Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Dyson is in the news frequently and so a dedicated thread.

.

Hi DIB:

No pschology save past experience in the business with customers.  Vacuum buyers anxious to purchase the latest and greatest typically "relegate" the current user to the upstairs, downstairs and/or garage for convenience.  It is a legitimate excuse [convenience] to upgrade if you only have one vacuum.  Most US households have more than one vacuum.

WRT dyson 07 pink, I've addressed the questions and concerns you ask here in the past.  Not in the Reviews, but in  posts.  I'll summarize for you here again.  If you have further questions you can message me offline.  I'll be happy to provide more details.  The design and function of the DC07 is not suited for my current rugs.  This was confirmed by the dyson helpline and technicians in several telephone calls who told me to return it to TARGET.  [Also confimed by my home builder and floor coverings sub contractor employed by the builder].  I "tweaked" the vacuum based on the several recommendations of the dyson techs.  But it would never perform properly on my rugs due to several shortcomings unrelated to air flow and steerability.  It was "fun" working with the dyson techs.  But fun alone did not solve the problems. 

I puchased the DC07 pink on a Labor Day sale from TARGET in 2006.  I kept it for several weeks and attempted to use regularly but to no avail.  Why?  The clutch would constantly make the ratcheting noise and the brush bar would stop.  All the while making calls and emailing dyson with the results [the fun part].  I could not pass over an area of my rugs 4/5 times w/o the clutch engaging and disabling the brush bar.  Toward the Holidays of 2006, I exchanged my dyson DC07 pink with my daughter's HOOVER Soft and Light upright [about 7 years old].  She had a home at the time that had carpets more suitable for this dyson.  She used it on the main level while using a HOOVER V2 [5 years old] on the top level.  In June 2007, after having a second baby, she and my son-in-law bought/moved into a larger house with carpets similar to my home.  The dyson was useless again.  Performing exactly the same as it did for me.

Having purchased my new ORECK Classic XL upright in April 2007, and my daughter liking it, I bought a new ORECK upright and gifted to her in July 2007.  She uses it on the main level, and the HOOVER Dual V on the second floor.  She relegated her dyson to a closet in one of her unused spare bedrooms.  She gifted the dyson away to a needy Church family during the 2007 Holidays.  Unfortunately it didn't work for the donee, who returned it to her.   It's still unused and awaiting another home where it can be used and hopefully appreciated. 

I trust this adequately addresses your concerns/questions.

Carmine D.

PS:  The clutch and brush bar shut off are flawed features [overengineering] on dysons for "some" USA carpets.  I'm sure the reason in large part that these features are no longer used on dyson models.  On a positive note, $45 from the sale was donated by dyson, according to its claims, to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.  A reason in part I bought it and never returned it.

Hello DIB:

I have not seen the new ORECK TV commercial, but nice to know Dave still likes to stay engaged in vacuum battles and forays with bagless, by-pass, and now steerable contenders.  Dave Oreck's sales essence is his fatherly figure status.  It is not what he says, but his presence and demeanor when saying it.  He exudes trust.

Carmine D.

Hello DIB:

Most definitely.  The USPTO is filled with lawyers and government bureacrats.  A product of years of Republican style politics in Washington which speak of less government involvement/regulation but do the opposite.  From 1968 until 2008, 40 years during which the patent office flourished, the USA had 28 years of Republican Presidents and 12 years of Democrats.  Too bad the US hasn't embraced Ben Franklin's advice. 

Carmine D.

Carmine wrote:

The essence of prudent Gov't regulation/oversight is balance.  Too much and/or too little are problematic.   Too much and you stymie private sector innovation.  Too little and you risk having no ethical/moral business boundaries.  Recent case in point.  Sarbanes Oxley.  For years, accounting firms were allowed to police themselves.  Result:  Oftentimes, the accounting firms were in bed with their clients, who paid them, and reported what their customers told them.  Hence: Enron, Global Crossing and host of other firms that went belly up with investors and stakeholders taking it on the chin.  All the while being audited/reviewed by accounting firms giving them clean [unqualified] opinions.  The best grade.  Gov't answer: Sarbanes/Oxley:  Over regulation.  Way too costly and time consuming.   Almost impossible to practically perform within the time constraints.  No better than having no regulation/oversight at all. 

Carmine D. 

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.

Rubbish?  Since you brought up HSN, I'll update you on some recent developments.  On October 31 when I posted the HSN common stock info, it was available on the HSN Web Site.  No more.  No stock quote info available.  Why?   If you recall it was trading at $6.15.  Here's the latest, just 2 plus weeks later:

Last Sale:	$ 4.92		Net Change:	0.25 5.35%
Share Volume:	267,283		Previous Close:	$ 4.67
Today's High:	$ 5.21		Today's Low:	$ 4.31
Best Bid:	$ 4.91		Best Ask:	$ 4.92
52 Week High:	$ 16.54		52 Week Low:	$ 3.06
P/E Ratio:	N/A		Shares Outstanding:	56,145,000
Earnings Per Share (EPS):	N/A		Market Value:	$ 276,233,400
NASDAQ Official Open Price:	$ 4.80		Date of Open Price:	Nov. 17, 2008
NASDAQ Official Close Price:	$ 4.67

Down, down, down.  How low will HSN go? 

If dyson follows the same pattern in 2008, and reports its financial results one year late, I suspect it just may be too little too late.

You're a smart man.  How does a company with 1700 employees add over 500 new hires on the wake of what all experts call the worse global economic downturn in over 70 years?   What is James thinking?  And more importantly, is he thinking? 

Carmine D.

Carmine, there's nothing here at all to suggest Dyson is being allusive. Dyson is a private limited company which (as you know) unlike a public listed company doesn't have to revel anything beyond the figures contained in the news article, which was taken from the accounts filed at companies house.

Dyson filed the year ending 31 Dec 2007 on 31 Oct 2008 - exactly the same requirement as any other limited company that chooses to use this accounting period.

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/7c555f817319dcf2dcfc450748155ff3/compdetails

The comparisons you make with performance to dividend payments are largely irrelevant for a company owned 100% by one family.

Whilst the future certainly will be challenging for them, diversifying in to international markets and indeed in to non-floorcare sectors they look better set to weather the storm than most. They sell functional, as apposed to luxury goods, with high added value.