中文One of Western Canada’s most storied printing operations is coming to a close. Mitchell Press, a family-owned commercial and digital printer based in Burnaby, British Columbia, has announced it is shutting down, ending a business that began in 1928 and grew into one of the region’s largest independent print companies.
Details remain sparse. The company has offered little public explanation for the decision, and calls from PrintCAN to management went unreturned. What is known is that staff were informed in a meeting on Monday, and that the closure follows an internal family dispute that had earlier spilled into the courts in 2025. A reported bid by a former CEO and shareholder to liquidate the company has added to the uncertainty surrounding the operation’s final chapter.
The Mitchell Group comprised Mitchell Press, Mitchell Digital and the trade service Pacific Bindery. Its plant in Burnaby covered roughly 64,000 square feet and ran a diversified equipment base that included heatset web, sheetfed offset and digital printing. At its peak the business was listed among Canada’s largest printers, with annual sales exceeding 18 million Canadian dollars and a workforce of around 80 people, making it a significant employer in the local print sector.
In a sign of how seriously the company once invested in its future, Mitchell Press ordered Canada’s first Landa Nanographic press, the S10P, and had put the machine up for sale earlier in 2026 as the operation’s fortunes narrowed. The Landa deal had been a statement of ambition, positioning the company at the forefront of digital offset quality in the country. That such a flagship investment is now being divested underscores how quickly the situation deteriorated.
For the Canadian printing industry, the loss of Mitchell Press is more than the disappearance of one company. It removes a long-standing training ground and a anchor customer for local suppliers, and it reflects a wider pattern of consolidation and contraction among independent printers who face rising costs, shifting client demand and intensifying competition from both larger groups and digital alternatives. Family-owned businesses in particular can be vulnerable when succession or governance breaks down, and the Mitchell case illustrates how internal strife can overshadow decades of operational achievement.
The broader context is sobering. Across North America, regional printers that built reputations over generations are increasingly pressured by substrate inflation, labour shortages and the migration of commercial work online. Some have thrived by diversifying into packaging, direct mail and fulfilment; others, like Mitchell, have found the transition too difficult to sustain.
As the staff absorb the news and the courts continue to untangle the ownership dispute, the immediate human impact is the most acute. Eighty people face an uncertain future, and a 64,000 square foot plant that once hummed with web and sheetfed presses will go quiet. Whether any part of the operation is acquired or the assets are sold piecemeal remains to be seen.
Mitchell Press’s story is a reminder that in printing, as in many traditional manufacturing sectors, heritage is no guarantee of continuity. The companies that endure are those that pair a strong legacy with stable governance and a willingness to reinvent their service mix. For now, one of Western Canada’s printing pioneers is preparing to close its doors, bringing nearly a century of history to an unceremonious end.
Source: Based on reporting from PrintCAN.
The closure fits a wider pattern of pressure on independent printers in British Columbia and beyond. Regional commercial printers that built reputations over generations now compete against larger groups with deeper balance sheets, against in-house print operations at major brands, and against the steady migration of commoditised work to digital channels. Substrate inflation, energy costs and a tight labour market have compressed margins for shops that cannot easily pass increases downstream.
Family ownership, long a source of stability and patient capital, can also become a vulnerability when governance breaks down. The Mitchell case, with its reported internal dispute and court involvement, shows how succession or control conflicts can overshadow decades of operational achievement and precipitate a sudden end. Lenders, suppliers and employees alike can be exposed with little warning when decisions are made behind closed doors.
The human cost is immediate. Roughly 80 people face an uncertain future, and a 64,000 square foot plant that once ran web and sheetfed presses will fall silent. Local suppliers lose a significant account, and the regional print ecosystem loses a training ground that developed operators and finishers over decades. Whether any part of the operation is acquired or the assets are sold piecemeal remains unclear, but the episode is a stark reminder that in printing, as in many traditional manufacturing sectors, heritage is no guarantee of continuity. The companies that endure pair a strong legacy with stable governance and a willingness to reinvent their service mix, and Mitchell’s exit underscores how fragile that balance can be.
