When Benny Landa spoke about the “sweet spot” for Nanography at drupa 2016, I agreed—naively. I believed he meant speed, size, quality, and applications. What I overlooked, until recently, was the real sweet spot: profit.

Why did SKion, Altana, and Windler invest in Landa in the first place? The answer is as obvious as it is essential: profit. The same motivation will likely drive Landa’s next chapter—whether it’s a sale or something else. In court just weeks ago, Benny Landa claimed Nanography could become the world’s dominant print technology. If it works, the profit potential is enormous—and everyone knows it.

If Nanography becomes a truly competitive technology, it won’t just compete—it could take over. That was the buzz in 2016: Nanography would revolutionize print. A B1/40" press offering speed, quality, and substrate flexibility? What’s not to like?

Consider this: there are millions of offset presses in the world. If just 1,500 Landa machines are sold—each producing 1–3 million sheets per month, at €0.05 per sheet, over 6–8 years—you’re looking at €2.46 billion in annual revenue. Play with the numbers, and it’s easy to see why investors are tempted.

But here’s the catch.

Will it ever run flawlessly? Will it operate without constant technician support, frequent belt changes, or printhead replacements? What will the competition look like if Landa finally gets it right?

Skeptics still argue that Landa was never intended to succeed as a manufacturer—that it was built to attract a buyout. That may have once been true, but eventually, real machines were built, sold, and supported by a sizable staff across sales, marketing, R&D, and operations.

At its peak, Landa’s valuation reportedly reached $2 billion—on par with Heidelberg, but with only a couple of dozen machines in the field. Who would buy such a company with so little to show?

Everyone wanted this to be real—a true disruption. And yet now, some still call it a “company reset.” David Zwang from WhatTheyThink writes:

That optimism contrasts sharply with the reality: some Landa customers have asked the Israeli court to give Landa time to reconstruct, hoping to avoid potential bankruptcy for their companies.

Over €1.4 billion has been poured into Landa. When it works, the print quality is stunning. When it doesn’t, the problems are severe. Anonymously, industry insiders cite endless reasons why the ink, the heated belt, and core systems are flawed. Yet the hype endures.

So what happens next—if Nanography fails, or if someone else emerges with a new technology promising to upend the industry? Will Canon, HP, Heidelberg, and others be ready—or was Landa the industry's one big gamble?

If a single company can nearly reshape the entire print world, that’s a vulnerability. This should be a wake-up call: vendors must prioritize revolutions over iterations. And for those willing to take the leap and buy Landa? You’ll be skipping 13 years of R&D—and saving a billion euros