Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

James Dyson has voiced his feelings in regard to what it will take to save Britain's manufacturing industry in a report commissioned by the country's Conservative Party.  An interesting read and plenty of UK reader comments follow.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/7400742/Sir-James-Dyson-plan-to-fill-UKs-engineering-vacuum.html

M00seUK and vacmanuk, I'll be glad to learn what you think.

Venson

CarmineD wrote:
Hello Carmine,
As if often the case, we're discussing a series of unknowns. What we do know is that 10 years ago, Dyson didn't believe in offering bonuses. Here's a quote from an interview dated in 1999:-

"...likewise, he thinks an interest in money is rather vulgar. He is not a fan of paying people bonuses to hit targets. 'I think the whole principle of bonuses is demeaning. If someone needs a bonus to motivate them, they are not the sort of person who should be in business, in my view. Somebody is here because they believe in what we're doing and want to go with that and make a difference, and get great satisfaction themselves, and achieve things."

What we don't know is when exactly this policy was reversed - it might well have been two years later. Equally, while the interviewer at the time was likely one of a number of people to raise the question of performance-related bonuses, I very much doubt he was the only one.

It's worth bearing in mind is that the Dyson in 1999 is quite different to the company it is now. Back then, they would have been investing in R&D, trying to expand production (against local frustrations) to meet international distribution demands. With cashflow likely a big issue, it was about more about making people believe in a cause, than paying out speculative bonuses and drag down the bottom line.

In recent times, with cashflow demands more relaxed, it's now about getting new, reliable, exciting, well-marketed products out there. Everyone shares in that responsibility and they recognise that a bonuses structure gives a good return on investment. By all accounts, there's been a fair number of performance goals met over the years. Nothing 'outrageous' in that at all, in my view. You're blowing this far out of proportion.

Carmine,
It sounds like you are saying...  people in the UK should remove their faith in those who promote invention and innovation and instead put faith in the ideas of men like you.  Correct me if I’m wrong, I believe the bigger money is in inventiveness (Dyson’s universe) vice slaving to a ‘hole in the wall’ business (your universe).


Dyson Invents Big

M00seUK wrote:

M00seUK:  With all due respect, the interview in 1999 is not in question here.  It's the interview you posted dated March 14, 2010.  In particular the excerpt I posted for the reasons I posted. 

I put forth the following question:  What was dyson's vacuum market share by percentage in the UK in 2004?  What is it in the UK today? 

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dibster:  You're wrong, as usual, just as James was wrong in 1999 about bonuses and wrong with MAP of 10 percent.  Money is made with effective and wise business decisions and leadership.  It has nothing to do with faith and only a small amount to do with inventiveness.  500 dyson engineers is overkill and cost ineffective by all and any standards of business measures. 

A business leader who refuses to pay employee bonuses based on a misguided opinion that doing so is insulting and demeaning is in itself insulting and demeaning to employees.  James made his fortune largely through parlaying 2 large lawsuit payouts in a robust world/consumer economy.  He used slick bagless marketing and outsourcing manufacturing jobs from the UK to a contractor housed in Malaysia. 

It's been downhill for James in recent years [since 2006] in large part due to his own business decisions and product blunders/failures.  He alone is the blame.  2006: James' net worth was $2 Billion.  2009 James' net worth is multi-millions.  That's a big monetary fall and not due solely to the economic recession as the article that M00seUK posted here would have us believe. 

Carmine D.

It's possible that the vacuum business (other than handhelds) is doing well, but the hand dryers and bladeless fans are a drag on Dyson's bottom line.  Likely margins are down on vacuums.   The washer fiasco is likely still dragging down Dyson's net worth. 

It's possible that Dyson's net worth has dropped considerably due to charitable contributions.   

DysonInventsBig wrote:
CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

I know small-men like to throw rocks at big-men (doers, job creators, life changers).  It’s an ugly habit and something good men unfortunately have to deal with and young people have to recognize, that is...  to decipher and then believe in those who ‘do’ (things big) or believe in those ‘who’ve never done’ (anything big).


Dyson Invents [lots of things] Big

Interesting interview with Sir James:    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/engineering/article7061037.ece

From The Sunday Times

Apparently James is planning to step down as CEO. 

And you might think he is preparing for something, as he lets slip that he will shortly stand down as chairman of Dyson, the business he founded in 1992. Bob Ayling, long-term board member and former boss of British Airways, will replace him. The company’s chief executive, Martin McCourt, another long-term ally, will remain in day-to-day control.

Dyson himself will have a new job title. “I’ll probably be called chief designer,” he says. “It’s just to make sure there is proper continuation should I go under a bus.”

...

Dyson doesn’t need anyone to warn interviewers off certain topics. He will talk about wealth if you want, though he is barely interested. That could be because he is worth more than £920m in the forthcoming Sunday Times Rich List. He was a billionaire three years ago but won’t mind dropping a notch in the recession.

I guess in American dollars, James is still a billionaire (£920m). 

Severus wrote:

Hello SEVERUS:

Certainly a real possibility.  But being old school, I won't believe it until it's proved true.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dibster:

 I was a successful independent vacuum business owner/operator for over 40 years.  I didn't slave to any boss except me.  I didn't make my fortune by suing others and/or bashing my competition.  I had no business complaints filed against me by any customers in all that time.  I sold the business to another independent who still has the store and business in the same location.  Then, I spent 1the next 15 years as a self-employed industry consultant before retiring in August 2006.  I have degrees in accounting, economics and business from what many would consider an Ivy League University.  I think that I know and speak authoritatively on all matters of vacuum related business.  I also know good business leaders and wise business decisions.  Just as I know and recognize the bad ones.  Big and/or small men and/or women with and without rock throwing abilitie have no bearing on the successful outcomes of businesses.  Both sized men/women are equally capable and/or incapable of being good and/or bad business managers. 

After more than 3 years into retirement, I'm pleased to say I still receive offers of employment and contractual bid requests.  All of which I have so far graciously turned down.  

Carmine D.

Severus wrote:

Hello SEVERUS:

Forbes March 29, 2010 List of World's Richest puts James Dyson exactly at $1B in net worth.  This is a decline in net worth since first making the list several years ago with a reported $1.6 Billion.  James is tied in last place [number 937] with 8 others.  He just made the cutoff for the list.  I presume that's what is meant by not minding dropping a notch in a recession.  However, more accurately and truthfully, tied in the last position at 937 puts James 236 notches [names] down from last year.  

According to Forbes, the net worth valuation is based on an estimate, in many cases not even vetted/verified, at one point in time: Feb 12, 2010.  The amount may have declined/increased since the Forbes publication.  I presume a disingenuous person, knowing the approximate time of valuation, could delay debt payments and expense payments in order to meet the $1 Billion cutoff.  I don't say any one, let alone Sir James, would actually do that although it is a possibility according to Forbes.  

Carmine D.