Comparison,Fellowes,and,GBC,Co business, insurance A Comparison of Fellowes and GBC Comb-Binding Machines
As we all know to live in this world we have to perform some activity by which we can earn money. There are many activities by which we can earn money and meet the standards to live in this society. And from one of them is franchise. Franc Small offices have unique needs, and thatincludes document shredding. Designed with the smaller business inmind, the Dahle 20314 is a cross-cut shredder that offers Level 3security and brings you into compliance with federal regulations. The
Binding machines are fast becoming amust-have for any small office that is looking to have moreflexibility, convenience, and control when putting together itsimportant documents, reports, presentations and proposals. One of themost simple, common and cheapest binding methods is comb binding. Forthis reason, there are many machines available on the market that aredesigned for comb binding. There are differences, however, in thedifferent comb-binding machines and their capabilities. Thesedifferences may seem insignificant to the untrained eye. However, whenit comes to binding machines, the slightest advantage can mean time andmoney saved. Here we will take a look at two of the major playerson the market, Fellowes and GBC. Both companies have a solid line ofbinding equipment, but there are some differences that you might wantto know about before you take the plunge and buy your own bindingmachine. First of all, you will have to decide whether youwant a manual or electric punch on your binding machine. Manual is alittle bit less expensive, but electric is quicker and more accurate.All of the machines that we will discuss here are available with eithermanual or electric punch mechanisms. Here is a quick comparison ofFellowes and GBC's manual machines for the small office: 1.Fellowes Pulsar vs. GBC C110: Both of these machines feature a 15punch/300 bind capability, and will run you about $230 (list price).The Pulsar gets the slightest nod here, however, because of thefollowing advantages it provides: The Pulsar isbuilt for vertical document loading, which ensures accurate punchalignment, and a rotary edge guide that accurately centers documents.ThePulsar features a much more compact and lightweight design. It evenfolds up for quick and easy storage, and won't take up much more roomthan a book on a bookshelf.While the Pulsar and C110 manualversions cost the same, the Fellowes electric machine is a bit lessexpensive than its GBC counterpart.The Pulsar comes with a two-year warranty, whereas the GBC provides only one year. 2. Fellowes Quasar and Quasar E vs. GBC's C210E. Again, Two verysimilar machines, with both featuring a 20-punch capability. Again,however the nod has to go to the Fellowes machines, due to the factthat they have a 500-bind capacity vs. the C210E's 300. The Quasarstores in a smaller space, and the warranty of two years just makesmore sense, especially when you consider that the electric versionscost virtually the same. Both of these companies are wellknown and respected in the binding industry for making highly reliabledevices, and really, you can't go wrong with either one of thesemanufacturer's comb-binding machines. The advantages we've discussedhere are fairly slight in the grand scheme of things, which is why wewanted to lay out the differences for you. Ultimately, you will need tocompare the systems for yourself and make a decision about the machinethat will best fit your particular needs. Article Tags: Comb-binding Machines
Comparison,Fellowes,and,GBC,Co