„3D printing: a threat to global trade” — analyzing the forgotten ING report
Are the claims made in the high-profile 2017 report still relevant?
For nearly a year, the AM industry has been in crisis. You could even say this is the most challenging period in its nearly 40-year history.
Companies are either going bankrupt or merging in extremely compromising ways to avoid collapse. Employees are being laid off, and research and development spending is being cut.
“Restructuring and optimization” are now the main buzzwords, effectively replacing “growth and development.”
But there are two other things that put all of this in a more complex light.
Because reports state that the situation of AM companies in China is entirely different. Investments there are in full swing, local companies are increasingly serious about global expansion, and those that have already expanded pose a significant threat to Western companies.
The second issue is the unbearable paradox described in my third law of the AM market: the market’s value is constantly growing, while the value of the companies that create this market is falling.
It’s getting harder to make sense of it all…
Should we be celebrating the success of Bambu Lab in global markets and the growing adoption of AM in more areas of life? Or should we be worried that this comes at the expense of companies like Prusa Research, UltiMaker, and other Western manufacturers?
Because this would essentially mean that the growth of one company always happens at the expense of others on the market — that these two things cannot be reconciled.
So, how is it, after all? Good or bad?
While searching for answers to these questions, I came across a report published seven years ago by ING. A report that, at the time of its release, caused quite a stir and was one of the key arguments in favor of additive manufacturing.
The report’s title was attractive to AM but ominous for the rest of the industrial production sectors: “3D printing: a threat to global trade.”
This is yet another fascinating journey through time, showing the sentiment surrounding AM just seven years ago. Overall, the report is very well-written, and the arguments presented are logical. Controversial for the rest of the industrial world, but pleasant to hear for the 3D printing industry itself.
How does this report relate to the current market situation? Is it still relevant? Is 3D printing on a path that will allow the realization of the report’s predictions, or has it already missed that chance?
Is the current crisis just a rough phase of a good plan, or has the good plan already become outdated?
I will try to answer all of this…