M00seUK

CarmineD wrote:
It looks like DIB has the same issues I have when posting links here. If you use the Firefox browser, it doesn't work correctly on this forum. It really discourages me from contributing.

Interview with James Dyson, insights to the latest version of the dyson digital motor and it's potential.

Sir James Dyson the inventor keeps on motoring
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/3135921/Sir-James-Dyson-the-inventor-keeps-on-motoring.html

Jake Dyson looks to be positioning himself as heir to his father’s legacy. He’s added a wall-mounted Motorlight to compliment the free-standing version and is busy working on a third version.

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=453&storycode=3123560&c=2

http://www.jakedyson.com/

Will Dyson (Senior) one day launch a coffee machine? Interesting patent filing here, which describes a method to simplify the internal working of such a machine, so that two ingredient hoppers can be operated by a single motor :-

http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=GB2447678&F=0

in turn, would there be any value in having coffee beans grounded by a Dyson Digital Motor at 100,000 rpm? Maybe!
There's no obvious reference to floor / laundry care in the description, but perhaps it could be applied.

The Dyson AirBlade web site has had a recent overhaul including a great video with John Churchill, who is credited with having the initial idea for the product.

http://www.dysonairblade.co.uk/

Motorhead / Carmine, thanks for the replies on self-propelled. It does sound complicated, but I guess no more so than was required of the design of the ball / undercarriage arrangement in Dyson’s DC15. Sounds like there are still a few years to go until contract cleaners can be replaced by robots! The commercial sector offers Dyson huge potential for growth, but they’ve yet to make an impact on the tried and tested. It would be a similar challenge as selling high priced hand driers.

I have to admire Dave Oreck in part. Although I have respect for continual product development, he’s certainly been able to successfully hold on to a certain part of the market for a long time.

In the early days of Dyson in the UK, they didn’t do any advertising at all. They quickly worked with having a disruptive product and being PR savvy brought good returns. They only really ramped up the TV commercials and went on the offensive when the dual cyclone infringing competitor, Hoover triple vortex went on the market (in around 2000, as I recall). Since then, within the sea of bag-less competitors, they’ve needed to reinforce in the minds of the buyer, the unique aspects their products offer.

mole wrote:
Agree. Oreck would be almost nowhere in the consumer space without their advertising spend to reach buyers in the senior category.
They have long perfected their formula. The high margin price (and lifetime replacement costs) allows them just enough advertising spend to reach the next level of buyers and so on.
The other option is to invest the profit in to R&D spend.

Personally, I'd say that the main reason Oreck choose to manufacture in the US is 1) Their high margin allows for the cost 2) Having 'Made in the USA' is a bigger marketing draw for sales than the cost savings that would equate to performing the work elsewhere.