Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

No idea what it will sell for, it hasn't hit the market yet. Maybe the water suppliers will subsidise it, even for metered supplies.
As crazy as it sounds, the energy suppliers are doing this, to play up to their green image.

This message was modified Jun 10, 2008 by M00seUK

Hello M00seUK:

I live in the desert.  Water is in short supply and big demand.  I think the product has merit.  Home builders, suffering the worse sales and profits in decades, would rally behind this product [depending on the pric] and include in their new houses.  Especially builders here in the desert.  Appliance retailers too.  City, county and state authorities too. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
That's why 'Vegas has those big fountain displays - it's to say  "There's so much money here, we can afford to throw this water about in the desert!"

M00seUK wrote:

When you visit next, you'll see that they have been cut back drastically!  Not completely but with severe restrictions and limitations now.

Carmine D.

M00seUK wrote:

The Water Saving - Plastic Chip Using washing machine (invention) story was picked up by This Is London, with reader comments.   Here.

If you are still eager to get a new dyson DC07 at a bargain price for yourself or to gift away, KOHL's is the latest big box store to join with all the others to discontinue the oldest dyson model. 

The KOHL's advertised price is $339 BEFORE an instant cash savings at the checkout of $40.  Plus, for every $50 spent, KOHL's gives away $10 in KOHL's cash.  Final cost for a new DC07 after all the instant rebates and incentives is $ 240.  Good things come to those who wait.  This beats the price I paid at TARGET in August 2006 for the DC07 pink.  My cost was $250.

Valid in stores and on-line June 18-21.  Time to buy? 

Carmine D.

6/18/08:  Dyson in Forbes, again.  Here and here.

Hello DIB:

Let's try 3 times:  What do you say is the dyson signature model?  The greater dyson?

Surely, someone as prolific as you with words, posts, graphics and pics has an opinion on the matter.  Express yourself. 

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

DIB:

I speak for myself regardless of the consequences.  Read on.

Forbes fails to mention that the entire foundation on which the 5127 prototypes was built is a hoax.  The claim: Dysons don't clog, so dysons don't lose suction.  That's a false and untrue statement and comes right from the dyson product literature. 

I can't fault Forbes completely, although I do partly.  The info is provided by dyson which of course prefers to remain silent on the matter.  Changing the dyson mantra and moving on, as one said here in the past.  But is it that simple?  If words could only make it so.  Witness now: The latest and greatest dysons and the filter maintenance needs.  Why?  Dysons do clog.  When filters/bags clog, vacuums lose suction.  Even dysons. The whole dyson mantra was founded on a big myth.  4 million people buy into the dyson myth yearly.  But will they continue?  Look to the UK consumers for your answer.  43 percent dyson market share in 2004.  28 percent in 2007.  Hello Forbes:  Did you ask why? 

Dysons don't clog is the crux of the dyson vacuum for $500.  When this claim fell apart, so did the premise for buying dyson vacuums.  Ball technology instead of clogging?  Give me a break.  Sure some prefer to move on and forget it.  That's easy and best for dyson.  They don't want the bough to break and the mighty good Sir Knight to fall.  What will become of the HS?

How about the consumers who plunked down $500 based on the claim?  Why so many dyson refurbs?  Disgruntled dyson buyers, fed a crock, who returned their $500 vacuums when they clogged and lost suction?  Perhaps.  Forbes:  There's your next story.  Get on it!

You want to defend your hero Mr. Dyson?  Be my guest.  Don't expect me to agree.  

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I’m bemused that you keep bringing this fact up in your posts, because I don’t personally see it as all that a big a deal. For someone like Dyson, selling a premium priced item to capture 43% of the market one year, falling by 15% three years later is to be expected. Why?

 

If Dyson (say) was in the perishable fruit market, yes, this would be a clear indication of their performance. People buy fruit one week, eat it, buy again fruit the next week, etc. Vacuums are not replaced with this frequency.. well okay, cheap vacuums can get replaced every 12months, but premium priced vacuums are designed to last for 5-10 years.

 

I see a saturated market, in the UK at least - I truly don’t see any brand even close to taking Dyson’s market share, at their price point. People either are either happy to buy a cheap bagged cleaner or are prepared to pay more for a ‘proper’ bagless by way of Dyson. Typically, people will even look to buy a low-end bagless, get frustrated by its performance, then, if their funds allow, will stump up for the Dyson.

 

Dyson’s performance indicators are all about market share – it’s about them getting the best return on margin, from as many people as possible. That’s why I think the ball feature is a great invention; it gives many existing Dyson owners an added incentive to upgrade. When this happens, a lot of the existing Dyson cleaners enter the second-hand market, again distorting the true picture of Dyson owners.