Illustrative case study · Private Equity

Resin work moves into the lab. Metal frameworks move out.

A private equity investor was weighing a dental contract manufacturer as labs move from milling to 3D printing. Would the shift grow or shrink the work labs send out? We put that question to 240 dental labs and contract manufacturers. Delivery took 13 days.

Illustrative scenario

Samplen = 240

Illustrative report

Dental Lab Contract Manufacturing Outlook

Over the next ten years, will the shift to 3D printing grow or shrink the work labs send out?

Study architecture

Map the shiftFive products, milled or printed, at three, five and ten years

Split in and outWhat labs bring in-house and what they keep sending out

Price the workHow much of a price rise labs absorb on outsourced work

Scope

A lab that buys a printer can bring some work home and still need more help with the rest.

Sample

240

Owners and production heads of dental labs and contract manufacturers.

Research by

Study typeAdoption forecast

ScenarioIllustrative

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportExecutive summary

Executive summary

Labs will print resin work themselves and send more metal frameworks out

Dental labs and contract manufacturers placed five products on a ten-year grid, milled or printed. Printing rises from 24% of lab output today to 55% in ten years. Labs will print models, guides and dentures in-house and send more metal out, yet only a quarter of manufacturers plan metal printing. 55% of labs would accept a 5% rise on outsourced metal work.

55%n = 160

of lab output printed in ten years, up from 24%

71%n = 160

of labs expect to print resin work in-house

62%n = 160

of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks

26%n = 80

of contract manufacturers plan metal printing

Figures rounded. Base n = 160 labs or n = 80 contract manufacturers as stated.

Top lines

1Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the millFive products on a ten-year grid03

2Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks outIn-house and outsourcing plans by material04

3One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will sendManufacturer forecasts and capacity plans05

4Most labs take a 5% rise on metal work; at 8%, most re-quoteLargest acceptable rise and pass-through06

5Sample, screener and quality controlWho we interviewed and how07

AAppendixQuestion flow and data tables09

Sample

240 labs and manufacturers

Segments

160 labs, 80 manufacturers

Method

AI-moderated interviews, adoption grid

Markets

US and Canada

Illustrative report. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional.

Illustrative report02

Illustrative reportExecutive summary

Illustrative example. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional. They show UserCue’s method and deliverable format. They do not come from any client study.

The engagement

Delivered in

days, with the report, the data file and a live readout.

Interviews

240

Owners and production heads of dental labs and contract manufacturers.

Audiences

160 dental labs and 80 contract manufacturers.

Method

Forecast

Five products placed, milled or printed, at three, five and ten years.

The brief

Client

A private equity investor

Decision

Where to put growth capital in a dental contract manufacturer

Stage

Technology outlook, before a deal

How we ran it

Approach

AI-moderated interviews with a ten-year product adoption grid

Measured

Adoption by horizon, in-house and outsourced work, price pass-through

Sample

Dental labs of every size and the contract manufacturers they use

Headline figures

Metal out62%

of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten years

Resin in71%

of labs expect to print resin work in-house within five years

Supply26%

of contract manufacturers plan to add metal printing capacity

The question

As labs move from milling to printing, does the work they send out grow?

Most of the target’s capacity is milling. If cheaper printers let labs bring work home, its order book shrinks; if labs keep sending the hard work out, the shift could grow it. That called for both sides of the trade: the labs and the manufacturers they use.

How fast will labs move from milling to 3D printing, product by product?

Which work will labs bring in-house, and which will they keep sending out?

How big a price rise on outsourced work will labs absorb?

What we did

How the study ran, start to finish.

1Kickoff
Milling capacity meets 3D printing.
Over ten years, will the shift from milling to 3D printing grow or shrink the work labs send out? The kickoff turned it into three questions: when labs switch to printing, what they bring in-house and what price rise they would absorb.
2Design
A ten-year grid for labs and manufacturers.
The screener admitted owners and production heads who decide what is made in-house: 160 labs, 80 contract manufacturers. Each side placed five products, milled or printed, at three, five and ten years, manufacturers forecasting what labs send.
3Fielding
240 firms on both sides of the trade.
Voice or text interviews held quant and qual together for a median 34 minutes; any lab planning a printer was asked what it would still send out. The researcher read all 271 and removed 31 for wrong titles or labs outside restorative work, leaving 240.
4Analysis
Labs print resin and send out metal.
The researcher split lab plans by material, and they pull apart: resin work moves into the lab and metal moves out. 71% of labs expect to print resin work themselves within five years, while 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten.
5Readout
Outsourced metal grows at 62% of labs.
The researcher walked the investor’s team through a 38-page report on the adoption grid, in-house split and pass-through at a live readout. Metal printing became the first use of growth capital, since only 26% of manufacturers plan it.

What we found

Four findings from the report.

Summary

Printing more than doubles its share of lab output, from 24% today to 55% in ten years. Labs will print resin work themselves, and 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks. Only 26% of contract manufacturers plan to add metal printing, and 55% of labs would accept a 5% rise on that work without re-quoting.

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 1

Top line 1 of 4

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill

¹ Q4. For each product, will most of it be milled or printed in three, five and ten years? n = 160.

² Material concerns are coded from open responses; see the appendix.

Labs placed five products on a ten-year grid. Printed work rises from 24% of lab output today to 34% in five years and 55% in ten¹. Models, surgical guides and dentures move first. Zirconia crowns and bridges stay milled: 19% of labs expect them to be printed within ten years.

55%n = 160

of lab output printed in ten years

24%n = 160

of lab output printed today

88%n = 160

expect models and guides to be mostly printed

19%n = 160

expect zirconia work to be printed

Products labs expect to be mostly printed within ten years

Expect the product to be mostly printed within ten years (n = 160)

Lab output by technology in ten years (n = 160)

PrintedMilledCast or hand-made

Printed share of lab output, by horizon (n = 160)

Five products rated milled or printed at three, five and ten years. Output shares are each lab’s own estimate, averaged.

Supporting evidence

Labs with ten or more technicians expect to print sooner. § 3.2
Labs say no printed material yet matches milled zirconia for a final crown. § 3.3²

Illustrative report03

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 2

Top line 2 of 4

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out

¹ Q6. Over ten years, will you send out more, the same or less of each product? n = 160.

² Q7. Why would you send metal frameworks out? Multi-select, asked of the 99 planning to send out more.

Labs split their plans by material. 71% expect to print resin work themselves within five years, and 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten¹. Of the 114 labs that will print resin, 74% would still send metal out: most often over printer cost at their volume.

71%n = 160

expect to print resin work in-house within five years

62%n = 160

plan to send out more metal frameworks

74%n = 114

of resin printers would still send metal out

27%n = 160

plan to bring zirconia milling in-house

What labs plan to bring in-house and send out

Lab plans, in-house and outsourced (n = 160)

Metal frameworks in ten years, labs that will print resin (n = 114)

Send outPrint in-houseCast in-house

Why labs send metal out, multi-select (n = 99)

In-house and outsourcing plans are each lab’s own; shares do not sum to 100. Reasons asked of the 99 planning to send out more metal.

Supporting evidence

Labs planning a resin printer budget for it sooner than for any other equipment. § 4.2
Metal volume per lab is too low to keep a printer busy, and labs say so in plain terms. § 4.3²

Illustrative report04

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 3

Top line 3 of 4

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send

¹ Q9. Which capacity will you add in the next five years? Multi-select, n = 80.

² Q8. Over ten years, will labs send you more, the same or less work? n = 80.

Manufacturers forecast the work labs will send them. 26% plan to add metal printing capacity, while 62% of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks¹. 48% of manufacturers expect labs to send them less work overall, and most plan to keep adding milling.

26%n = 80

of manufacturers plan to add metal printing

62%n = 160

of labs plan to send out more metal

48%n = 80

of manufacturers expect less work from labs

56%n = 80

plan to add milling capacity

Manufacturers’ plans against labs’ plans for metal work

Metal frameworks: lab demand and manufacturer plans

Work manufacturers expect from labs in ten years (n = 80)

MoreSameLess

Capacity manufacturers plan to add (n = 80)

Manufacturers forecast lab demand on the same products and horizons as labs. Capacity plans are multi-select.

Supporting evidence

Manufacturers expect labs to bring resin work home and mention metal less often. § 5.2
The manufacturers already printing metal expect the most growth. § 5.3²

Illustrative report05

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 4

Top line 4 of 4

Most labs take a 5% rise on metal work; at 8%, most re-quote

¹ Q5. What is the largest rise in the price of metal frameworks you would accept without re-quoting? Open numeric, n = 160.

² Reasons to stay are coded from open responses; see the appendix.

Each lab named the largest rise it would accept on outsourced metal work. 55% would accept a 5% rise without re-quoting¹, and 23% would accept 8%. Manufacturers expect to pass on 70% of their metal powder and machine cost rises; at 8%, most labs re-quote or move the work.

55%n = 160

would accept a 5% rise without re-quoting

81%n = 160

would accept a 3% rise

23%n = 160

would accept an 8% rise

70%n = 80

of cost rises manufacturers expect to pass on

Would accept the rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting

Labs accepting each rise without re-quoting (n = 160)

Labs’ response to an 8% rise (n = 160)

AcceptRe-quoteMove the work

Accept a 5% rise, by lab size

Cumulative shares from each lab’s largest acceptable rise, against its current price for outsourced metal frameworks.

Supporting evidence

Larger labs accept more: re-quoting their framework volume costs them more than the rise. § 6.2
Labs name fit and turnaround as the reasons to stay with a manufacturer through a rise. § 6.3²

Illustrative report06

Top line 1 of 4 · page 03Illustrative report · top line 1 of 4 · swipeIllustrative report

Question 1 · The shift

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill.

Labs expect printed work to rise from 24% of their output today to 55% in ten years. Models, surgical guides and dentures move first; only 19% expect zirconia crowns and bridges to be printed in that time.

Models and surgical guides88%

Dentures71%

Metal frameworks48%

Zirconia crowns and bridges19%

Labs expecting each product to be mostly printed within ten years · n = 160

Question 2 · In-house or out

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out.

71% of labs expect to print resin work themselves within five years, and 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten. Of the 114 labs that will print resin, 74% would still send metal out.

Print resin work in-house71%

Send out more metal frameworks62%

Bring zirconia milling in-house27%

Send out more resin work9%

Dental labs · n = 160

Question 2 · The supply gap

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send.

Only 26% of contract manufacturers plan to add metal printing capacity, while 62% of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks. 48% of manufacturers expect labs to send them less work overall.

62%labs sending more metal out

26%manufacturers adding metal printing

Dental labs n = 160 · contract manufacturers n = 80

Question 3 · Price

Most labs take a 5% rise; at 8%, most re-quote.

55% of labs would accept a 5% rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting, and 23% would accept 8%. Manufacturers expect to pass on 70% of their metal powder and machine cost rises.

Accept a 3% rise81%

Accept a 5% rise55%

Accept an 8% rise23%

Accept a 12% rise8%

Labs accepting a rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting · n = 160

“We print every model and denture in-house now. Metal is different. I’d need forty frameworks a day to keep that printer busy.”

Dental lab owner · Illustrative quote

Illustrative quotes

Three themes behind the numbers.

Resin

“The printer paid for itself on models alone. Dentures are going the same way, and I don’t send any of that out anymore.”

Lab production manager

Metal

“Metal frameworks still go out. Powder handling, heat treatment and the certification paperwork would need a department we don’t have.”

Lab owner

Supply

“Everyone is buying mills because that is what we know. The labs keep asking us about printed metal, and we keep saying soon.”

Contract manufacturing director

What the investor did

Three moves made with the report.

1The capital · from finding 3

Put the first growth capital into metal printing.

The target adds metal printing sized to the frameworks labs plan to send out, while only 26% of manufacturers plan the same.

2The pipeline · from finding 2

Went after the labs that will print resin.

74% of the labs that will print resin still send metal out, so sales calls start where printers are being bought.

3The pricing · from finding 4

Capped metal price rises at 5%.

The plan passes through rises of up to 5% on metal work, where 55% of labs accept without a re-quote.

Illustrative example. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional. They show UserCue’s method and deliverable format. They do not come from any client study.

Bring us your next growth question.

A senior researcher designs and presents every study.

Talk to our team

More private equity studies

Switching study

How the study ran, start to finish.

1Kickoff

Milling capacity meets 3D printing.

Over ten years, will the shift from milling to 3D printing grow or shrink the work labs send out? The kickoff turned it into three questions: when labs switch to printing, what they bring in-house and what price rise they would absorb.

2Design

A ten-year grid for labs and manufacturers.

The screener admitted owners and production heads who decide what is made in-house: 160 labs, 80 contract manufacturers. Each side placed five products, milled or printed, at three, five and ten years, manufacturers forecasting what labs send.

3Fielding

240 firms on both sides of the trade.

Voice or text interviews held quant and qual together for a median 34 minutes; any lab planning a printer was asked what it would still send out. The researcher read all 271 and removed 31 for wrong titles or labs outside restorative work, leaving 240.

4Analysis

Labs print resin and send out metal.

The researcher split lab plans by material, and they pull apart: resin work moves into the lab and metal moves out. 71% of labs expect to print resin work themselves within five years, while 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten.

5Readout

Outsourced metal grows at 62% of labs.

The researcher walked the investor’s team through a 38-page report on the adoption grid, in-house split and pass-through at a live readout. Metal printing became the first use of growth capital, since only 26% of manufacturers plan it.

Four findings from the report.

Summary

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 1

Top line 1 of 4

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill

¹ Q4. For each product, will most of it be milled or printed in three, five and ten years? n = 160.

² Material concerns are coded from open responses; see the appendix.

55%n = 160

of lab output printed in ten years

24%n = 160

of lab output printed today

88%n = 160

expect models and guides to be mostly printed

19%n = 160

expect zirconia work to be printed

Products labs expect to be mostly printed within ten years

Expect the product to be mostly printed within ten years (n = 160)

Lab output by technology in ten years (n = 160)

PrintedMilledCast or hand-made

Printed share of lab output, by horizon (n = 160)

Five products rated milled or printed at three, five and ten years. Output shares are each lab’s own estimate, averaged.

Supporting evidence

Labs with ten or more technicians expect to print sooner. § 3.2
Labs say no printed material yet matches milled zirconia for a final crown. § 3.3²

Illustrative report03

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 2

Top line 2 of 4

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out

¹ Q6. Over ten years, will you send out more, the same or less of each product? n = 160.

² Q7. Why would you send metal frameworks out? Multi-select, asked of the 99 planning to send out more.

71%n = 160

expect to print resin work in-house within five years

62%n = 160

plan to send out more metal frameworks

74%n = 114

of resin printers would still send metal out

27%n = 160

plan to bring zirconia milling in-house

What labs plan to bring in-house and send out

Lab plans, in-house and outsourced (n = 160)

Metal frameworks in ten years, labs that will print resin (n = 114)

Send outPrint in-houseCast in-house

Why labs send metal out, multi-select (n = 99)

In-house and outsourcing plans are each lab’s own; shares do not sum to 100. Reasons asked of the 99 planning to send out more metal.

Supporting evidence

Labs planning a resin printer budget for it sooner than for any other equipment. § 4.2
Metal volume per lab is too low to keep a printer busy, and labs say so in plain terms. § 4.3²

Illustrative report04

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 3

Top line 3 of 4

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send

¹ Q9. Which capacity will you add in the next five years? Multi-select, n = 80.

² Q8. Over ten years, will labs send you more, the same or less work? n = 80.

26%n = 80

of manufacturers plan to add metal printing

62%n = 160

of labs plan to send out more metal

48%n = 80

of manufacturers expect less work from labs

56%n = 80

plan to add milling capacity

Manufacturers’ plans against labs’ plans for metal work

Metal frameworks: lab demand and manufacturer plans

Work manufacturers expect from labs in ten years (n = 80)

MoreSameLess

Capacity manufacturers plan to add (n = 80)

Manufacturers forecast lab demand on the same products and horizons as labs. Capacity plans are multi-select.

Supporting evidence

Manufacturers expect labs to bring resin work home and mention metal less often. § 5.2
The manufacturers already printing metal expect the most growth. § 5.3²

Illustrative report05

Dental lab manufacturing · Executive reportTop line 4

Top line 4 of 4

Most labs take a 5% rise on metal work; at 8%, most re-quote

¹ Q5. What is the largest rise in the price of metal frameworks you would accept without re-quoting? Open numeric, n = 160.

² Reasons to stay are coded from open responses; see the appendix.

55%n = 160

would accept a 5% rise without re-quoting

81%n = 160

would accept a 3% rise

23%n = 160

would accept an 8% rise

70%n = 80

of cost rises manufacturers expect to pass on

Would accept the rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting

Labs accepting each rise without re-quoting (n = 160)

Labs’ response to an 8% rise (n = 160)

AcceptRe-quoteMove the work

Accept a 5% rise, by lab size

Cumulative shares from each lab’s largest acceptable rise, against its current price for outsourced metal frameworks.

Supporting evidence

Larger labs accept more: re-quoting their framework volume costs them more than the rise. § 6.2
Labs name fit and turnaround as the reasons to stay with a manufacturer through a rise. § 6.3²

Illustrative report06

Top line 1 of 4 · page 03Illustrative report · top line 1 of 4 · swipeIllustrative report

Question 1 · The shift

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill.

Models and surgical guides88%

Dentures71%

Metal frameworks48%

Zirconia crowns and bridges19%

Labs expecting each product to be mostly printed within ten years · n = 160

Question 2 · In-house or out

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out.

71% of labs expect to print resin work themselves within five years, and 62% plan to send out more metal frameworks within ten. Of the 114 labs that will print resin, 74% would still send metal out.

Print resin work in-house71%

Send out more metal frameworks62%

Bring zirconia milling in-house27%

Send out more resin work9%

Dental labs · n = 160

Question 2 · The supply gap

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send.

Only 26% of contract manufacturers plan to add metal printing capacity, while 62% of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks. 48% of manufacturers expect labs to send them less work overall.

62%labs sending more metal out

26%manufacturers adding metal printing

Dental labs n = 160 · contract manufacturers n = 80

Question 3 · Price

Most labs take a 5% rise; at 8%, most re-quote.

55% of labs would accept a 5% rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting, and 23% would accept 8%. Manufacturers expect to pass on 70% of their metal powder and machine cost rises.

Accept a 3% rise81%

Accept a 5% rise55%

Accept an 8% rise23%

Accept a 12% rise8%

Labs accepting a rise on outsourced metal work without re-quoting · n = 160

Three themes behind the numbers.

Resin

“The printer paid for itself on models alone. Dentures are going the same way, and I don’t send any of that out anymore.”

Lab production manager

Metal

“Metal frameworks still go out. Powder handling, heat treatment and the certification paperwork would need a department we don’t have.”

Lab owner

Supply

“Everyone is buying mills because that is what we know. The labs keep asking us about printed metal, and we keep saying soon.”

Contract manufacturing director

Three moves made with the report.

1The capital · from finding 3

Put the first growth capital into metal printing.

The target adds metal printing sized to the frameworks labs plan to send out, while only 26% of manufacturers plan the same.

2The pipeline · from finding 2

Went after the labs that will print resin.

74% of the labs that will print resin still send metal out, so sales calls start where printers are being bought.

3The pricing · from finding 4

Capped metal price rises at 5%.

The plan passes through rises of up to 5% on metal work, where 55% of labs accept without a re-quote.

Illustrative example. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional. They show UserCue’s method and deliverable format. They do not come from any client study.

As labs move from milling to printing, does the work they send out grow?

How fast will labs move from milling to 3D printing, product by product?

Which work will labs bring in-house, and which will they keep sending out?

How big a price rise on outsourced work will labs absorb?

How the study ran, start to finish.

Milling capacity meets 3D printing.

A ten-year grid for labs and manufacturers.

240 firms on both sides of the trade.

Labs print resin and send out metal.

Outsourced metal grows at 62% of labs.

Four findings from the report.

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill.

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out.

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send.

Most labs take a 5% rise; at 8%, most re-quote.

Three themes behind the numbers.

Three moves made with the report.

Put the first growth capital into metal printing.

Went after the labs that will print resin.

Capped metal price rises at 5%.

Bring us your next growth question.

Wound Care Product Evaluation

AI Assistants in IT Service Desks

Outsourced Receivables Recovery Market

As labs move from milling to printing, does the work they send out grow?

How fast will labs move from milling to 3D printing, product by product?

Which work will labs bring in-house, and which will they keep sending out?

How big a price rise on outsourced work will labs absorb?

How the study ran, start to finish.

Milling capacity meets 3D printing.

A ten-year grid for labs and manufacturers.

240 firms on both sides of the trade.

Labs print resin and send out metal.

Outsourced metal grows at 62% of labs.

Four findings from the report.

Printing takes resin work first, and zirconia stays on the mill.

Labs print resin in-house and send metal frameworks out.

One in four contract manufacturers plans for the metal work labs will send.

Most labs take a 5% rise; at 8%, most re-quote.

Three themes behind the numbers.

Three moves made with the report.

Put the first growth capital into metal printing.

Went after the labs that will print resin.

Capped metal price rises at 5%.

Bring us your next growth question.

Wound Care Product Evaluation

AI Assistants in IT Service Desks

Outsourced Receivables Recovery Market