Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

ORECK - The business, the history, the machine, the man and related.

(Below: Oreck 1979 to 2008)

  < yr. 1979  < yr. 5/2008

CarmineD wrote:
Same could be said for the Dyson DC15.  Four and a half stars out of five.

http://www.bestbuys.com/p24122475-Dyson-DC15-All-Floors---The-Ball-Bagless-Upright-Cyclonic-Vacuum--reviews.html

To each their own, shall we say.

Dusty

Dusty:

I would add one more observation to make the ORECK XL 21's star rating interesting based on 40 epinions.  Consumer Reports typically and consistently rates this ORECK model above all the dysons save one: the DC17.  So while each their own sounds good, the epinions and CR reviews for ORECK are congruent.  I can't say the same for the epinions star ratings and CR reviews for other brands like dyson which typically gets fair to middlin from CR.

Also Dusty if you don't mind me saying: When you put parens around the http site as you did in your post above, the site can't be found.

Carmine D.

I corrected the link.  Thanks for pointing it out.

Dusty

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

I’ll be glad to answer your question, but me first…  Q:  What is more reassuring for Oreck Dealers and alike….  A)  Hearing a competitor say on a live national t.v. (HSN) and proclaiming to hundreds of thousand of viewers (at minimum) that “the other guy stole it from me and that’s fact” or B) Knowing “Your guy” is super creative and Trademarked their original phrase?

.

What is to prevent Hunter Air from continually stating the above.  If there’s archived video of Hunter Air using this phrase 8 years or so prior, what can Oreck do?        DIB

DIB:

It makes for a good sales show.  The guy had his chance to protest and officially prove he said it first.  He didn't.  ORECK gets the credit he gets to put on a good show. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

CR.  The one who lost a law suit for giving a bad report on a certain electronics good and has raed them at the top ever since.  Also, awarded a best buy to a van simply because it had so many cup holders.

It is only logical that they rate Hoover and Oreck over Dyson because they have headlights to over ride the poor performance of both. 

CarmineD wrote:
Talk about flip-flopping!!!  Weren't you the same one who said the following in the DYSON videos thread:

"From my way of viewing, and probably most others who are not diehard dyson fans, it is quite natural and understandable to side with Kenneth J, the engineering student, who patented his version some 10 years before dyson.  Why?  For the very reason DIB cites so often for dyson against other vacuum makers.  Americans and I trust most others like and root for the underdog.  In this case, Kenneth J. not James D."

So why aren't you "rooting for the underdog" here, as you so eloquently  put it?  There must be some reason other than the fact that you actually like Oreck, and dislike DYSON.

-MH 

Hello Motor:

The difference is huge:  Kenneth J filed a patent 10 years before dyson.  The HSN guy didn't file.  And didn't protest.  2 strikes against him.  Kenneth J has proof of being first.  The latter doesn't have anything.  Even tho given two opportunites to do so.

Makes for a good TV show.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine,

Did Oreck contact Hunter Air with their intentions, asking for their blessings and permission in regards to taking control, owning and Trademarking Hunter Air’s very strong and money making tag phrase?  At minimum, did Oreck contact Hunter Air and give them fair warning by telling HA they should watch and pour thru the “Trademark Official Gazette” and once HA sees the trademark, then they had only a 30 day window from the Gazette’s publication date to file protest?

 

Kenneth J. and his team of lawyers contacted Dyson at a time of great leverage; only 20 days prior to the DC15’s U.S. launch did they contact Dyson.  Kenneth had a 20 year time frame (life of the patent) by which he could claim patent infringement.  Hunter Air had only a 30 day window by which to protest.  Huge differences, yes.        DIB

DIB:

I didn't quote and site the trademark notice.  Nor did I make the rules governing them.  The HSN guy had his chance, twice: Once to claim the right, like ORECK did.  And once to file protest after the ORECK's filing.  He blew both.  Now, he gets to talk about it on TV.  Who's to say he is telling the TV audience the truth and ORECK wasn't first?  His word?  Does he have corroborating proof/evidence to support his word?

BTW, the notice to respond to ALL proposed government rules and regulations in the CFR is 30 days.  That's standard operating procedure.  The government doesn't make individual mailings/contacts to people and businesses with vested interests.  It's the same for all: One public printed notice and 30 days to respond. 

Carmine D.