Advertising Age - HOOVER TO DYSON: IT’S ON NOW
Dyson and Hoover have been having a fight over who sucks more. That’s suck as in vacuum- and which one cleans your carpets better.
Hoover is the old business- been around forever. In fact, in Dyson’s home country, England, or the United Kingdom as the Brits like to refer to themselves, when you vacuum your floor- it’s called “hoovering”- so how could Hoover end up being threatened by this upstart, premium priced vacuum? Simple- it’s got nothing to do with who cleans better- it’s all about who understands marketing better. The winner is Dyson- hands down.
Both have worked with great ad agencies- Dyson was with Fallon before switching to Element79, Hoover is now with TBWA/Chiat/Day - so they are all obviously aware that advertising helps sell products that suck.
As an owner of several vacuum cleaners- and one and a half dogs that shed more than snow falls in the Rockies, I can tell you that if you emptied the bag as often as you emptied the Dyson canister- I’m sure you wouldn’t lose suction either. We empty the Dyson every time we vacuum- we empty the bag when it’s all the way full (which is about once every 10 times we vacuum). And, no, this isn’t scientific fact; it’s just a common sense observation.
The reason Dyson is killing Hoover- and everyone else is design- pure and simple. They glamorized the lowly vacuum into a fashion accessory- and put a status price tag on their product. Hoover was still selling it as an appliance to hide in the closet. Just look at the product graphics on the two machines- Dyson hasn’t mucked their lines up with a million messages- your typical Hoover looks more like a NASCAR- with stickers everywhere.
Now- if you still don’t believe me- consider this. Up until about 2000 or so, Dyson licensed their same design to a US distributor- who had the product made in black with purple accents- it had a stupid name like “Phantom”- and looked like a NASCAR too- just like all the other machines- only it cost a bit more. It didn’t sell worth a crap. Then Dyson pulled the agreement, came to the US with their signature yellow and gray machine- with simple graphics, hiked the price, did classy ads- and now everybody wants one.
That’s proof- good design helps sell products that suck.
What do you think?
It is still amazing to me how many ad agencies use flash only sites. It tried to click on the links while I was on a computer away from home and the pages wouldn’t even display because the computer I’m working from doesn’t have the latest version of flash installed. So, all I was able to see was the copyright notice at the very bottom of the page, not even the agency’s name was visible. Interesting how an ad agency makes it difficult for a good chunk of their potential audience to view their site.
Interesting fact about the Phantom– I don’t own a Dyson (no carpet– a vacuum powered Swiffer, which came free with a dirt devil I never use– serves me quite well) but just goes to show you that marketing, not necessarily design, creates buzz and sales.
Fantom actually did sell well in its nine year run, but their poor quality eventually caught up to them. They fizzled because of piss poor quality control, and overwhelming product servicing costs for the company. It wasn’t that the Dyson Dual Cyclone design they were liscensed was poorly designed. It was that Fantom couldn’t build a vacuum around the Dyson Dual Cyclone that couldn’t sufficiently support it (not enought power). This led to mass failures nationwide, which then led to tremendous returns and service calls, which costed Fantom too much money. In 2001, Fantom lost the rights to utilize Dyson’s Dual Cyclone collection system, so they had to design mediocre pleated filter bagless vacs like everyone else. Their sales sank, and they finally went bankrupt in 2002. Shortly after, the rights to the Fantom name were sold to another purveyor of cheapo products called EuroPro.
In retrospect, all that Fantom had was great marketing, and never a great product. Dyson has done well here in the last four years because of successful marketing, higher quality designs, innovative features, and tremendous word of mouth from millions of satisfied customers.
Hoover does suck..in more ways than one. We just bought one of those fancy Hoover vacs, but it’s heavier than hell to carry up and down stairs, and the Hepa filter that never needs cleaning always needs cleaning….wish we’d never bought the damn thing.
I agree with Chuck… Hoover does suck and not in a good way. I probably bought the same model as Chuck, mine is so heavy I can hardly use it. I spent close to $300 for mine and I contacted Hoover about 36 days after I purchased it to see if I could exchange it and they were not helpful at all, actually their customer service is horrible. They couldn’t care less. I will NEVER buy another Hoover vacuum again!
Hoover vacuums were great, when they were metal and the company cared about its image. I have had two self propelled Windtunnels, and they work great. The suction is the best there is on the market, even with the bag filling up. I bought a 2nd Windtunnel, new Surface Command (Bagless) for the upstairs of a large house. Nothing but a piece of junk. There is a spinning filter at the top of the vacuum that clogs up, about 10 minutes into usage. The suction then goes to zero. I emailed Hoover and requested to exchange the model to the version we have on 1st floor, w/ bag. They treated me horribly. I got the run around for over 2 weeks. I was told over and again, they do not replace vacuums, only offer service. This model has a serious design flaw. Ultimately, I filed a complaint with the Better Business Buraeu in Ohio, but still, got a total runaround. I think this a classic example of what happens when companies move to India and China. Hoover now manufactures products in China. For the most part, these machines are made cheaply, and parts break off just a few years into usage until the entire machine is junked. Sad.
”England, or the United Kingdom as the Brits like to refer to themselves.”
England is a country, the United Kingdom of Great Britain is not. The United Kingdom is made up of four countrys – England, Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland. So a Brit would call Britain the United Kingdom as a referance to themselves, as a Scot is not going to call him/herself an Englishman.