Abby's Guide to Vacuum Cleaners
Username Password
Home Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Vacuum Cleaners > Discussions > Oreck sues Dyson TWICE over Dyson's advertised claim of - “No Loss of Suction”...

Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Search For:
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Original Message   Mar 1, 2009 5:50 pm
Story here:  http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/40463852.html

This message was modified Mar 1, 2009 by DysonInventsBig



Replies: 9 - 18 of 150Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Model2


~ It Beats...as it Sweeps...as it Cleans ~

Location: England
Joined: Jan 8, 2009
Points: 155


Reply #9   Mar 2, 2009 6:59 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Would that be the dyson UK Web SIte and/or dyson product literature?  Or, is this pervasive of all dyson advertisements which include retailers of dysons?  Also, does dyson annotate/footnote with IEC tests as proof?

I excerpted the below from dyson's Home page in the USA which mirrors its own product literature more or less.  Conspicuously absent, unless buried elsewhere, is the "Never clogs" claim.  This claim was part of the class action filing with the ASA.  The clogging according to the dyson complainants resulted in loss of suction.  ASA sustained the complainants, if my memory serves me correctly. 

"Dyson proves no loss of suction using the IEC 60312 Cl 2.9 test standard on uprights and canister
vacuums and using a test method based on the IEC 60312 Cl 2.9 standard for the handheld.

Dyson proves no loss of suction, best average pick up, and 'overall outcleans other vacuums' using results from
IEC 60312 Cl 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, ASTM F608 and F558, and DTM 755— an independently conducted Dyson test."

It is my gut opinion that vacuum manufacturers are given some "puffing" latitude for their claims with their own products and advertisements.  Short of lying.  But not when their products are advertised by others and/or in a line up with other brand industry products.

PS:  Would someone, anyone, explain the claim:  "best average pick up?"  Sounds impressive but the exact/correct meaning fails me.

Carmine D.

The slogan 'others clog - ours don't' is featured in a Dyson promotional leaflets for their current UK upright and canister range. The leaflet for Dyson's DC16 uses the slogan 'The only handheld that doesn't lose suction'

The slogan 'the cleaner that doesn't lose suction' is featured both in Dyson promotional material, and also the current Spring/Summer 2009 catalogue from major UK retailer Argos.

The current Winter 08/09 floorcare catalogue for Currys, another major appliance, electronics and white goods retailer contains several similar statements:

'A Dyson vacuum cleaner uses Root Cyclone technology to spin dirt from the airflow. That's why a Dyson vacuum cleaner never loses suction.'

And:

'Root Cyclone technology separates the dirt from the air by centrifugal force, collecting it in a bin. Because it does not rely on a filter, suction remains constant room after room.'

None of these slogans are followed with references to any test results. I cite the Argos and Currys brochures as examples because I happen to have both of them to hand as I'm writing this. The website for electrical retailer Comet also features the slogan 'the cleaner that doesn't lose suction'  in its Dyson section, as well as the claim 'A Dyson cleaner spins the dirt out of the airflow at high speed, so nothing gets clogged. Which means it doesn't lose suction':    http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/advice/080/Dyson-Guide

It should be noted that Vax, another major UK brand, are now making very similar claims for their own cleaners. From Currys floorcare brochure:

'Multi-cyclonic technology provides better separation of dust particles from the airflow, maintaining suction for longer. Cleans as well as the first time, every time.'

Cleaners from Vax's Mach range all bear the words, 'No loss of suction'

I can't help you Dysons, 'the best average pickup' claim; that's not in use over here!

~ However Clean - Hoover Cleaner ~
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #10   Mar 3, 2009 6:37 am
Clearly, dyson is given more latitude among its sales venues in the UK than here in the USA.  Perhaps, due to the ORECK 1 settlement?  Maybe.

I'm not sure what test can be used to document and prove NEVER clogging. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #11   Mar 3, 2009 6:51 am
HARDSELL wrote:
Do you mean like the ads that claim to clean 50% better than Dyson that were lies?


No, I don't.  I'm speaking strictly about dyson as you know.  Based on the total mass of industry data in the public arena, it is safe to say that dyson vacuums are not known for their besting others [even $50 Dirt Devil uprights] in rug cleaning and grooming let alone doing so in written advertised claims.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #12   Mar 3, 2009 2:46 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts.

It's clear that whatever the terms of the ORECK 1 settlement in Feb 2007 the result is that the once well defined slogan "Never clogs, never loses suction" has been replaced by a verbose ambiguous dissertation about tests and results.  Hard to hold any feet to the fire over words that have multiple meanings depending on who's interpreting. 

Carmine D.


Has not Oreck made themselves out to be an enemy to Dyson?  Oreck has made a second career out of attacking the Dyson vacuum (in their infomercials, etc), attacking Dyson’s marketing and suing Dyson.  If Oreck spent more time on themselves, paying their bills on time, keeping up a good credit history, not having to sell their financial souls to outside investors, inventing, creating new and needed markets, being first to market, etc.,- they would not need to sue (so badly) and write creative claims of their vacuum's wonders and their leading edge engineering that cannot be proven as true.


DIB
This message was modified Mar 3, 2009 by DysonInventsBig



CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #13   Mar 3, 2009 3:27 pm
I offer no comment on your opinions of ORECK, other than to say I am pleased with mine and it performs exactly as I want and expect.  I do seem to recall that ORECK and HOOVER too [if memory serves me correctly] joined with the 30 plus others, who characterized themselves as disgruntled dyson owners and users, who filed against dyson with the ASA in the UK.  I doubt these customers and buyers of dysons had any motives for bringing dyson up against the ASA other than fairness and truth in dyson's product claims.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL


Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293


Reply #14   Mar 3, 2009 4:05 pm
CarmineD wrote:
I offer no comment on your opinions of ORECK, other than to say I am pleased with mine and it performs exactly as I want and expect.  I do seem to recall that ORECK and HOOVER too [if memory serves me correctly] joined with the 30 plus others, who characterized themselves as disgruntled dyson owners and users, who filed against dyson with the ASA in the UK.  I doubt these customers and buyers of dysons had any motives for bringing dyson up against the ASA other than fairness and truth in dyson's product claims.

Carmine D.



It shouldn't be difficult to find 30 consumers who disliked any product ever sold.

Exactly when does Dyson lose suction?

DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #15   Mar 3, 2009 5:03 pm
CarmineD wrote:
I offer no comment on your opinions of ORECK, other than to say I am pleased with mine and it performs exactly as I want and expect.  I do seem to recall that ORECK and HOOVER too [if memory serves me correctly] joined with the 30 plus others, who characterized themselves as disgruntled dyson owners and users, who filed against dyson with the ASA in the UK.  I doubt these customers and buyers of dysons had any motives for bringing dyson up against the ASA other than fairness and truth in dyson's product claims.

Carmine D.


My opinions? - No.  Recorded history? - Yes.  I merely organized this history into a few sentences.

Glad you enjoy your Oreck.  Your Oreck and today's current line of Oreck’s prove out that for most manufacturers, [major] innovation is impossible.

DIB
This message was modified Mar 3, 2009 by DysonInventsBig



CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #16   Mar 3, 2009 5:39 pm
Some, maybe more, like the classics and buy them for that reason.

Carmine D.

CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #17   Mar 3, 2009 5:51 pm
HARDSELL wrote:
It shouldn't be difficult to find 30 consumers who disliked any product ever sold.

Exactly when does Dyson lose suction?



Not just 30 plus consumers who dislike their products after they purchased but went a step further.  They took issue with dyson's product claims and took dyson before the ASA for them.  I can't recall another vacuum brand in recent years that had that happen either here with the FTC or in the UK with ASA save your fave brand. 

Dyson vacuums, like all bagless vacuum products, lose suction when their filters clog.   That was the crux of the disgruntled dyson customers' filing with the ASA in the UK.

Carmine D.

HARDSELL


Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Points: 1293


Reply #18   Mar 3, 2009 7:25 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Not just 30 plus consumers who dislike their products after they purchased but went a step further.  They took issue with dyson's product claims and took dyson before the ASA for them.  I can't recall another vacuum brand in recent years that had that happen either here with the FTC or in the UK with ASA save your fave brand. 

Dyson vacuums, like all bagless vacuum products, lose suction when their filters clog.   That was the crux of the disgruntled dyson customers' filing with the ASA in the UK.

Carmine D.



You apparently have never heard of a class action law suit.  No reason for other vacuum makers to be sued.  They have no technology to infringe on.  Who wants to sue for advertising such as:  "SAME ANTIQUATED TECHNOLOGY AS ALL OUR PREVIOUS ONES" or  "STILL CHOKES AND LOSES SUCTION AFTER A FEW MINUTES USE" or  "WE ONLY CHANGED THE SKU NUMBER SO YOU DUMMIES WOULD BUY IT".  My favorites:  "SOLD ONLY BY INDEPENDENTS SO YOU CAN ALSO GET SCREWED ON REPAIRS" or "OUR VACUUMS DON'T PERFORM, HOWEVER WE GIVE YOU A GIFT TO OFFSET ITS POOR PERFORMANCE".

Dyson should add:  IDIOTS DO NOT TRY THIS VACUUM AT HOME.  Would you drive a car forever and never change filters?

Replies: 9 - 18 of 150Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Vacuum Cleaners Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2024 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.
Site by Take 42