You’ve been sold short to a scam

It might sound paradoxical, but all this stems equally from poverty and greed. 3D printing has always been poor. Underfunded. Unprofitable. But it’s not that no one in the industry has made big money. It’s about something else.

A millionaire in the 3D printing industry could be a billionaire in any other industry.

For some reason, they chose a career in Additive Manufacturing and are stuck in it, trying to succeed. And they see that it doesn’t bring adequate results. That their hard work is not properly rewarded. Here’s an example:

• John runs a business in the AM industry
• he has two friends who run businesses in other, “normal” and “ordinary” industries
• John works 16 hours a day, 7 days a week
• the first friend — let’s call him James — works just as hard as John
• the second friend — let’s call him Jeremy — works normally; you could even say he’s slacking off… yeah, he’s a slacker!
• 10 years pass
• John decides to compare himself to his friends
• it turns out that James has a fortune worth 30 times more than his
• it also turns out that slacker Jeremy has a fortune worth the same as John’s.

Why is that? Because it’s the goddamn AM industry. That’s just how it is. It’s very disappointing. Frustrating. It’s very unfair. The AM industry is, on the one hand, very demanding (but which industry isn’t…?), and on the other hand, poorly paid. To make really good money here, you have to work your guts out. There’s no other way.

Unless there is…?
What if…? You know…?
Cheat…?

Money for the promise of money

When we compare 3D printing to other, traditional manufacturing methods (as I do below), it turns out that in terms of business and marketing, it has one gigantic advantage. It is still perceived as innovative. Even though the technology is — depending on the specific technique — 30–40 years old, it has only entered public consciousness relatively recently. Let’s say 10 years ago…

So, 3D printing = innovation.

And innovations have some interesting characteristics:

• they are promising — but difficult to predict
• they are currently inexpensive — but have huge growth potential in the future.

This makes them an excellent investment product. Although they are indeed high-risk, this risk is compensated by a high rate of return. These are basic principles of economics and investment.

Alright, so here’s what we do:

• we take 3D printing with all its imperfections
• we package it in successive layers of innovation
• these layers, on the one hand, cover the imperfections, and on the other hand, highlight the advantages.

In this way, we create a completely new product, dripping with promises of great achievements and money. And a very important thing — all of this will be achieved in the future. Not now, but if we get a lot of money now, then the future will be wonderful. There will be a hell of a lot of money.

So, once again:

• we take an existing 3D printing technology that is niche and little-known
• we package it in a modern design and, just in case, scale it up (meaning we will produce larger parts or a greater number of parts, or both)
• we say it’s a real revolution, a game-changer that will turn everything upside down; we make a great promise.

We get the money. A lot of money. Screw poverty.

Remember The Big Short? The restaurant scene? When Mark Baum meets the CDO Manager?

Greed.

Oh crap, I forgot the most important thing… And what is the great promise of additive manufacturing? Well, the great promise of additive manufacturing is rapid manufacturing for mass production of parts.

Why is Rapid Manufacturing impossible to achieve today?

I’ve written about this many times, but I’ll keep writing it because people still don’t notice or don’t want to understand… 3D printing has three advantages and three disadvantages compared to any other manufacturing method:

✓ is the fastest
✓ is the cheapest
✓ allows the greatest geometric freedom

✗ has the poorest accuracy and finishing quality
✗ becomes problematic as part size increases
✗ not profitable for mass production

Advantages and disadvantages interact and cancel each other out. This determines the usefulness and suitability of 3D printing for producing a given application.

For example, if a part needs to be:

1. made quickly
2. made cheaply
3. have complex geometry
4. surface quality and dimensional accuracy are not significant
5. small (fits within a 10x10x10 cm / 4x4x4 inch cube)
6. produced in a single piece

then there is no better and more profitable manufacturing technique in the world than 3D printing. But if we remove the third item — complex geometry — and start changing any of the last three parameters (4–6), everything starts to fall apart like a Jenga tower.

Because if:

• dimensional accuracy needs to be at the level of 0.05 mm
• the part size is 25 x 25 x 45 cm / 10 x 10 x 18 inches
• 1500 pieces are needed

then “quickly” and “cheaply” become highly relative. 3D printing may still remain in the game, but it won’t be as obvious. It will depend on the AM technology, the material used, the expected strength of the produced parts, etc. For 3D printing to be profitable and cost-effective, its advantages and disadvantages must balance each other out.

Okay, but is it possible to produce a really large number of parts on 3D printers — enough to put injection molding to shame?

Yes, it is.

But only if the part is small and does not require complicated post-processing (meaning it is not full of internal supports that need to be manually removed). And there are no special requirements for the material used. There are companies in the world that fulfill orders in the hundreds of thousands or even millions of pieces, and these are completed faster than any injection mold could be created.

You probably know the names of these companies because you watch their videos on YouTube and like their posts on social media. I do it myself because they really make cool stuff. But we — the 3D printing people— know the truth. These are parts that can be produced this way. There are other parts that cannot be produced this way. Or simply changing the material makes it impossible… We know this — but people with big money and hope for a quick profit — don’t know. These are people who can be convinced to invest.

The people who got short sold into a scam

Oh, poor investors who drowned millions of dollars, euros, pounds [insert currency name] in lying and deceitful 3D printing startups. What manipulations were used to trap them? How fine was the web of lies that ensnared them?

Well, they got what they deserved. They were greedy too. They believed because they wanted to believe. Let me tell you a story from Poland — and I know it’s similar in other parts of the world.

A man calls me. He says he represents a large and important investment fund (from Poland). He says he is interested in a certain Polish company producing 3D printers.

He asks if I know it?

I say that I know it very well. I know it better than the company would like me to.

He asks if he could then ask a few questions?

I say sure, but what kind of answers is he expecting? Detailed or general?

He asks what does that depend on?

Well, on whether we are talking business or like two strangers having their first conversation ever and will never hear from each other again?

He replies that in that case, the general… That “he’s just asking”…

So I say, well, in that case, all the general answers to general questions are in my free articles on my free portal.

“Oh, that’s nice,” he says, and ends the conversation.

I’ve had “a few” conversations like this. The last one was with a representative of one of the largest Polish bank’s funds, who asked me about a certain publicly traded company. He asked me through LinkedIn Messenger. He also said he was “just asking in general” and even invited me to Warsaw (I live in Łódź — 130 km / 80 miles away) for a coffee. Meaning he would pay for it. For the coffee — not for the travel to the coffee.

Damn, I don’t even drink coffee…

This is what research conducted by investment managers in the area of 3D printing looks like. I’d like to believe it’s different in other areas… These people spent other people’s money (investment funds manage other people’s money) and now they cry that they were deceived. All of this could have been checked earlier. They should have read. They should have gone to the right people and asked the right questions.

Hey, but those people didn’t want to talk to us for free…

So stinginess kept you from consulting, and greed pushed you into a shady investment. You deserved it.

So, is this the end of investing in 3D printing?

Of course not. Just like the events of July 3, 2024, didn’t end 3D printing. The technology will continue to develop, companies will rise and fall, and investment funds will invest more carefully and thoughtfully. Just as they should have from the very beginning. They were fooled once with consumer 3D printers. Now they have been fooled with industrial-scale 3D printing.

Maybe everyone will finally learn?