This morning I was listening to Stobart Group (they of the iconic trucks) chief executive Andrew Tinkler talking about the company's interim results. My ears pricked up when he explained that the firm is protected against fuel price increases because it has a surcharge mechanism written into its contracts with customers.

I imagine fuel is Stobart's biggest variable cost, so that has to be an eminently sensible approach. But I can't help wondering if the printing industry at large could learn a thing or two here?

Recently I spoke to the boss at a sizeable print group whose electricity bill alone had doubled over the past 12 months. Another was bemoaning a £600,000 increase. Even leaving paper aside, there's also gas, ink, plates... and indeed fuel for deliveries. We're talking considerable sums here. Yet in this business, where margins are as thin as a Mills & Boon plotline, it just seems to be accepted that printcos will somehow magically absorb every cost increase going for ever and ever until they finally turn their toes up. 

Am I being utterly naïve to suggest that print contracts should include the industry equivalent of a "Stobart" surcharge clause?

PS

The other interesting thing about the Stobart business model is the clever way its logistics are organised so that trucks aren't returning empty to base - more than 80% are always transporting something other than thin air. I wonder how many printing industry journeys, either of paper or finished goods, this could apply to too.