Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Following is a link to a news article regarding the up and down sides for Electrolux during this year's first quarter.

http://www.centredaily.com/business/technology/story/553091.html

Best,

Venson

Mole  and Carmine are two of my favorites.  Carmine and I can't agree, however I look forward to meeting him some day.  Mole and I have more in common with cars than vacuums.

This forum was so dulll until they joined in.  If we all agreed on the same thing there would be a lot of lost information.

Hi Moose,

I believe it does not matter how long James actually had his ReCyclone for sale to be the exclusive (for a period of time) or “worlds first”.  Worlds First is a phrase used very, very much by Electrolux and one must presume it helps sell lots and lots of product and/or helps create a powerful impression in the minds of consumers that Electrolux innovation leader.  There is plenty of room in consumer’s minds for another innovation leader – James Dyson.  Electrolux has many worlds firsts, I say Electrolux is indeed the “worlds first” at recycled vacuums second to Dyson.  Let the one time backyard inventor have his day in the sun and in the history books as the “worlds first” in recycling vacuums (assuming no others pre-date Dyson).        DIB

Google – Electrolux and “worlds first”

P.S.  Sorry if I come off somewhat intense in support of Mr. Dyson.  I know you like the guy too.

Hello Carmine,

I was indeed 100% uncertain if Dyson could/should stop Electrolux from profiting from the James Dyson exclusive accomplishment of “worlds first recycled vacuum”.  But after reading some literature from the FTC and NAD, indeed this is an untrue claim Electrolux makes.  Launching a brand new concept and pronouncing it as a “worlds first” is claiming exclusivity (and creativity), which it is neither and thereby is misleading the consumer.  It may or may not be more “green” than the ReCycone but that's irrelevant and that’s not what Electrolux is leading consumers to believe and thereby profiting from.  James Dyson climbed the recycled vacuum cleaner mountain first, not Electrolux.  NAD and the FTC guidelines that I have seen are clear on advertising truthfulness which benefits the consumer.  The Federal Trade Commission has the resolve and power to enforce truthfulness in advertising.  In theory…  Can or should James complain to NAD to try to stop Electrolux from advertising exclusive ownership of worlds first?  Yes.  Will NAD rule against this as a false claim?  Yes.  When is the best time for a lawsuit?  After a NAD ruling against Electrolux and only if Electrolux is in non-compliance with such ruling.  At least this was the path James took to stop Hoover from making the Fusion claim/James’ claim and tag line of No Loss Of Suction.

.

Unlike a patent lawsuit where 2 or more companies battle for the rights to manufacture and profit from widgets, the FTC is the big brother, and friend to the lamb-like consumer.      DIB

You raise very good points.  Very cogent arguments.  

Please, tell me which dyson vacuum did dyson claim to be the world's first recycled vacuum:  Was it the DC02 ReCyclone canister [cyclinder for our UK fans] and/or the DC03 ReCyclone upright which Tom Gasko quoted from the User manual?  It appears dyson used the World's First claim for both vacuums?  Tom said in his original post here [the one saying there would be a dyson lawsuit against Electrolux] it was the DC02 canister.  But his follow up post quotes directly from the DC03 Manual.  Apparently, he is confused too just as dyson.  Which do you say it is?   DC02/DC03?

Just because dyson made the claim first that either/both vacuums were recycled, does it have incontrovertible proof, defensible in a court of law, that the dyson vacuums were in fact made from recycled plastic?  This is the point M00seUK makes.  Or just dyson say so that they were?  Does it make a difference: To claim it but not be able to prove it?  In a court of law?

Electrolux can defend its World's First recycled vacuum claim.  It quotes the percentages of recycled plastics to the nearest whole number.  Electrolux takes the claim very seriously.  Even to the point of explaining the reason for the one and only dark "green" color.  Unlike dyson which offered the recycled vacuums in several consumer pleasing colors. 

Carmine D.

MH,

Thanks for all the ReCyclone info.  I could not find the ReCyclone mention in the Dyson autobiography.  If you or anyone knows the ReCyclone page, can it be pointed out to me?  Here is a DC01 manual talking of recycling too (at bottom of page).        DIB

http://www.dyson.co.uk/customercare/manuals/uk/dc01_abs_manual_uk.pdf

Hello DIB:

If I recall, these have been posted here before.  It is dyson's mission statement on how it conforms to the new European law [effective July 2007, I believe its called the WEEE Law hence the address] on socially and environmentally responsible disposal of electronic products.  It doesn't address dyson's policy present/past/future to use recycled plastic materials to make new vacuums.  Nor does the WEEE law mandate this.

Which raises another issue for discussion.  What does the dyson DC02/DC03 claim mean:  "The first recycled vacuum?"  Does it mean that the vacuum is made from recycled materials?  Or does it mean that the dyson vacuum is recycled IF the consumer follows the dyson instructions to return for proper disposal/recycling! 

As I mentioned, I think this is the point that M00seUK makes about the dyson claim.  What does the dyson claim mean?  We know what the Electrolux claim "World's First recycled vacuum means."  It is stated in no uncertain terms. 

Carmine D.

Here's what I think will transpire:  Mr. Dyson and/or his designee will contact their counterpart at Electrolux and say dyson had the first recycled vacuum.  The Electrolux person will ask what does that dyson claim mean?  And the dyson person, like you and others here, won't be able to intelligently say what the dyson claim means.  Let alone will dyson have the proof to back it up. [10 years ago].  An impasse will result.

Dyson's high powered, high hourly priced, NY lawyers with 3 names and 3 piece suits will file a lawsuit against Electrolux.  In fact, I personally and professionally believe that all the vacuum makers, including Electrolux, hope this is the case.  Three years from now when the opening arguments are presented, the dyson legal team will fall short of the necessary proof to back up its claim:  World's first recycled vacuum.  Electrolux will have 3 years of proof and be represented by a low-paid paralegal that looks like Kali from HSN with Kelly Rippa in toe as the official spokeswoman for Electrolux.  The hearing official, probably a kratchety old male judge, will recommend a mutual settlement to and by both parties.  Terms will be confidential and undisclosed. 

Electrolux will agree to modify its existing claim to the following:  "The World's First Proven Recycled Vacuum."  The dyson attornies will agree to this verbage.  Then they will mail Mr. Dyson an invoice for legal fees for $1 MILLION, possibly more.

All the vacuum manufacturers will have a good laugh [at dyson's expense].

Carmine D.