By
contrast, the supplier of CNC functions for Andrews had a Canadian office on the outskirts of Vancouver.

Until September 2016, both Flynn and Wood had favoured the Bale machine because of Bale’s track
record in numerically controlled functions. Wood preferred the Bale machine because it offered a higher
resolution screen than the one, Andrews offered. The Bale machine could diagnose its own breakdown
source. The only negative opinion came from Jack, the maintenance supervisor, who did not like the old
Bale die cutter in the BCB Vancouver plant.

In the final days of the negotiations the purchasing department attempted to tie down the suppliers to firm
performance contracts, stating that if the machine did not perform by a certain date, such as July 1, 2017,
there would be monetary penalties. However, Flynn was pessimistic about the value and viability of such
performance contracts. He placed more reliance on the word of Archie, his factory superintendent, who
had seen pictures of the machines and talked to the salesperson. Archie had said, “If you get that Andrews
machine, I’ll get it running for you.” Flynn demonstrated that Rhone machines would not provide the
output required in the BCB Vancouver plant. In early December, they invited Bateman and Castrelli to
give them, the manager of engineering services and the purchasing agent for the Canadian Division, a
final presentation at the Canadian Division headquarters in Toronto.

In April 2016, the quotations had been Bale $509,700 and Andrews $499,900. On Thursday, December
15, the Andrews salesperson, sales manager and division manager made their presentation. The Andrews
quotation for spring delivery of 2017 was $535,000—the price had risen from April because of
inflationary factors. During dinner with the Andrews representatives that evening, Flynn pointed out that
a number of Andrews’ options were expensive compared with the same features on the Bale machine. As
a result, the Andrews representatives agreed to take a look at their prices and by the end of the evening,
they had lowered their price to $525,000.

On Friday, December 16, the Bale salesperson, sales manager and division manager visited the same BCB
people and offered a price of $519,640. Flynn indicated that he would like to lower that price and the Bale
people threw in free installation. However, they were quite firm that they would not negotiate any further
on price.
On Saturday morning, December 17, Flynn telephoned the Andrews sales manager and told him, “If you
want to stay in the picture, you will have to look at your price in terms of including the installation of the

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 5 9A99A021

machine and training of personnel as part of the $525,000 price.” The Andrews sales manager
immediately agreed to this arrangement.

On that same day, Saturday, December 17, the manager of engineering services and the Canadian division
general manager made a whirlwind trip to the United States in order to see each of the two machines in
operation. The Bale CNC flexo folder gluer was installed in a BCB plant in Georgia. It was not
functioning particularly well when the Canadian BCB executives arrived. After spending the morning in
Georgia, the two men hurried on to Philadelphia to see an Andrews machine operating in a competitor’s
plant. The Andrews machine was functioning smoothly.

On Monday morning, December19, Flynn wrote out a justification for spending an extra $5,000 on the
Andrews machine. This was sufficient for Andrews to fly a representative to Toronto to write a revised
quotation for the BCB vice-president of finance to review.

At 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 21, the Bale sales manager telephoned the Canadian division
purchasing agent in Toronto and said, “We are putting two CNC flexo folder gluers into production; we
can put a third machine into production and pass the economies on to you. We will let the third machine
go at $490,000—do you want it?” The purchasing agent contacted the manager of engineering services
who telephoned Flynn. Flynn was surprised because the Bale people had made it clear that the $519,640
was not negotiable. He talked it over with the manager of engineering services and they agreed that they
could not justify a $35,000 difference in price, especially since the Andrews people had not shut the door
on further price negotiations. Flynn told the manager of engineering services that he felt obliged to let the
Andrews people have another look at their price.

Flynn telephoned the Andrews’ sales manager who called back 20 minutes later to say that Andrews’ best
price would be $510,000 and that would be their final position. At that point, the Bale machine was
$20,000 less than the Andrews machine. Flynn knew that there were eight features on the Andrews
machine which were not on the Bale machine. It would be difficult to place an exact value on those
features. However, Flynn had to telephone the manager of engineering services in Toronto with a decision
by 4:30 p.m. that day.

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 6 9A99A021

EXHIBIT 1

Canadian Division Officer September 25, 2015

MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT—VANCOUVER

A very significant proportion of this plant’s annual sales comes from the brewery market, a total value of
approximately $1,200,000 gross sales out of a total sales budget of approximately $9,000,000. These sales
generate a profit margin of $325,000 annually.

Nearly all these boxes are glued and this operation is performed on our 38” x 80” Folder Gluer which was
installed in 1998 and has been in continuous use since. As is to be expected from a machine that has seen
such service, major overhauls have to be performed from time to time. Such a major overhaul has been
deferred on the 38” x 80” Folder Gluer for over 12 months pending the outcome of the Vancouver Plant
Expansion Proposal.

Since the Expansion Program may incur further delays, it now becomes critical that we take steps to safeguard
our continued participation in the brewery business. We have recently had a manufacturer’s erector review the
38” x 80” Folder Gluer and have received a quotation to completely update the machine. The cost of this work
would be, approximately, $160,000.

There are three disadvantages to this proposal:

1. A six to eight week shutdown of the Folder Gluer is required to complete the work, creating problems of
supplying customers with their orders in that period.
2. $160,000 would be invested in a machine whose framework and structure is not as strong as modern
equipment and would still be liable to breakdown.
3. Beyond maintaining present output levels there is no return in terms of cost reduction or methods
improvement through improved run speeds or reduced labour.

An alternative course of action which would not have the disadvantages mentioned above and which I strongly
recommend is to move the proposed purchase of the 50” x 110” Two Colour, Flexo Gluer from the Plant
Expansion Program and to proceed with its installation separately and as soon as possible.

The installation of this 50” x 110” machine would provide backup for the present Folder Gluer until it can be
finally phased completely out of production and scrapped, permit the removal of 04 and 06 V Type Printer
Slotters, both 25 years old, and generate substantial additional income from cost reductions through elimination
of Finishing Department equipment, such as the #22 Stitcher, #14 E Taper and the #13 Versa-Taper. It would
also lead to a reduction in labour within the Finishing Department of up to three persons.

From analysis it is estimated that a cost reduction of $139,000, before taxes, could be achieved with the
present volume. In addition, the 50” x 110” Folder Gluer would have the capacity to handle an additional
volume over our present sales of 30,000,000 sq. ft.

The cost of a new 50” x 110” Two Colour, Flexo Folder Gluer is estimated at $450,000 and savings described
above would give a before tax return of 25 per cent. As the proposal is part of our long-term planning, it
appears more sensible to invest this money in a new machine now than to spend $160,000 on our present
outdated Folder Gluer.

It must be stressed that the action must be taken soon to ensure protection of our ability to service the brewery
account. The purchase of a new Two Colour 50” x 110” Flexo would do this as well as provide the additional
advantages already described.

I am sending a draft capital request to Mr. B. Davidson for consideration and would appreciate favourable
consideration of this project, so that we can target towards installation early next year.

P.A. Flynn, Plant Manager

Cc: B. Davidson
R. Smythe

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 7 9A99A021

EXHIBIT 2

Canadian Division Office December 17, 2015

FOLDER GLUER—VANCOUVER

With reference to our proposal to purchase a Two Colour Flexo Folder Gluer for this location to replace
worn-out existing oil link presses and our folder gluer, the following report has been compiled by the Plant
Superintendent and Quality Control Supervisor regarding our existing folder gluer.

1. The complete kicker bar assembly is worn-out and this is causing crooked cartons.

2. The main drive shaft assembly is badly worn at the point where it connects to the drive gear train, this
is beyond repair and would have to be replaced.

3. The main gear train is so badly worn that there is a two inch backlash in the slotting section causing
the slots to jump.

4. The slotting heads are sloppy on the shafts causing the heads to come out of line and this causes
chipping of the slotting knives and rings. This, in turn, causes ragged slots. After operating
approximately 24 machine hours with a new set of slotting knives and slotting rings they become
worn to the point where they produce ragged slots.

5. The scoring heads are sloppy on the shafts causing the scores to travel from side to side on the slots
producing crooked containers, toed-in containers and cracked scores. The cracking of the scores is
caused by the pulling action of the scoring heads moving back and forth on the shafts as the cartons
are going through the machine.

6. The main folding panels of the machine are twisted and are out of mesh with each other and this is
caused by a combination of worn screw guides, worn screws, and worn guide shafts.

All of these factors are causing loss of production, excessive spoilage, and serious quality problems. This
results in considerable time waste and excessive labour being used in sorting and reworking orders
before they can be sent out to customers.

In view of the fact that this Company’s entire participation in the manufacture and sale of corrugated
cartons to the brewery industry rests solely on our ability to keep this machine functioning, I request your
support in preparing a Capital Request for replacement equipment without further delay.

P.A. Flynn
Plant Manager
Cc: B. Davidson
R. Smythe

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 8 9A99A021

EXHIBIT 3: CAPITAL EXPENDITURE REQUEST

2016 $ 125,000
2017 443,300 $ 18,500 $ - $ - $ 586,800

$ 568,300 $ 18,500 $ - $ - $ 586,800

DESCRIPTION

Purchase and install one only Two Colour 50” x 110” Numerical Control Flexo Folder Gluer.

JUSTIFICATION
After Tax
Average Added Return On
Income Investment
($000s) (%)

Market Expansion $ 54.8 7.8

Cost Reduction 97.7 13.8
Total $ 152.5 21.6

EXPLANATION

Folding and gluing capacity at the Vancouver plant is now limited to one 18-year-old worn-out machine
with no printing section, and several light, hand fold and feed finishers. All are awkward to set up, slow in
operation and costly to repair. Quality, consistent with the present-day exacting standard, is difficult to
maintain.

It is proposed to replace the existing 38” x 80” folder gluer together with two old oil-ink presses and two
hand-fed finishers, with a new 50” x 110” folder gluer having in-line Two Colour Flexo printing, and
Numerical Control for automatic set-up monitoring.

The new high performance combination printing, slotting, folding and gluing equipment will consistently
produce a high quality container, and will provide finishing capacity for an additional 20 million sq. ft. of
board annually. A yearly income before taxes of $265,000 will be generated through reduced labour
requirements and increased sales volume.

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 9 9A99A021

EXHIBIT 4: NUMERICALLY CONTROLLED FUNCTIONS BY MANUFACTURER

DIAL IN: Bale Andrews Rhone

Co. Co. Co.

1. Box Depth-Lateral and Circumferential * * *

2. Slot Register * * *
3. L.H. Trim * * *
4. L.H. Slot * * *
5. R.H. Slot * * *
6. R.H. Trim * * *
7. First Print Register * *
8. Second Print Register * *
9. Pre-Set Powered Side Guides * * *
10. Analog Nip Control (Pre-Set Control of All Roll Openings) * *
11. Pre-Set Dim’s Set-Up of Next Run While Preceding Run
Is On * * Limited
12. First Blank Capability
13. Soft Wire Open Loop * *
14. Repeat Order Storage *
15. Feed Section Backstop (Scotsman) * *
16. Storage Order Data for 100 Order *
17. Optional Additional Capacity * *
18. Data From Other Computer or Storage * *
19. Closed Loop – Hardwire * *
20. Glue Lap Equipment and Creaser Control Panel Set-Up *
21. Manual Override * *
22. 8-Minute Wash Up cycle
23. 2-Minute Set-Up (No Wash Up) * * *
24. Wrong Entry Control * *
25. Ink Detection * *
26. Glue Detection * * *
27. Run Detection * *
28. Management Information System * *
29. English/Metric System * *

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.
 Page 10 9A99A021

EXHIBIT 5: SUMMARY OF QUOTATIONS FOR A 50” X 110” 2 COL. FLEXO FOLDER GLUER

Comparison Of Prices Quoted For Delivery in 2017 if Ordered Before December 31, 2016

Bale Andrews Rhone

Co. Co. Co.

Feed Unit Vacuum Motorized Opening Incl. 79.7 Incl.

Flexo Point Units—2 Only 390.8 97.6 97.6
Slotter Section with Powered Heads Incl. 63.3 Incl.
Scrap Conveyer—Slotter Section 5.2 Incl. 6.5
Folder Gluer with Counter Ejector Incl. 128.1 250.9
Sub Total 396.0 358.7 355.0
Optional Items
Power Side Guides (Feed Unit) 5.3 Incl. Incl.
Wash & Run Feature 5.0 9.7 18.2
Chrome Plated Print Cylinders & Full Rolls 2.6 Incl. Incl.
Haling Die Mount System Incl. Incl. Incl.
Side Belt Scrap Conveyor Incl. Incl. Incl.
Numerical Control with Memory 95.0 102.3 57.5 (No Memory)
60” 63” 66”
Skip Feed Provision to 60” 2.3 Incl. 13.7
40 HP 60 HP 60 HP (Not Firm)
Drive System Inc. Transformer Incl. 15.7 21.7
Inside or Out Glue Lap Incl. Incl. 6.9
Centre Support Incl. Incl. 1.2
Roll Back Slotter Section Incl. Incl. 6.2
Low Ink Warning Incl. Incl. 1.0
Ink Quality Warning Incl. Incl. n/a (not available)
Glue Quality Warning Incl. Incl. n/a
Independent Folding 55” 87” 4.0 (70” Max)
Gap Detector—Skewed Sheet Not. Req’d Incl. 1.9
Jam Detector Incl. Incl. n/a

Total Machine Including Optional Items 506.2 496.4 487.3

Total Brokerage Duty Freight 3.5 3.5 3.7

Net Delivered Price 509.7 499.9 491.0

This document is authorized for use only in Dr Garima Saxena/Dr Harvinder Singh/Dr Juhi G Sarkar/ Dr Tripti G Sharma's PG/IMTG/2021/330 (1) at Institute of Management Technology -
Ghaziabad (IMT) from Jul 2021 to Jan 2022.