Vacuum Cleaners Discussions |
|
HARDSELL
![](/images/icons/star-silver.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-silver.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-silver.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-silver.gif)
Joined: Aug 21, 2007
Points: 1293
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #107 Jan 19, 2010 5:07 am |
|
HS: If you repeated what I said, I'd have no reason to post. Talk about me twisting words? You must have majored in philosophy in college. You gave an answer to the SEVERUS question but didn't provide any meaningful information. The question is:
Depends on the user is your answer? Then, my friend any vacuum brand and model may be correct answers. Do you believe that is the case? If so, why argue/debate here the pros and cons of brands/models. They're all equally good, despite the price differences. As long as users' requirements are satisfied reasonably. Right? Wrong! Consumer Reports answers/tries to answer the SEVERUS question for most vacuum buyers. You always take umbrage with CR. Impugn it constantly ad infinitum. Yet, given the chance, you don't provide a meaningful answer/option. Carmine D. Carmine, you harped on Hoover for years. They fell on their a$$. In desperation you chose Oreck in another attempt to find something that could best Dyson. You even compared the two in your reviews on this site. You have established that you use the Oreck regularly in any conversation that mentioned Oreck. In fact you have stated that it is necessary to use it almost daily to keep carpet clean. I can read without a major in philosophy. I responded to Severus and he hasn't complained. If not for your NPD you would likely sit quietly.
I never said they were equally good. Hell, some folks prefer spam to steak. Don't forget that not all can afford higher quality so what they can afford is best for them. There is no definitive best or worst to my knowledge. Perhaps you can list them for us. I will say that Oreck falls to the bottom of my list. How's that for starting another pissing match? Notice how CR rates products. They can tie in performance. Yet one can be purchased in their color of preference and they give the extra points to that one. Go Clown Reports.
|
Lucky1
![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif)
Joined: Jan 1, 2008
Points: 271
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #108 Jan 19, 2010 5:43 am |
|
Hardsell didn't mention his cost of ownership with the Dyson, but it's not uncommon for Dyson user's to have very low cost of ownership. IF most Dyson owners don't have to buy additional filters or supplies over a 5 year ownership period, doesn't it seems reasonable for Dyson to charge more money up front? When people pay over $2000 for some door to door brands, it's hard to fault an inventor for trying to cash in before his patents expire. Venson has documented the high cost of Miele vacuum tools and supplies. Greed more than anything else is what drives people to take the risk to start a business. If Dyson can convince consumers to part with $500 for a vacuum, I'm not going to criticize him for it. Compared to what government does to us, at least buying a Dyson is voluntary. My complaints against Dyson are Company related more so than product related but that said, several expenses I have seen with owning a dyson besides Belt/Clutch is buyers believe their Dyson to be Maintenance Free resulting in clogged HEPA's that need to be replaced $22-$30, new Washable filter that has been ruined because of lack of maintenance $20, Frequent Cleaning $50-$90 and worst the cost to ship the vacuum for warranty Service because they can't get it serviced by the store they bought it from. In Miele's benefit most of the repairs are on older machines 5,10+ years old. Usually past the life span of most other vacuums.
|
Severus
![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-bronze.gif)
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 30, 2007
Points: 397
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #109 Jan 19, 2010 7:02 am |
|
My complaints against Dyson are Company related more so than product related but that said, several expenses I have seen with owning a dyson besides Belt/Clutch is buyers believe their Dyson to be Maintenance Free resulting in clogged HEPA's that need to be replaced $22-$30, new Washable filter that has been ruined because of lack of maintenance $20, Frequent Cleaning $50-$90 and worst the cost to ship the vacuum for warranty Service because they can't get it serviced by the store they bought it from. In Miele's benefit most of the repairs are on older machines 5,10+ years old. Usually past the life span of most other vacuums. If you believe Consumer Reports survey on reliability, Dyson does fairly well. I don't have any way of knowing the percentage of Dyson owners with clutch failures. However, the newer Dysons don't seem to have the clutches. It would be interesting to see what the typical 5 year cost of a Dyson versus other vacuums really is. Certainly as a repair person you only see the problem machines. I can't say that I have much sympathy for those who abuse their vacuums (i.e. fail to maintain filters). One of the moderators (MikeW) used to harp about taking good care of your vacuum, if you want it to take care of you. Certainly a customers lack of maintenance can be a profit center for independents, so that's not such a bad thing either. I have no problem with Miele charging a fortune for their supplies. If you buy a Miele, you know up front that you will pay through the nose for certain things. It goes along with the prestige of owning a Miele.
The smart tyrant writes his own story to ensure that it is favorable. The lazy will repeat lines from the book without fact checking.
|
CarmineD
![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif)
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Points: 5894
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #112 Jan 19, 2010 8:28 am |
|
Carmine, you harped on Hoover for years. They fell on their a$$. In desperation you chose Oreck in another attempt to find something that could best Dyson. You even compared the two in your reviews on this site. You have established that you use the Oreck regularly in any conversation that mentioned Oreck. In fact you have stated that it is necessary to use it almost daily to keep carpet clean. I can read without a major in philosophy. I responded to Severus and he hasn't complained. If not for your NPD you would likely sit quietly. I never said they were equally good. Hell, some folks prefer spam to steak. Don't forget that not all can afford higher quality so what they can afford is best for them. There is no definitive best or worst to my knowledge. Perhaps you can list them for us. I will say that Oreck falls to the bottom of my list. How's that for starting another pissing match? Notice how CR rates products. They can tie in performance. Yet one can be purchased in their color of preference and they give the extra points to that one. Go Clown Reports. HS:
There you go again speaking for me and taking my words out of context. As a simple and easy lightweight upright for use on floors and rugs, ORECK users are more likely to use daily whether for thorough rug/floor cleaning or for high traffic areas and quick pick-ups. Not so with pulling out a full size vacuum with tools on board every day to vacuum. That's the beauty of an ORECK for its users. At $150-$199 for the upright only that's alot of bang for the buck. Before you shoot yourself in the foot, at least take it out of your mouth first. Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 19, 2010 by CarmineD
|
CarmineD
![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif)
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Points: 5894
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #113 Jan 19, 2010 8:39 am |
|
Carmine,
I guess my point is that market forces will determine the number of vacuums sold at a given price point. I can't find the link, but David Oreck gave a speech at a business school, and he predicted the downward spiral of competitors who dropped price and the ensuing pressures to cut costs. Hi SEVERUS:
I agree to a degree. When product prices, like vacuums, and their sales venues, like big box stores, are similar, discerning customers/buyers look for other reasons: Ease of use, performance, longevity, maintenace costs to mention the most likely. When you price your product at 2, 3, 4, and more than the mainstream products, you have to have legitimate justifications to do so, else risk not selling in the same amounts as the competition. I recall David's speech. ORECK recently [last two years and after David made this speech] started unbundling the upright for solo sales and offering ORECKS in big box stores. The solo sales have been a good marketing strategy for ORECK to maintain sales in a economy that has suffered a consumer spending tsunami. Whether the sales in big box stores is effective for its business model remains to be seen. Carmine D. Carmine D.
|
CarmineD
![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif) ![](/images/icons/star-gold.gif)
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Points: 5894
|
![](/images/icons/rereply.gif) |
Re: whatever happened to the Rainbow enthusiasts
Reply #114 Jan 19, 2010 8:58 am |
|
If you believe Consumer Reports survey on reliability, Dyson does fairly well. I don't have any way of knowing the percentage of Dyson owners with clutch failures. However, the newer Dysons don't seem to have the clutches. It would be interesting to see what the typical 5 year cost of a Dyson versus other vacuums really is.
Certainly as a repair person you only see the problem machines. I can't say that I have much sympathy for those who abuse their vacuums (i.e. fail to maintain filters). One of the moderators (MikeW) used to harp about taking good care of your vacuum, if you want it to take care of you. Certainly a customers lack of maintenance can be a profit center for independents, so that's not such a bad thing either.
I have no problem with Miele charging a fortune for their supplies. If you buy a Miele, you know up front that you will pay through the nose for certain things. It goes along with the prestige of owning a Miele. Hi SEVERUS:
As I mentioned, dyson clutches are a chink in the Consumer Reports reliability data. CR has not caught up yet with the repair problem. Belt replacements on the clutch models is a chink too. Typically in its repair data collection, CR doesn't address belt replacements as a repair cost. CR says it is a low cost item and user repair. Not so with the dyson clutch models and their belt replacements. We don't see the CR customer data collection survey. But we know CR rates dysons highly. We also know that CR does not collect/report belt replacements as a repair matter. I opine that the belt replacement costs on dysons clutch models are not collected and reported in the customer surveys. At least not yet. When they are, if ever, dysons' reliabilty rates will fall precipitously. Dyson and its admirers will say these models have been discontinued so it's a non-issue in the future. That's dodging the repair bullet IMHO. Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 19, 2010 by CarmineD
|
|
|