Business


Figure 5: Provision made at time of purchase for future service/maintenance costs


Purchase vendor’s service contract


None – purchase service calls as and when required None – rely on manufacturer’s warranty None – rely on internal service/engineering capability Purchase third party service contract/cover for all instruments None – don’t think about it


24% 20% 8%


5% 5%


0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% % Responding


© HTStec 2012 39%


want to defer purchase (Figure 4). When consider- ing guaranteed service or replacement it is impor- tant to understand how respondents currently deal with these issues. Most (39%) survey respondents make provision for future service and maintenance costs at the time of instrument purchase by the purchase of a vendor’s service contract. This was followed by those that make no provision – pur- chase service calls as and when required or rely on manufacturer's warranty (Figure 5).


Main advantages of outright purchase versus instrument rental


Figure 6: Advantage of features of the outright instrument purchase model


Equipment choice – unlimited Ownership – liability’s remains with purchaser


Lifecycle – purchasers has a responsibility for lifecycle compliance


Equipment value – depreciation costs affect balance Effect on balance sheet – asset values are


integrated into purchasing company valuations Payments – funds are spent on Day 1


Service costs – can be significant, and are additional to depreciation


Software – license issues and upgrades can be expensive extra costs


-0.16 -0.45


-0.59 -0.58


-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 © HTStec 2012 0.5 1 1.5 2 Mean RATING SCALE of -2 to +2, where -2 = highly disadvantageous, 0 = no impact, and +2 = highly advantageous


0.01 0.03 0.11


1.33


Survey respondents rated ‘equipment choice – unlimited’ as the most advantageous feature of outright instrument purchase model. The least advantageous features of outright instrument pur- chase model were ‘software – licence issues and upgrades can be expensive extra costs’ and ‘service costs – can be significant, and are additional to depreciation’ (Figure 6).


Figure 7: Advantage of features of the instrument rental/lease model


Software – equipment is supplied with latest software and associated licenses


Service costs – included in rental


Lifecycle – rental company supplies equipment fully compliant


Equipment value – no depreciation costs Payments – variable spend with complete flexibility,


customers free to use capex budget elsewhere


Effect on balance sheet – expense item without long term commitment


Ownership – rental company retains the responsibilities of ownership


Equipment choice – limited to what is supplied by rental company


-2.00 © HTStec 2012 -1.50 -1.00 -0.62 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Mean RATING SCALE of -2 to +2, where -2 = highly disadvantageous, 0 = no impact, and +2 = highly advantageous 0.60


today. This was closely followed by current lack of capital budget; and then to gain access to rapidly changing instrument technology; and guaranteed service or replacement. Least motivating was the


70


Previous experience and future interest in lab instrument rental Only a minority (23%) of survey respondents reported any previous experience of renting or leasing laboratory instruments. A similar propor- tion indicated limited awareness of any companies that routinely offer monthly rental/lease agree- ments on lab instruments. The most cited rental company used was the UK-based Flexible Lab Solutions, which according to respondent feed- back appears to have been successful in renting


Drug Discovery World Spring 2013


0.93 0.97


0.80


1.34 1.40


1.25


Survey respondents rated ‘software – equipment is supplied with latest software and associated licences’ as the most advantageous features of the instrument rental/lease model. The least advanta- geous features of instrument rental/lease model were ‘equipment choice – limited to what is sup- plied by the rental company’ (Figure 7). In a separate question ‘no hidden costs, parts and engineer labour and travel fully included in rental cost’ was rated the most important technical support issue in a lab instrument rental situation. This finding should be considered together with the fact that many purchased instruments today are not covered by a service contract and routine preventative maintenance or regular instrument recalibration tends to get overlooked. Herein lays another potential advantage for lab rental as it is in the rental company’s interest to fully service its instruments, such that those offered could actually be maintained to a higher standard, with greater uptime and deliver superior productivity to those which are not rented.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80