Abby's Guide to Vacuum Cleaners
Username Password
Home Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Vacuum Cleaners > Discussions > “Anything” Dyson that makes news.

Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Search For:
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Original Message   Jun 28, 2008 12:41 am

Dyson is in the news frequently and so a dedicated thread.

.

This message was modified Aug 2, 2008 by DysonInventsBig



Replies: 362 - 371 of 624Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #362   Nov 12, 2008 5:29 pm
Hello DIB:

The essence of prudent Gov't regulation/oversight is balance.  Too much and/or too little are problematic.   Too much and you stymie private sector innovation.  Too little and you risk having no ethical/moral business boundaries.  Recent case in point.  Sarbanes Oxley.  For years, accounting firms were allowed to police themselves.  Result:  Oftentimes, the accounting firms were in bed with their clients, who paid them, and reported what their customers told them.  Hence: Enron, Global Crossing and host of other firms that went belly up with investors and stakeholders taking it on the chin.  All the while being audited/reviewed by accounting firms giving them clean [unqualified] opinions.  The best grade.  Gov't answer: Sarbanes/Oxley:  Over regulation.  Way too costly and time consuming.   Almost impossible to practically perform within the time constraints.  No better than having no regulation/oversight at all. 

Carmine D. 

This message was modified Nov 12, 2008 by CarmineD
M00seUK


Joined: Aug 18, 2007
Points: 295


Reply #363   Nov 16, 2008 6:05 pm
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #364   Nov 16, 2008 6:55 pm
Hello M00seUK:

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by CarmineD
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #365   Nov 17, 2008 1:08 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello M00seUK:

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.


 Take it easy Tom Clancy. First your HSN/Dyson conspiracy of selling 10,000 units of the DC07 in one day, now the above rubbish. Time to switch to decaf.        DIB


CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #366   Nov 17, 2008 2:05 pm
Hello DIB:

Rubbish?  Since you brought up HSN, I'll update you on some recent developments.  On October 31 when I posted the HSN common stock info, it was available on the HSN Web Site.  No more.  No stock quote info available.  Why?   If you recall it was trading at $6.15.  Here's the latest, just 2 plus weeks later:

Last Sale: Net Change:
Share Volume:Previous Close:$ 4.67
Today's High:Today's Low:
Best Bid:$ 4.91Best Ask:$ 4.92
52 Week High:$ 16.5452 Week Low:$ 3.06
P/E Ratio:N/AShares Outstanding:56,145,000
Earnings Per Share (EPS):N/AMarket Value:$ 276,233,400
NASDAQ Official Open Price:$ 4.80Date of Open Price:Nov. 17, 2008
NASDAQ Official Close Price:$ 4.67

Down, down, down.  How low will HSN go? 

If dyson follows the same pattern in 2008, and reports its financial results one year late, I suspect it just may be too little too late.

You're a smart man.  How does a company with 1700 employees add over 500 new hires on the wake of what all experts call the worse global economic downturn in over 70 years?   What is James thinking?  And more importantly, is he thinking? 

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by CarmineD
M00seUK


Joined: Aug 18, 2007
Points: 295


Reply #367   Nov 17, 2008 2:37 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello M00seUK:

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.



Carmine, there's nothing here at all to suggest Dyson is being allusive. Dyson is a private limited company which (as you know) unlike a public listed company doesn't have to revel anything beyond the figures contained in the news article, which was taken from the accounts filed at companies house.

Dyson filed the year ending 31 Dec 2007 on 31 Oct 2008 - exactly the same requirement as any other limited company that chooses to use this accounting period.

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/7c555f817319dcf2dcfc450748155ff3/compdetails

The comparisons you make with performance to dividend payments are largely irrelevant for a company owned 100% by one family.

Whilst the future certainly will be challenging for them, diversifying in to international markets and indeed in to non-floorcare sectors they look better set to weather the storm than most. They sell functional, as apposed to luxury goods, with high added value.

DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #368   Nov 17, 2008 2:53 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello DIB:

If dyson follows the same pattern in 2008, and reports its financial results almost one year late, I suspect it just may be too little and too late.

How does a company with 1700 employees add over 500 more new hires on the wake of what all experts call the worse global economic downturn in over 70 years?   What is James thinking?  Is he thinking? 

Carmine D.


 Carmine,
So much concern for Mr. Dyson? Is Dyson the only corporation affected by the world's economies? I applaud the man! He keeps doing and keeps putting faith in what has worked for him and the civilized worlds past too... he keeps inventing! Yes he will have a harder time with all the knockoffs including Miele's and others entering James' category -- steerable's.

 I have not read of Dyson doing any hiring, in fact just the opposite, I've read he might let go of some 69 jobs in Malmesbury which made a stink in some of the British press. Carmen you must remember that competing manufacturers are nothing without Dyson inventing first and showing these competing manufacturing numbskulls the way to more profits via innovation. :-)

DIB


CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #369   Nov 17, 2008 2:58 pm
Hello M00seUK:

I beg to differ with you on several points.  Dyson sells functional products but does so at luxury prices.  Bad for business in poor economic times when consumers are not spending. 

A formal submission on a timely basis is always a matter of routine.  In the past, dyson "leaked" sales and profit information to the press well in advance of the regulatory requirements for reporting.  Dyson fans posted the news here for all to read.   Dyson made no early releases of financial data for 2007.  Instead, filing the obligatory data in accordance with the time requirements by October 31.  And news entities reading/reporting about the filings weeks later. 

Cost and expense increases, the number of new hires, and a company's dividend payouts have the same meanings and implications for privately held firms [controlled by one family] as publicly held ones with varied and sundry investors and stakeholders.  When times are good, dividend payouts and salaries are good.  When times are bad, they are not.   Increasing operating costs with an 18 percent increase in new hires, on the eve of the worse global economic downturn in over 70 years, worsens the adverse impact on operations.  The way to hide the negative impact of increasing costs is cutting back dividend payouts and owners' [read family] salaries.   The article mentions James' salary as the highest cut by over 60 percent.  I suspect other salaries were cut too.  Why?  To sure up the net profit and paint a "rosie scanario."

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by CarmineD
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #370   Nov 17, 2008 3:18 pm
DysonInventsBig wrote:
 Carmine,

 I have not read of Dyson doing any hiring, in fact just the opposite, I've read he might let go of some 69 jobs in Malmesbury which made a stink in some of the British press.
DIB



Hello DIB:

I won't debate opinions with you.  You're entitled to put James on a pedestal.  But you must remember, the higher you put him up there, the harder the fall.

Here is an excerpt from the article that M00se posted from the UK Telegraph.  It's my source for the new dyson hires.  I don't make this stuff up.  I read what you and others post here.  And quote it back to you.

"The company’s highest-paid director, believed to be Mr Dyson, took a 60pc pay cut to £12.6m in 2007 while staff numbers grew by 18pc to 2,203. "

I don't know if 2,203 is before and/or after the 69 person cut. 

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by CarmineD
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #371   Nov 17, 2008 3:56 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello DIB:

I won't debate opinions with you.  You're entitled to put James on a pedestal.  But you must remember, the higher you put him, the harder his fall.

Here is an excerpt from the article that M00se posted from the UK Telegraph.  It's my source for the 500 new hires. 

"The company’s highest-paid director, believed to be Mr Dyson, took a 60pc pay cut to £12.6m in 2007 while staff numbers grew by 18pc to 2,203. "

Carmine D.


Hey Carmine,

The concept is pretty simple to understand...  the world craves innovations that make life better.  Dyson is the kind of fella that delivers such innovations, certainly not all his ideas are winners and he is in good company...  many prolific inventors of past believed in stinkers too.  I do put innovation in a place of prominence (pedestal if you prefer) and not humans.  I do applaud and laugh when Dyson walks into a 100 year old industry and turns it upside down do the NIH/"Not Invented Here" beliefs of vacuum manufacturing Suits.  Like I said in the past the "NIH Suits" give license for Dyson to print money even if it is a paltry $25m annually or as high as $124m annually. What do you think David Oreck or Mark Bissell profit off their namesakes? Certainly nothing like what Dyson does. Between Oreck and Bissell there's 200 years of vacuum manufacturing, certainly and in the spirit of fairness it's time for you to throw rocks at these guys too. - Start with Oreck, since he is the biggest American vacuum manufacturer-whiner of Dyson.

DIB
This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by DysonInventsBig



Replies: 362 - 371 of 624Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Vacuum Cleaners Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2024 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.
Site by Take 42