Landa Digital Printing: The flight of Icarus

The verdict is in: Landa Digital Printing is sold to FIMI for 80 million US$ in a flash sale. Benny Landa, who a few years ago claimed his company was worth 2 billion US$, is retiring, according to earlier revealed details of the FIMI offer. Benny Landa can look back at a career that will be part of the history books of printing. As an excellent showman, he certainly contributed to the growth of digital printing. But he wasn’t the only trailblazer for digital printing. And even being the first to launch a digital color press comes with an important sidenote: he announced his Indigo press when he heard about an imminent press conference in Belgium, the launch of the Xeikon DCP-1. And not everything he touched turned into gold… Let’s take a closer look at this and also put some things in perspective.

CONTENTS: LiquidToner | Indigo: not fully ready, saved by HP | Landa Digital Printing: promises, promises, … | The collapse… | The first, the fastest, the best quality | Why is this important?  | Important PostScript | Updates 
Originally published: 07/09/2025 – Last update: 10/11/2025

Inventing something new is usually not linked to just one person and just one point in time. It usually is a chain of events, people building on the work of others. And often several people are trying similar paths. But usually we remember only one person: the survivorship bias. The best-known example is probably the invention of the light bulb. Surprise, surprise: that was not invented by Edison. Others had experimented and even filed patents before him. What made Edison different was that he approached it from a systems point of view: he also looked at the electricity system needed, which made the invention viable. 

Here’s what Google Gemini says about this: “While Thomas Edison is widely credited with inventing the light bulb, the story is more complex. The modern incandescent light bulb was the result of a long process of development with contributions from numerous inventors over many decades.” More than 70 years before Edison, Humphry Dave created the ‘electric arc lamp’. Later, Warren de la Rue and Joseph Swan conducted further experiments, but these were limited to the filament and the light bulb. Gemini continues: “Edison’s major contributions were not just the bulb itself, but the entire system needed to make electric lighting practical for homes and cities.”

With digital printing (in color), that survivorship bias is also a risk. Many people say Benny Landa invented digital color printing. In 2016, he even claimed “For almost 40 years, I was the only one pushing for it.” (source: Globes, 29/09/2016) Which is not correct. Paving the path for digital color printing was the work of many people. Benny Landa may have been the most visible and vocal, but he wasn’t the only one. There are also Lucien De Schamphelaere and his team at Xeikon, Charly Pesko and his team at CAP Ventures (who organized the On Demand conference, which debuted in 1994), and, of course, prof. em. Frank Romano, who has also been a very vocal advocate for digital printing. And these are just a few names.

Added 09/11/2025: I forgot to mention that – obviously – digital color printing is a further evolution of b/w digital printing, which existed already for some time. As always, new developments build on previous developments. In the case of printing, it evolved from slow B&W printers with small paper sizes and rather low resolution to the large, high quality, high throughput color productions machines we see today.   

Liquid toner
Benny Landa’s first inventions and patents were in the field of liquid toner. This wasn’t new, as liquid toner had been invented in 1953, and many companies had printers with this technology over the years. Benny Landa in 2012: “I didn’t invent liquid toner, Ken Metcalfe did. I had the great privilege of meeting him in the early 1970s. With Indigo, we started our liquid toner research where Ken Metcalfe left off – and we got great patents.” (source: Print21, 03/07/2012) This is BTW again an example of survivorship biass: “At the Defence Standards Laboratory, Adelaide SA, Ken A Metcalfe and Bob J Wright developed a ‘wet’ photocopying process (…)” Ken Metcalfe was one of the two inventors. (source: Print21, 20/03/2012)

If you want to know more about the history of the development of liquid toner, here’s a paper with a nice overview.

Those ’great patents’ are where Benny Landa got his money from to develop his liquid toner ideas further, to create the Indigo digital color press: “Over time every copier company in the world had to become licensed from us because of our patents. That yielded over $200 million in license fees, which funded more than ten years of R&D to create the world’s first digital printing press.” (source: Print21, 03/07/2012)

The ‘ElectroInk’, a core element of the Indigo presses, was invented in 1984. (source, digitalprinter, 11/11/2013)

Indigo: not fully ready, saved by HP
It took a long time for Indigo to launch a product. The company was founded in 1977 (source: Globes, 14/08/1997), but it was only in 1993 that the first digital press was launched: the Indigo e-Print 1000. But even after so many years, the presses weren’t ready… Benny Landa in an interview from 2003: “The product wasn’t ready, it wasn’t sufficiently reliable, and it therefore needed a lot of support.” (source: Globes, 03/06/2003) An article on 20 years of digital printing notes: “Early machines were so unreliable they were only shipped in pairs and had full time Indigo technicians to help keep them going.” (source: digitalprinter, 11/11/2013)

In 2012, when an interviewer asked: “So you’re not concerned about the length of time to get Nanographic Presses and NanoInks to market? Will you let some technologies enter the market prematurely?” Benny Landa answered: “No, I made that mistake once. In the early days of Indigo, we did not have the money to sustain years of in-house improvement and development, so our factory began shipping presses before they were fully ready.” In that same interview Benny Landa adds: “But with Nanography it’s different; we have the resources to get it ready for market in-house and we will.” (source: Print21, 03/07/2012)  

So, the early days of Indigo became a bumpy ride… From a Globes article in 1997: “A year later (1994), Indigo raised $100 million via a Wall Street IPO, at which time company value was set at $1 billion, a very generous value even in US capital market terms.” (…) In July, 1995, a year after going public, without even a dollar in profits, Indigo’s company value had reached $3.3 billion. (…) But something went wrong along the way. The Indigo printers suffered from reliability problems. The company had to bring in one engineer for every two machines sold, clients seldom used their new machines, and potential clients shied away.”
(sidenote: there are different versions of that maximum company value)

Benny Landa in that article: “There were a lot of problems. Clients were losing money, the machines weren’t reliable, and there was no market at all.” 

“Over the past two years, Indigo bid farewell to 450 employees (one-third of its workforce), most senior managers and $150 million. Shares dropped quickly, losing 90% of their value.” (source: Globes, 14/08/1997)

In late 1995, a class action lawsuit was filed by investors, which was subsequently settled outside the court. (source: Globes, 03/06/2003)

Indigo started looking for partnerships. Benny Landa in 2003: “Indigo marked Hewlett-Packard as its target in 1997, and pursued them for years.” Before pursuing HP, Landa had established contacts with other companies to discuss potential collaborations, acquisitions, and mergers. Scitex was one of them. (source: Globes, 03/06/2003) HP started looking into Indigo in 1998 (source: Wikipedia)

Eventually, in September 2001, HP did buy the whole company (source: Printweek, 07/09/2001), after first having bought part of the shares in September 2000. (source: Globes, 03/06/2003) And HP Indigo became a success. However, that was the result of a significant redesign of the Indigo engine. An R&D manager from HP Barcelona told me a few years after the acquisition, that they were ‘not amused’ when they finally could take a closer look at the machines, which was only after the deal was signed. It’s thanks to the redesign by HP that Indigo presses became reliable, real production machines. Which was confirmed over the past few weeks, in LinkedIn discussions. It’s HP Indigo that became a digital printing behemoth, not Indigo.

BTW: a quote from Benny Landa in 2014 on that era: “I wanted to be HP, not to be sold to it.” (source: Globes, 08/07/2014)

Here’s the timeline in brief:

Landa Digital Printing: promises, promises, …
The introduction of Landa Digital Printing at drupa 2012 was a big bang. It dominated that drupa (IMO the big theme should have been the superfast setup times of offset presses). Seemingly out of nowhere, six new digital presses appeared. Customers were lining up, and many manufacturers of offset presses announced a cooperation with Landa to integrate the technology into their presses.

The six models launched at drupa 2012 consisted of three sheetfed (S5, S7, S10, resp. B3, B2, and B1 in size), three web presses (W5, W10, W50, resp. 560mm, 1020 mm, and 560mm, the first two for packaging and labels, the last one for publication printing). And they had impressive specifications: up to 6.500 sheets/hour for the S10, with a promise that the speed could double to 13.500 sheets/hour. The web presses had speeds up to 200 m/min. (picture below: Sprinter, 06/08/2012)

As a reference, let’s check a few other presses that were introduced at drupa 2012. These are two B2 inkjet presses: the Konica Minolta KM-1 had a speed of 3.300 sph, the Fujifilm Jetpress 720 printed at 2.700 sph. (source: Global Inkjet Systems presentation, 6-7/12/2012 )

Today, over a decade later, the top speed of the current Fujifilm Jetpress 750s high speed model is 5.400 sph in productivity mode, 3.600 sph in ultra-high quality mode. (source: Fujifilm)

When looking at fully digital web-fed presses, in 2012, most had a speed between 30 and 50 m/min, with one exception, the Kodak UltraStream, at 152 m/min. (source: Digital Labels & Packaging, 20/09/2016)  Screen last week launched a new inkjet label press, which prints at 100 m/min. (source: Screen Europe)  The HP Indigo V12 digital label press is slightly faster: 120 m/min. (source: HP)

So, the specifications of the Landa Digital Printing presses as stated in 2012 were impressive, no wonder everyone wanted to take one home. Over 400 companies signed an LOI and made a deposit. Benny Landa: “We expected interest, but we didn’t expect to have sales. We received more than $1 billion in orders at one exhibition.” (source: Globes, 28/10/2012)

On the other hand, those specifications should also have sounded alarm bells, if not raised questions. Launching such high-performance digital presses, which significantly surpass the specifications of other digital presses, out of the blue, almost begs for a miracle… Especially since Landa Digital Printing was use inkjet heads, paper transport provided by others… There were also other companies using the same heads.

At drupa 2016, the speed was raised to 13.000 sheets per hour, and bold claims were made. Benny Landa: “Fourteen years of nanotechnology research has enabled us to make tremendous breakthroughs in the quality, speed and cost of printing. Landa Nanographic Printing® Presses produce offset quality, and now at offset speeds and offset-competitive cost per print – on virtually any paper stock. (…) We expect visitors to our stand at Drupa to be completely blown away by the amazing performance of these products – for which we will be taking orders at Drupa. Our presses will start shipping in early 2017.” (source: Incus Media, 24/03/2016)

Added 07/09/2025 – 17:00 CET: After I already published the article, I came across another interesting article from 2016: “Landa (9-A73) has announced a perfecting version of its 1m-wide web press at Drupa – with more announcements expected to follow later today. The 200m/min Landa W10P Nanographic Printing Press is primarily targeted at publishing applications and is capable of 2 million A4 magazine pages per eight-hour shift. (…) While the new perfecting web press was unveiled at Drupa, the machine, which Landa said would begin shipping in late 2017, is not on display in Dusseldorf.” (source: Printweek, 31/05/2016)

The pre-drupa 2024 event was obviously again full of positive statements. CEO Gil Oron said: “These are very exciting times for Landa Digital Printing. After an investment of over €1bn we are now experiencing rapid growth with very, very strong ramp-up. And actually we are doubling our business year after year. (…) And we also have many repeat orders – eight customers have purchased a second or third press.” (source: Printweek, 27/03/2024) There were a few companies that got a second press (some even for free, rumors say, just so that Landa Digital Printing could brag about that), but there is not one customer that has three presses. It was also stated that they had 55 presses installed, or soon to be installed. Which wasn’t consistent with the list I kept over the years, a list that turned out to be quite accurate (someone with intimate knowledge checked it recently and only noticed a few discrepancies).

When confronted with the fact that the new presses were ‘only’ running at 11.200 sph, not the 13.000 sph that was already announced 8 years before, in 2016, Benny Landa answered: “We showed a machine running at 13,000sph. But the difference between a demo and making that machine consistently, reliably, with super quality colour day in day out 24/7… you have to walk before you run. We started at 6,500. Now we’re up at 11,200 and in the future we will go even higher.”  

The reported sales and turnover were significant every drupa.
drupa 2012: over 400 orders, for 1 billion US$, availability: late 2013 (source: Globes, 08/07/2014) Benny Landa in 2013: “We expect to ship our first machines into our beta customers at the very end of this year. (…) 2014 will be a year of rising volumes and then full scale. (…) We have quite a number of customers in beta sites. At drupa we took about 430 orders, these were LOIs with requirement for deposits, so that’s serious customers.” (source: EFI Connect 2013 Fireside Chat with Benny Landa – UNCENSORED, 06/02/2013)

A British label printer became the world’s first customer: a W5, which would ‘most likely’ be installed in the second half of 2013. (source: Packaging News, 04/05/2012) As you may know: that W5 never made it to the market.

drupa 2016: 450 million euros in orders (source: Globes, 14/06/2016). There was no number of presses mentioned, but with around 3 million euros a piece, that would make around 150. “Landa reported numerous multiple-press deals, demonstrating market confidence in Landa and its Nanographic Printing presses.”  (source: Globes) And: “Among the first Landa beta customers in Germany will be Elanders with an S10P and Colordruck Baiersbronn with an S10. In addition to customer sites in Germany, the world’s largest online print shop Cimpress has announced a coming order of up to 20 Landa S10P machines, which will be installed around the globe.” (source: Beyond Print, 09/06/2016)  Cimpress never had a Landa press installed, the full press release included this phrase: “upon completion of successful testing”, which most people overlooked. (source: Cimpress)

The British label printer now placed an order for a W10: “We were the first business to sign an LOI for a Landa Press in 2012 for their W5, and four years on, I was here first thing on day one of drupa to become a paid-up customer for the W10. Why? Because the disruptive nature of Landa technology perfectly mirrors our business strategy.” (source: Large Format Review, 06/06/2016) Another article also included something interesting, something you may have forgotten about: “We’re going to filter rainwater off the roof for the ink.” (source: Printweek, 03/06/2016) Yes, that’s right…

The original idea was that Landa Digital Printing would deliver a concentrate, which the printer would then have to add water to. See this archived page from the Landa Digital Printing website in 2012.

“Sustainable shipping – Our 15 liter ink containers are specifically designed with carbon-impact in mind. Concentrated ink is dispatched in a collapsible container and need only be mixed with water on the receiving end to prepare it for use.”

Working with concentrated ink and then mixing it with water always seemed risky business to me. I know how some offset printers have struggled with unstable water quality. When using tap water to mix inkjet inks; that would have been even worse. Unless you first treat the water. (more on that).

Another interesting story about the W10 is the announcement from 2022: “Landa eyes the next billion dollar opportunity.” And that is the printed cans market. “It is the first extension of the nanographic process beyond conventional graphic arts and packaging printing and comes with the first W10, the Landa press designed for flexible packaging print, to be delivered in coming weeks.” (source: Print Business, 11/07/2022) Curiously enough, that W10 had already been removed from the Landa Digital Printing website at that time… You can still see it as a ‘pre-release’ at this archived snapshot from 17/06/2022, but it is no longer there in the snapshot from 28/06/2022… 

drupa 2024: according to this press release, Landa Digital Printing had “unprecedented orders taken at the show”. (source: Landa Digital Printing)Being a little bit skeptical, I already stated that the number then must have been unprecedentedly low. In my opinion, more than 400 presses (the 2012 reference) and more than 450 million euros (the 2016 reference) are not possible. And my skepticism turned out to be true: there were 50 LOIs, but only 11 were transformed into orders. (source: Ctech, 01/07/2025)

And the good news show continued, criticism still wasn’t allowed. Even in April 2025, only months before the collapse, there was the following article: “LDP scaling up to meet market demand – Landa boosts top team” (source: Printweek, 10/04/2025)

The collapse…
That statement of scaling up to meet market demand conflicts with a note I found in the ALTANA yearly report, in April: “For the group of innovation risks, both potential losses and the probability of occurence 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 compared to the previous year. This rise is 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗲𝗱 to higher risks associated with the 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗟𝘁𝗱.” (source: ALTANA Corporate Report 2024 – see page 86).

And then came the big crunch, quite fast. It started mid-June, with a reduction in workforce of over 20%. (source: Globes, 12/06/2025) A few weeks later (end of June), there was a comment on their Facebook page, claiming that Landa Digital Printing was on the verge of collapse. After four days, that comment was still visible, with no reply, so I put it on LinkedIn. Within fifteen minutes, there was a reply from someone who works at Landa Digital Printing: “#fakenews”. But when checking a few Israeli news websites, it immediately became clear the troubles were serious: “Landa Digital Printing seeks court protection” (source: Globes, 29/06/2025)

At first, the court granted two weeks to find a solution, which was then extended to about two months, until the end of August. (source: Globes, 10/07/2025) During that period, more and more details became public: only 51 presses were sold (source: Globes, 21/08/2025), not the 70+ that was claimed earlier, e.g. in this article from Packaging / Label Magazine, 06/09/2024.

Despite already having invested a lot of money, the current shareholders assessed that the company needed another 300 million US$ in investments and 5 years before getting breakeven. (source: Ctech, 01/07/2025) Over the past few years, the annual losses have reached 150 million US$. Cumulative losses hit 1,8 billion US$… (source: Ctech, 31/08/2025)

Although there were at least half a dozen potential candidates mentioned during those first weeks, meaning: companies that had accessed the ‘data room’ with all the information, only two serious candidates seemed interested to make an offer: HP (which was, according to the trade press, the ‘primary candidate’) and FIMI, a financial group in Israel. But eventually only FIMI made an offer… They offered 80 million US$ for a company that a few years ago believed it was worth 2 billion US$. (source: Globes, 21/08/2025)

Sidenote: to put that 2 billion US$ in context, I asked Google Gemini the turnover and market value (cap) of a few companies:

• Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG
  • Latest Turnover: $2,38 billion (trailing twelve months as of June 30, 2025)
  • Market Value: $298 million (as of August 29, 2025)
• Komori Corporation
  • Latest Turnover: ¥109,3 billion (7,4 billion US$) (latest twelve months ending June 30, 2025)
  • Market Value: ¥81,50 billion (552 million US$) (as of August 28, 2025)
• Konica Minolta, Inc.
  • Latest Turnover: $7.66 billion (as of September 5, 2025)
  • Market Value: $1.71 billion (as of September 5, 2025)
• Koenig & Bauer AG
  • Latest Turnover: $1.4 billion (trailing twelve months as of June 30, 2025)
  • Market Value: $298 million (as of August 29, 2025)

And here is something important in my opinion: not one vendor from the printing industry considered Landa Digital Printing valuable enough to make an offer… Not Komori, which provides the frame and has its own version, the Impremia NS40. Not Fujifilm, which provides the inkjet heads. Not AGFA nor Koenig & Bauer | Durst, who both have a competing B1 inkjet press (resp. the SpeedSet Orca 1060 and the VariJET 106). Nor anybody else who would be interested in a quick way to enter that market. Think about that. After all those years of promises, showing machines with unbelievable specifications and claims of the best quality and price point in the known universe, not one competitor saw enough value to make an offer. Not even Benny Landa’s claim in the court that Landa Digital Printing could become the largest printing company in the world could convince them:  “We are at the beginning of a revolution and we are alone in this field, we have no competitors worldwide. Landa could become the largest printing company in the world.” (source: Ctech, 10/07/25)

Even a few days after FIMI made its offer, there were already troubles showing up: the – rather complicated – real estate deal for the new offices. Offices a smaller Landa Digital Printing wouldn’t need. (source: Ctech, 25/08/2025)

Today, 7th of September 2025, we know the verdict: the 80 million US$ offer from FIMI got approved. “The deal ensures continued operations and avoids liquidation, protecting the majority of employees’ jobs. (…) Following the acquisition, FIMI will own 100% of Landa Corporation and will continue to employ most of its workforce. (…) She (the judge) emphasized that liquidation would likely yield only minimal proceeds, given that the company’s customers are primarily overseas and its only assets in Israel are machinery.” (source: Ctech, 07/09/2025) I wonder whether this provide a long term solution and make the new Landa Digital Printing viable, competitive in the current and future market. IMO, and I’m not the only one, still a lot of R&D needs to be done to make the machine reliable and productive. 

The first, the fastest, the best quality
If there is one clear thing: Benny Landa wanted to be the first, the fastest, the best. He wanted to be different from the others. Therefore also the unique naming: liquid toner became ElectroInk, indirect inkjet became Nanography.

Benny Landa always claimed: “We were the technology leader, and were the first on the market with digital printers.” (e.g., in this Globes article from 03/06/2003 ) But reality is a bit more complicated. Two companies can claim to be first on the market of full color digital presses: Xeikon showed their DCP-1 at the same Ipex exhibition in 1993, see this article called: “Ipex 93: digital’s birthplace”. (source: digitalprinter, 11/11/2013), The Indigo press release about their first digital press was sent out a few days before the press conference from Xeikon in June 1993 (that press conference had been announced earlier, but without full details of what was going to be announced). You can read all about this in this excellent article by Dutch journalist Ed Boogaard (please note that there are a few paragraphs in Dutch at the top; below is everything in English, look for the subtitle ‘Single pass duplex’, where the story starts). From the article, on the fact that Indigo published its press release a few days before their press conference: “De Schamphelaere didn’t think his premiere had been overshadowed by it: “We will be first to go to market and to demonstrate it.” ”  (source: Edboogaard.nl)

An ‘interesting’ story is the speed of the S10 / S11 series. Initially, it was 6.500 sheets per hour (sph). At drupa 2016, it was announced that the S10 would run at 13.000 sph (source: Incus Media, 24/03/2016), but the actual speed stayed 6.500 sph for a very long time… Until March 2024, when Landa Digital Printing announced the upgrade from the S10 to the S11, with a speed raised from the original 6.500 sph to 11.200 sph. Not the 13.000 sph that was announced at drupa 2016, but an odd 11.200 sph. (source: Landa Digital Printing) Did you ever wonder why this odd number, and why at that moment? This might be the reason: in December 2023, AGFA announced its SpeedSet Orca 1060, which runs at 11.000 sph. (source: Print Action, 15/12/2023)  So, the Landa S11 wasn’t the fastest B1 digital press anymore… they had to go just a little bit above that 11.000 sph…

Benny Landa also wanted to be the best in quality. Already with the Indigo he mentioned that the quality was on par with offset: “Indigo’s breakthrough Digital Offset Color printing technology combines the quality of offset printing with the flexibility, economy and ease of use of electronic printing.” (source: Indigo website – archived web page from 24/12/1996). And this quest for quality was mentioned several times in comments these past few months. And that’s what I don’t get: what aspect of quality was Landa Digital Printing focusing on? What was their reference? And did they ever update that reference when competing technologies improved? Except for the sharp dots and the large gamut when using 7 inks, I never saw ‘superior quality’. Even at drupa 2024, there were still registration problems and white lines between rows of dots. Issues that other vendors of inkjet presses have solved long ago.

And I’m not the only one seeing those registration errors. Here is, e.g., someone telling his story on Reddit: “I’ve worked with an S10 (…) I have a lot of thoughts on it. Not many or any are positive. (…) It seemed to always be out of registration and the imaging blanket always needed to be replaced which seemed to be 6 hours downtime everytime (at least one a week).” Also other comments in that Reddit thread are worth a read…

As a sidenote: I once saw what ‘uncorrected’ inkjet looks like, that was a real eye-opener: awful! Ink droplets were flying in all directions (as a matter of speaking). But when they turned the ‘correction’ on, the result was perfect quality!

There is also an interesting story about drupa 2016… There were live demos, but you needed to be a VIP (which I’m obviously not). A few months ago, someone shared something intriguing – and harming – about those demos: while attending one, he noticed that the paper that was put into the press, was already pre-printed! When he made a remark on that, he was removed from the stand by security… According to him, these were not live demos, they were fake.

What I remember from drupa 2016 is that the amount of light was relatively low. And to conduct a good quality assessment, you need a sufficient amount of light. That’s why we have these very bright lights at press consoles… Although the amount of light was quite limited, and the samples on display for non-VIPs were behind a rope, keeping us over half a meter away, I could still notice registration errors. As far as I know, only one person from the trade press reported on this, a German journalist. (source: Flexo-Tiefdruk, 09/06/2016) And got a backlash, for violating the first commandment of digital printing: “Thou shalt not doubt, nor criticize Benny Landa” 

Why is this important?
Benny Landa is called a visionary, a genius. And I agree that he was a visionary in seeing the potential of digital printing, but he wasn’t the only one. He was a genius, a marketing genius that is. However, the execution of his vision, bringing reliable, productive digital printing presses to the market, that’s where it went wrong, and we need to acknowledge this.

Indigo presses only became reliable after the remake by HP. Landa Digital Printing never reached that level. Even after two decades of R&D, I continued to see basic quality problems, such as white lines and registration issues. The individual dots may be very crisp, but it’s the full image that counts.

The amount of time spent in R&D is significant, much longer than that of other companies, as I showed in a previous article. While others pivoted when a specific route turned out too complex, Landa Digital Printing seemed to stay on that same route: inkjet via a transfer belt. A route that many others have tried, as Morten from Inkish showed, but all of them eventually picked a different route and launched successful, reliable digital printing presses. As I stated in that previous article: when does perseverance become a liability? When Icarus tried to fly ever closer to the sun, his wings melted, he crashed. 

Important PostScript (same is in this article): I’ve been critical of Landa Digital Printing from the start, from the moment I watched one of the demos (the small machine near the exit of the hall) for the second time and noticed that the touchscreen changed before it was touched. At that moment, it became clear to me that the machines weren’t real (yet), that it was a fundraising show.

But criticizing Benny Landa was ‘not done’. When I shared my assessment with the editor in chief of a print magazine, he replied: “What do you know about innovation??? This is Benny Landa!!!”. For the record, I worked at the innovation center for the printing industry at the time, already for 14 years. Initially, I held the position of trendwatcher, and at the time, I also combined that with the role of general manager.

When I shared my first analysis of the print quality (the “I’m not impressed” article), many years later, I received a response that I was overcritical and that I wanted to impose a super high ‘Hagen standard’ for printing. That person seemingly hadn’t read any of my posts about brand colors in real life and my quest to get rid of the 2 dE00 fetish…

That print quality came up again about a few weeks ago, when I commented on LinkedIn that, in my opinion, the quality of the machines is the primary reason for the troubles, not the geopolitical situation. This time, I received a reply stating that Landa Digital Printing has been under much more scrutiny than any other digital press vendor. Really??? Please, show me more than 2 articles that take a critical look at the quality of Landa Digital Printing. Other than mine, obviously. The ratio of raving reviews versus critical articles is certainly above 100 to 1, probably even above 1000 to 1.

When I challenged the number of installments last year, I received an irritated reply stating that the numbers shared by Landa Digital Printing were correct, and that the author had seen the list, but – obviously – couldn’t share it. Now we know better: the information in the data room shows that there are approximately 50 installments. A few weeks ago, someone with seemingly intimate knowledge checked my list and concluded it was “fairly accurate, with a few discrepancies”.

And yes, I’m not an entrepreneur, I do not have ‘hands-on’ experience as an entrepreneur. I’ve never claimed that and never aimed to be one, my goal in life is different. If I were an entrepeneur, you would not be reading these words for free, I wouldn’t share my insights and ideas for free. I also wouldn’t have worked for industry organizations for almost my entire career (one association and two innovation centers). And I have deep respect for people who have a great idea and do go that extra mile to realize that dream. However, an entrepreneur should also know when to cut their losses, as shown in this article.

During my years at the printing industry federation and the innovation center, I’ve been the confidant of many people, including printing companies and vendors; from press operators and R&D engineers to C-level and VPs. They’ve shared tons of information with me, even information that should have been under an NDA but wasn’t. I had the opportunity to visit numerous trade shows and conferences. I know a thing or two about innovation, R&D, and new product launches. I’ve launched several small (and free…) tools myself, projects that made a (slight) difference. For example, low TAC ICC profiles, to facilitate ink savings. Already in 2011 – well over a decade ago – we conducted tests with ICC profiles that had a significantly lower total area coverage (TAC) but without visual degradation. We launched several ICC profiles, including proiles with 260% and 220% coverage. You can still download the 260% from the ICC registry. And Project BBCG is a pretty new approach to defining and exchanging brand colors. And SAD (the ‘Smallest Actionable Difference’) takes a very different look at tolerances in brand color reproduction. These maybe not have made the headlines, but all of them are a new approach, all of them make a difference.

One last thing: I explicitly want to thank all the individuals who shared information over the past few years. I really appreciate it! And if I didn’t publish your information, there is a good reason for that: if I didn’t find any public confirmation, I decided not to publish it, avoiding that it could be linked to you… That’s also the reason why I didn’t publish any pictures I got, e.g., showing issues with the blanket… But I always kept the information in the back of my mind.

Some of the sources were anonymous, but most of them, I know by name, and I checked their profile. And it ranged from people with ‘hands-on’ experience with a Landa Nano press, to people with a much higher profile. I thank them for trusting me, for sharing the information, and for confirming what I had suspected (or feared) from day one. 

PS: if you are an editor or blogger and want to use this content, please note that I put a lot of time in my writings, this one is a summary of over 30 years of experience in the printing industry. As with all writings: it’s copyrighted material. If you want to republish: please contact me so that we can make a fair deal on payments. If you don’t want to pay me, only a brief summary in one paragraph, plus a link to this article, is allowed. Don’t be a freeloader and honor this. Even if it’s ‘just post on LinkedIn’.

UPDATE 09/09/2025: Yesterday the following, long comment was published in a thread on Reddit:
“(…) Here’s the reality:
The 𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗽𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿.
The “𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗿𝘆” 𝗯𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗸𝗲𝘁 everyone hyped up? 𝗧𝗼𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝘆. It takes hours to replace, and you’re lucky if you don’t burn through multiple blankets just to get one decent one.
Customers get promises and press releases, while service teams are left holding the bag when things fail in the field.
For years, leadership has been more focused on optics than on fixing real problems.
The people on the ground — engineers, techs, operators — are busting their asses while executives sell a dream and cash the checks.
If FIMI is serious about turning this around, they need to wipe the slate clean.
Innovation alone won’t save Landa — accountability will…” 

UPDATE 11/09/2025: There is something I forgot to mention in my timeline of Landa annoucements / launches: the 7 color option for the S10. This was already mentioned in 2012, with packaging printers in mind. However, it was only in October 2020 that a S10 press was installed for the first time… (source: Ink World Magazine, 27/10/2020) 

Related posts:

The evolution of offset printing
And why is this relevant to the troubles at Landa Digital Printing Landa Digital Printing – a textbook example of ‘sunk cost fallacy’? The crossover between digital and offset printing, in real life