Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Hello Model2, and HS:

I answered both your questions several times.  You don't accept/understand my answers.  Why?  You're brainwashed by your favorite company's dyson bagless bin propaganda. 

Propaganda is a matter of fact.  It's documented by dyson's legacy in the USA.  The idiosy of a clutch.  Sub par, sub standard brush roll.  Floating head farce.  DC07's use of an old inexpensive one fan Panasonic motor.  Used simultaneously in Pano's cheapest upright for $60.   Dyson mantra: Doesn't loose suction, doesn't clog.  Ball technology is laughable nonsense in the vacuum industry.

Dyson has to recreate itself as a niche vacuum seller [strictly high priced bagless].  Divest itself of all non-vacuum products. Downsize markets and employees.  Retrench by cutting irrelevant and unprofitable R & D on products that lose money in the market place or like the DDM DC22 never sell in all markets..   Else like its falling vacuum market share in the UK, risk inevitable extinction and obsolescense.

Carmine D.

What would be advantageous from a marketing point of view, is that a small, inexpensive 'starter' cube would be an ideal gift item, while providing a great opportunity to sell further appliance cubes to the recipient as time goes by. Say a person receives a 'kettle cube' as a gift, if they begin to appreciate its benefits, there would be great temptation to add a 'toaster cube' to it, to reclaim another power-point and the worktop space. Clearly, they'd be paying a slight premium for the added convenience aspect, yet the 'toaster cube' needn't cost much more to manufacture than one of those budget toasters - which represents a really attractive business prospect.

I'm surprised to hear that the Dyson washing machine might well get another launch in the near future. James Dyson admitted in an interview recently that while the basic premise was sound, they were incredibly arrogant in what they though people would pay for it and the huge costs involved with becoming established in this established market. Both points they overcame with the vacuum cleaners, but the false confidence was to cost them dear... at least to date.

PS for HARDSELL primarily and on the margin for MODEL2:

You can't compare dyson to ORECK as niche sellers.  Why?  ORECKS are sold primarily through a network of ORECK stores nationwide.  By last count over 500.  Opening more all the time, despite the economy.  And also sold through independent vacuum stores.   Dyson'ssales venue has always been primarily big box store retailers.  Big box retailers are another dying breed in the current economic tsunami:  i.e. Circuit City, Linens-N-Things.  Who knows which others bellying up in the months to come.

A note on an unrelated industry but a product of teh times: FAO Schwartz [100 year history as a niche toy seller of high end quality toys like Steiff stuff animals] bought out by Toys R US, a main stream toy seller.  KB toys went belly up even before the Christmas 2008 Season.  

Carmine D.

Hello Model2, and HS:

I answered both your questions several times.  You don't accept/understand my answers.  Why?  You're brainwashed by your favorite company's dyson bagless bin propaganda. 

Propaganda is a matter of fact.  It's documented by dyson's legacy in the USA.  The idiosy of a clutch.  Sub par, sub standard brush roll.  Floating head farce.  DC07's use of an old inexpensive one fan Panasonic motor.  Used simultaneously in Pano's cheapest upright for $60.   Dyson mantra: Doesn't loose suction, doesn't clog.  Ball technology is laughable nonsense in the vacuum industry.

Dyson has to recreate itself as a niche vacuum seller [strictly high priced bagless].  Divest itself of all non-vacuum products. Downsize markets and employees.  Retrench by cutting irrelevant and unprofitable R & D on products that lose money in the market place or like the DDM DC22 never sell in all markets..   Else like its falling vacuum market share in the UK, risk inevitable extinction and obsolescense.

Carmine D.

Oreck and Hoover were the 2 companies in upright vacuum market to gain market share.  All others including Dyson lost market share last year.

Hoover gained double digit market share in the extraction market.

FYI--Hoover made a prototype for a vacuum being centered on a ball about 10 years ago.  They decided not to go forward with the plans due to poor customer reception.

Guess Dyson is copying Hoover...again.

Actually I have to agree that Dyson and Oreck should not be compared as niche vacs. Although you are calling the wrong one a niche vac.

Oreck does not qualify as a full sized industry standard vac.  Dyson does. 

Oreck brush can't be turned off.  Dyson can.

Oreck includes a gimmick gift so that they can justify a high price for obsolete technology with cheap parts. Dyson does not.

Orecks strong point is being light weight and is marketed to the elderly and weaker users.  Dyson is marketed to all users.

Oreck is sold only through exclusively Oreck stores (BIG NICHE). Dyson is not.

I could go on with reasons to show Oreck as a niche and Dyson as a standard, however, you should get the point.

BTW, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO CONTINUES TO MAKE ALL THE COMPARISONS IN AN ATTEMPT TO TWIST THE TRUTH ABOUT A SIMPLE QUESTION THAT I ASKED.

It that were true, Dyson’s competitors (many are enemies) would attack the Ball technologies patents and prove them to be invalid.  A patent search proves that it was an ex-furniture designer turned Dyson design-engineer who alone created the [Dyson] steerable Ball. 

MooseUK provided video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pPlYR6Hql8


DIB