"What has dyson invented now?" Original Message Oct 11, 2009 11:23 pm
I received this "teaser email today: http://links.mkt2388.com/ctt?kn=1&m=2735925&r=MTgwOTM1MTgzMTcS1&b=0&j=NzgxMTAyODMS1&mt=1&rt=0 Anyone know what's up with this??
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #205 Dec 7, 2009 7:29 pm
Severus wrote:
Carmine,
Are the clutch failures on the DC07 and DC14 covered by the Best Buy and/or Sears extended warranties? I wonder what percentage of these vacuums has experienced a clutch failure. Given Dyson's reliability ratings in Consumer Reports, I suspect there aren't too many failures in the first 4 years.
Dyson owners may be more forgiving than you suspect. I can think of one Dyson owner who probably gets a chill down his leg when he see James Dyson on tv talking about his inventions. Dyson has a dirt collection system that works fairly well. Contrast that with the old bagless vacuum offerings that used pleated filters. Those pleated filter vacuums lost Dyson rivals a great deal of good will with consumers. It would have been better to not offer a bagless vacuum than to offer one that had a high maintenance dirt collection system. Nowadays, almost everyone offers a dual cyclone bagless system that works fairly well. However, many of these companies burned bridges with consumers by offering poorly designed filtration systems that required a significant amount of filter maintenance.
While an informed consumer knows how Dyson compares to others in controlled test conditions, consumers have no way of knowing how much dirt is left uncollected by their vacuums. Dyson wisely designed his dirt bins to not compress the dirt. When a consumer compares a $400 Dyson to a $45 Bissell product from Walmart, it starts to look pretty good. Consumers don't tend to compare that same $400 Dyson to other $400 vacuums unless they go to independent stores.
Hello SEVERUS:
Up through August 15, 2006, dyson vacuums came with a 2 year warranty. After that, dyson offered 5 years. BEST BUY and SEARS customers purchasing a 3 year extended service plan with their dysons will not be covered with an ESP and clutch failures if they bought before August 15, 2006 [expired August 15, 2009]. They would be covered with 4 years up thru August 15, 2010. Even tho an ESP is purchased for 3 and/or 4 years, the first 2 years defaults to dyson for warranty coverage. This gives only a 1 and/or 2 year extension with an ESP. The lion's share of 2 year DC07 and DC14 purchases even with a 3 and/or 4 year ESP are out of warranty by now. Unless they were purchased after August 15, 2006 with a 5 year dyson warranty. If a customer is within that small window of opportunity to have a clutch covered by the ESP, the remaining warranty is still limited by the original warranty period. No extension on the repair/part. August 15, 2010 is the drop dead date. Not much time left.
I agree with you. With normal/less than normal use particularly on low carpets, dyson clutches should easily last 4 years. The exceptions, those used more often and/or on medium pile carpets, especially those with only a 2 year dyson warranty, have been failing and out of warranty/ESP. A dyson clutch repair easily costs $100 or more depending on dealer and parts replaced. With an older dyson, and discontinued model to boot, consumers decline the repairs and opt for new/trade.
Also, faithful readers of Consumer Reports, as you probably know, would decline ESP coverage on their new vacuums. CR has indoctrinated against these as money makers for the retailers.
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #206 Dec 7, 2009 7:32 pm
Severus wrote:
Carmine,
Are the clutch failures on the DC07 and DC14 covered by the Best Buy and/or Sears extended warranties? I wonder what percentage of these vacuums has experienced a clutch failure. Given Dyson's reliability ratings in Consumer Reports, I suspect there aren't too many failures in the first 4 years.
Dyson owners may be more forgiving than you suspect. I can think of one Dyson owner who probably gets a chill down his leg when he see James Dyson on tv talking about his inventions. Dyson has a dirt collection system that works fairly well. Contrast that with the old bagless vacuum offerings that used pleated filters. Those pleated filter vacuums lost Dyson rivals a great deal of good will with consumers. It would have been better to not offer a bagless vacuum than to offer one that had a high maintenance dirt collection system. Nowadays, almost everyone offers a dual cyclone bagless system that works fairly well. However, many of these companies burned bridges with consumers by offering poorly designed filtration systems that required a significant amount of filter maintenance.
While an informed consumer knows how Dyson compares to others in controlled test conditions, consumers have no way of knowing how much dirt is left uncollected by their vacuums. Dyson wisely designed his dirt bins to not compress the dirt. When a consumer compares a $400 Dyson to a $45 Bissell product from Walmart, it starts to look pretty good. Consumers don't tend to compare that same $400 Dyson to other $400 vacuums unless they go to independent stores.
Agree with you SEVERUS. The reason that most indies don't sell dysons to their customers even if they are dyson dealers.
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #207 Dec 8, 2009 7:06 am
Severus wrote:
Carmine,
Are the clutch failures on the DC07 and DC14 covered by the Best Buy and/or Sears extended warranties? I wonder what percentage of these vacuums has experienced a clutch failure. Given Dyson's reliability ratings in Consumer Reports, I suspect there aren't too many failures in the first 4 years.
Dyson owners may be more forgiving than you suspect. I can think of one Dyson owner who probably gets a chill down his leg when he see James Dyson on tv talking about his inventions. Dyson has a dirt collection system that works fairly well. Contrast that with the old bagless vacuum offerings that used pleated filters. Those pleated filter vacuums lost Dyson rivals a great deal of good will with consumers. It would have been better to not offer a bagless vacuum than to offer one that had a high maintenance dirt collection system. Nowadays, almost everyone offers a dual cyclone bagless system that works fairly well. However, many of these companies burned bridges with consumers by offering poorly designed filtration systems that required a significant amount of filter maintenance.
While an informed consumer knows how Dyson compares to others in controlled test conditions, consumers have no way of knowing how much dirt is left uncollected by their vacuums. Dyson wisely designed his dirt bins to not compress the dirt. When a consumer compares a $400 Dyson to a $45 Bissell product from Walmart, it starts to look pretty good. Consumers don't tend to compare that same $400 Dyson to other $400 vacuums unless they go to independent stores.
Hello SEVERUS:
My apologies for not responding in one post all at the same time. Busy nights during the Advent season.
Agree and disagree on this point [see highlight]. While consumers may be forgiving, they're savvy. Enough of a dyson history/trend is available now to lead many to have skepticism about dyson's vacuum products. It's been mounting for several years now, both here and in the UK. One would think dyson should rule in the UK but clearly does not based if we connect market share with popularity/performance. Past dyson customers and potential new customers hesitate with dyson vacuum buy decisions. Combine the skepticism with the current economic malaise globally, and it's clear for the reasons of huge dyson price discounts, way below the once set in concrete dyson MAP, as Tom G liked to say/post. As mentioned, with the rising euro to dollar exchange, the discounts squeeze dyson's profit margins especially here in the USA, which we are told is two-thirds of dyson's market in vacuum sales.
If my vacuum can remove even one spec of dirt that yours misses, then mine is better than yours - even if there's no proof that mine would have picked up as much dirt as yours...
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 397
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #208 Dec 8, 2009 1:38 pm
Venson wrote:
Hi Severus, As both brands primarily sell in vac shops, negotiating price is a very strong possibility. All things considered, my conservative guesstimate is that prices as marked may be talked down as much as $125 to $150 "sticker price".
I did quite well in regard to what I landed my two Mieles a year or so ago. It being just everyone, not just the humble Joe Schmoes who dole out hard-earned money, has had to tighten their belt and make compromises, I think indie shops are equally prepared to the same -- especially now.
Venson
Venson,
Thanks for yourself. Have you used a Sebo upright? If so, how does it compare with your Miele upright? It's more curiosity, since there's no budget for either right now. If I recall correctly, Consumer Reports gave Sebo high marks for design, but it scored "good" for carpet cleaning several years back. It sounds like the new Miele scores very good on carpeting. On the other hand, one CR reviewer claimed that the Miele didn't work well on her carpeting, and the brush roll kept stalling/cutting off. I don't know if she used automatic suction or set it to high.
The smart tyrant writes his own story to ensure that it is favorable. The lazy will repeat lines from the book without fact checking.
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #210 Dec 8, 2009 4:07 pm
Dyson and their clutch system are costly. Give me the clutch system on the Electrolux Uprights of the 1974-1984 time period. No broken belts or problems with the clutch by my customers. Two geared belts and magnetic clutch.
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #211 Dec 8, 2009 5:33 pm
Severus wrote:
Venson,
Thanks for yourself. Have you used a Sebo upright? If so, how does it compare with your Miele upright? It's more curiosity, since there's no budget for either right now. If I recall correctly, Consumer Reports gave Sebo high marks for design, but it scored "good" for carpet cleaning several years back. It sounds like the new Miele scores very good on carpeting. On the other hand, one CR reviewer claimed that the Miele didn't work well on her carpeting, and the brush roll kept stalling/cutting off. I don't know if she used automatic suction or set it to high.
Hi Severus,
I like Sebo due to design as well but have not bought one. I tried the Air-Belt canisters the uprights at stores and like them well enough but have not been moved to make a purchase. (Can't do that now anyway as my budget won't allow either.)
That said, the difference between Miele S7 and Sebo's regular uprights would be:
1) Sebo provides no headlight. True, it's not a big issue and one less thing to have to worry about but considering price it should be part of the package. I will make honorable mention of Sebo's "brush deterioration alert" but , duh, brushwear is something you need to think about only every few years and sometimes much longer than that unless your cleaning your way from New York to California.
2) As far as I know, there's no suction adjustment available either by way of bleed valve or electronics on the Sebos. All the Miele S7s offer it. Nonetheless, the Miele electronic suction adjustment is a little weird when set on automatic. It reduces suction instead of stepping it up when airflow is restricted. Highly unlike other machines I've owned (Hoover and Kenmore) that increase speed when when dust is in the air stream or there is blockage.
3) Sebo's brushroll removes very easily for cleaning (No belt wrestling -- just lift off an end-cap, slide it out completely, clean and put it back). The Miele S7 doesn't provide this. By nature of the screw heads on mine it appears that end-users are not intended to fix much themselves.
4) Very user-friendly Sebo "knocks down" completely for easy clean out and removal and replacement of parts.
Sebo's electronic automatic height adjustment knocks me out. However, I have yet to learn if users have much trouble with over time. On the other side of the coin, Miele's "floating brushroll" has presented me with no problems to cause me to complain.
5) Sebo uprights, depending upon model, may be a couple pounds or more lighter than the Miele S7. That in mind despite the heavier weight, due to the design of the carry handle, I don't mind opting to use it with attachments on stairs. Sebo has a handle at back as well but not quite as comfortable.
6) Per specs (Miele -- 5.4 quarts and Sebo -- listed as 1.4 gallons (approx. 4.5 quarts)) disposable bags on both are quite generous. I think many of the trade-offs are more matters of apples and oranges. Miele swivels and Sebo does not. So what. As for the rating being listed as "good," who knows anymore. Many machines listed as just "good" have maintained raves by way of word of mouth from their owners. I'd say Sebo and several other brands are sound choices too. Venson
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #212 Dec 9, 2009 4:52 am
Trebor wrote:
Carmine and DIB,
Forget about Mole, you two need to be in time out.
As to the lawsuit against Amway, I knew about that, perfectly justified. I was unaware that it related to IONA. Against Hoover UK, I would say the same. When you get into peeing contests over advertising claims, it is always shaky ground, and the wind can blow either way, as James found out in the litigation over the "ballbarrow" name. Those sorts of things aside, there is the matter of the engineering student, who lost on a 'technicality'. I'd like to know about that one before passing judgment. If he really was wronged on a mere technicality, then it was one of Sir James less-than-stellar moments. But the law has to have lines of demarcation, and sometimes the spirit of the law is trampled by the letter, hopefully not too often. As to the matter of using patents which have expired, IT IS NOT STEALING! What theft are you referring to, DIB? The law is the law, and since patents are unlike copyrights which are renewable, they have time limits, and once the time is up, they are public domain. Think what you will, but it is what it is. But please stop accusing manufacturers of theft. If they were stealing, Sir James has proven he has what it takes to sue and to win. If you meant something else, please explain, DIB. But you really hurt your case for being considered rational when you insist on repeating accusation which are not true. If you guys are intent on taking moral potshots at each other, you shouldn't cry 'foul' when the other makes a hit.
DIB, I was referring to the original Fantom, the one later called the Thunder. It was the best. A motor with a little more suck, a larger diameter hose and wand, a little easier to push, and the multi-cyclone, bottom empty dustbin, and viola, an vacuum ahead of its time even today. DIB, what do you have to say about the wiring harness in the dirt tube on the DC25? And the problematic clutch in the DC07 and 14?
Let's not forget 8,000 Dyson vacuums find their way into American homes each and every day, and it shows no sign of abating. Dyson has to continue winning an increasing share of the market to sustain that figure, however. The vacuum buying market has yet to decide what the least acceptable life-cycle is for a 300.00 to 500.00 vacuum. That is everything. If is say, 5 years, and people are repeat Dyson buyers, then Dyson's future is secure. If not, something has to change, reliability/longevity must go up, or prices must come down, or both. The market rules.
Trebor
Trebor,
Lots of things in life are perfectly legal but perfectly despicable too.If you pumped 20 years of your life into a pizza joint, cultivated a clientele, advertised a new previously unthought-of dish, developed a huge following for this dish, then had some suits from Pepsi Co. eat at your place, take take-out from your place, study your ingredients and copy your dish/s... that’s all perfectly legal and so is them moving in across the street and so is them beating your pricing by 40% and after you lost your business, your home, your self esteem you’d have old-Trebor patrons eating in the Pepsi Co. store looking at your closed business saying no laws have been broken, Pepsi Co. is just giving me more value for my dollars and I’m sure Trebor and his home and his family and his kids and his kids college tuition's and his planned retirement date and ability to move to be closer to family will be just fine.It’s just business and no laws have been broken.
Dyson Invents Big
This message was modified Dec 9, 2009 by DysonInventsBig
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #213 Dec 9, 2009 7:14 am
DysonInventsBig wrote:
Trebor,
Lots of things in life are perfectly legal but perfectly despicable too.If you pumped 20 years of your life into a pizza joint, cultivated a clientele, advertised a new previously unthought-of dish, developed a huge following for this dish, then had some suits from Pepsi Co. eat at your place, take take-out from your place, study your ingredients and copy your dish/s... that’s all perfectly legal and so is them moving in across the street and so is them beating your pricing by 40% and after you lost your business, your home, your self esteem you’d have old-Trebor patrons eating in the Pepsi Co. store looking at your closed business saying no laws have been broken, Pepsi Co. is just giving me more value for my dollars and I’m sure Trebor and his home and his family and his kids and his kids college tuition's and his planned retirement date and ability to move to be closer to family will be just fine.It’s just business and no laws have been broken.
Dyson Invents Big
Dib-ster:
Very sad story....but that story and .50 cents can buy you a bowl of soup. Unless you can make it into an autobiography and sell it to your employees/fans at a ridiculously high price by playing the "pity me now only a multimillionaire who 2 years ago was a multi-billioniare" card.
Re: "What has dyson invented now?" Reply #214 Dec 9, 2009 2:31 pm
Trebor wrote:
Carmine and DIB,
Forget about Mole, you two need to be in time out.
As to the lawsuit against Amway, I knew about that, perfectly justified. I was unaware that it related to IONA. Against Hoover UK, I would say the same. When you get into peeing contests over advertising claims, it is always shaky ground, and the wind can blow either way, as James found out in the litigation over the "ballbarrow" name. Those sorts of things aside, there is the matter of the engineering student, who lost on a 'technicality'. I'd like to know about that one before passing judgment. If he really was wronged on a mere technicality, then it was one of Sir James less-than-stellar moments. But the law has to have lines of demarcation, and sometimes the spirit of the law is trampled by the letter, hopefully not too often. As to the matter of using patents which have expired, IT IS NOT STEALING! What theft are you referring to, DIB? The law is the law, and since patents are unlike copyrights which are renewable, they have time limits, and once the time is up, they are public domain. Think what you will, but it is what it is. But please stop accusing manufacturers of theft. If they were stealing, Sir James has proven he has what it takes to sue and to win. If you meant something else, please explain, DIB. But you really hurt your case for being considered rational when you insist on repeating accusation which are not true. If you guys are intent on taking moral potshots at each other, you shouldn't cry 'foul' when the other makes a hit.
DIB, I was referring to the original Fantom, the one later called the Thunder. It was the best. A motor with a little more suck, a larger diameter hose and wand, a little easier to push, and the multi-cyclone, bottom empty dustbin, and viola, an vacuum ahead of its time even today. DIB, what do you have to say about the wiring harness in the dirt tube on the DC25? And the problematic clutch in the DC07 and 14?
Let's not forget 8,000 Dyson vacuums find their way into American homes each and every day, and it shows no sign of abating. Dyson has to continue winning an increasing share of the market to sustain that figure, however. The vacuum buying market has yet to decide what the least acceptable life-cycle is for a 300.00 to 500.00 vacuum. That is everything. If is say, 5 years, and people are repeat Dyson buyers, then Dyson's future is secure. If not, something has to change, reliability/longevity must go up, or prices must come down, or both. The market rules.
Trebor
Trebor,
Glad you liked he heavier, clumsier and better picker-upper and better filtering Fantom. Although the big money (I believe) was in the lighter Fury’s.
I've said it before and I'll say it again...using expired patents is not theft. If you go back and re-read my words I said "robbed" not theft. Robbing comes in may forms... James Dyson and his family and team were robbed when Amway led them on, wasted their time and money and demanded their up-front monies returned. James Dyson and his family and team were robbed when Iona pounced and used this Amway theft as an opportunity to [demand] a lower royalty payment. I can go on and on. Below is a side by side comparison demonstrating how Hoover UK Robbed Dyson LTD and their creativity. Hoover UK copied the DC24 commercial (robbed) down to the same/near same furniture, color of furniture, woman's dress, color of dress, shoes, camera angle, etc. Hoover UK is attempting to rob and dupe the public into thinking their pile of junk (cannot really turn) swivel upright is on par with Dyson Ball vacuums.
I do not get going to bat for losers... I do not get you. Although you provide good banter.
Dyson Invents Big
< Hoover UK’s masterstroke - which only followed Dyson's The Ball and Slim's success.
< Chinese owned VAX’s masterstroke - which only followed Dyson's DC11's success.
This message was modified Dec 9, 2009 by DysonInventsBig
< Hoover UK’s masterstroke - which only followed Dyson's The Ball and Slim's success.
< Chinese owned VAX’s masterstroke - which only followed Dyson's DC11's success.