A Very Poorly Written "Article" Regarding The Hoover Vortex

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

Anger is a very dangerous and indeed selfish emotion. That's what I didn't take what you said with a pinch of salt. I grew up around anger you see and as a result had mild anger issues myself. However, I had to learn to deal with it as unfourtunatly there were not the excellent services avaliable to me back then as there would be now. I wasted a lot of my life and pushed people away because I could get angry. Thankfully by the time I was 30 I had all but dealt with it.

I could easily find things that might offend or indeed anger me, were I to look for them and then decide to react accordingly. I don't - look for them or react to it. There's no point.

Indeed on other occasions knowing I am right in the face of something that is obviously wrong is enough for me. A sense of internal smugness that I could have done better than the other party, or that the other party hasn't a clue how stupid they sound. I learnt to pat myself on the back metaphorically for my own good behaviour, rather than get angry at someone else's shortcomings. Afterall, none of us are really fit to judge anything. Life is so subjective.
 
to be fair...

You just judged me.


 


I didn't say it out of the blue, that I could right a better article, I was responding to another member.


 


I am not truly angry or offended, I was using it in a rhetorical fashion.


 


I notice, you use your age to belittle the younger generation here, I am 21, how stupid do you think I am.
 
Since you claimed that Tom's article was poorly written, the onus is on you to clearly document what is wrong with it. If you claim his facts are wrong, please provide some evidence. Do you have any proof that the Hoover copy filtered better than the Dyson, or are you just making that up? Surely you have some references to some Which? reports or something to back up your claims.
 
I love to read articles about the Hoover Company

I've read volumes at tHe Hoover Historical Society in Ohio. So many articles are there....some including the travel fiasco.... that created havoc in a well-known Company.
Research is so important when writing articles. So many things have been written about Hoover AND many other companies that were untrue, or partially untrue. Some have been corrected or have tried to have been corrected. Still, misinformation goes out into the world. Sadly, if it is not corrected, it becomes truth, legend, etc. You know what they say: "Be careful what you put out there". You might never get it back...OR. it CAN come back to bite you in the a-s.
Any time I've been asked about the company, or a product, I make sure I have all my ducks in a row, as it were. If there's anything I'm unsure about, I go to an expert...the source, if I can. Ann Haines, Tom Anderson, etc....all those people from North Canton, who have been in all of the buildings, in all of the files, books, etc, all throughout the museum, (there's a museum in N. Canton), know the correct data. I, too, have been fortunate to roam through everything, however, I'd NEVER attempt to even say that I knoe a fraction of the info that is out there. I always do my best to speak about subjects honestly and clearly. It's the best we can do when communiacting with others, especially with others who will know more than I.
John
 
I was not trying to prove anything! I was talking from MY EXPERIENCE. I have owned many early Dyson Cleaners and used the ones I haven't owned, I have also owned a Hoover Vortex and from my experience, less dust build up was found on the filter. I never said I was proving anything or saying anything scientifically.


 


Why do I need to say what is wrong with it, I was just commenting on how badly written it was, in any case, another member, corrected it anyway.


 


There were which reports available at the time that rated the Vortex a better performer to the Dyson, I do believe. Don't quote me on that.

[this post was last edited: 10/6/2015-12:19]
 
the onus is on you to clearly document what is wrong with it

Oh, I'm sorry, what have we been doing for the previous 34 posts?

You also seem to be forgetting that some of us were actually around and in the same country as this particular cleaner when it was launched and quite clearly remember the launch, successes, failures, pro's, con's and of course the well publicised law suit.

Read the whole thread and watch the video that Roger has linked to.

Whilst I don't agree with Alex on certain points, credit where credit is due, he is drawing on his own experience of using this particular cleaner in his home and comparing that with other cleaners used in the same environment for the same job - I can't say fairer than that.
 
Have any of you guys taken the time to read the testimony from the Dyson/Hoover lawsuit? There are pages and pages of testimony. It answers all the questions about the machine, and how it is like (and unlike) the Dyson. I also own a Triple Vortex, along with lots of European vacuums, (my Vortex is pictured in the article). I get one page of the magazine to summarize a different cleaner every month - a magazine read by vac shop owners on their lunch breaks. IF you take all the information about the Triple Vortex (both printed info and real world experience with the actual vacuum), I see nothing in the article that anyone should be angry about. Dyson might have copied the high efficiency cyclone from a saw mill, but there were NO dual cyclone vacuums ever until the Dyson "Cyclon 1000". No one ever put the two cyclones together before him, so I will disagree about him copying anyone. He did make the mistake of believing he was the first person in the world with a bagless, no loss of suction vacuum - 10 million owners of Rainbows would beg to differ with him.
 
Have any of you guys taken the time to read the testimony from the Dyson/Hoover lawsuit?


 


One should yield his own advise, perhaps the "facts" written down the first time would of been correct. We all make mistakes, but if you are going to publicly post something, surely one would double check his work before publishing.


maybe we wouldn't be here now, doing this.
 
Thanks for your article Tom. It was a very good read. I appreciate the efforts you went to actually read the court documents and research the topic.
 
White Vortex / Red Vortex

The white V2000 model went on sale at Easter 1999, I know because I bought one. The original version had a black foam exhaust filter which let through the dust.

The red V2001 model was launched around September 1999, with a white, pleated S-Class filter.

I ordered an S-Class filter to fit the V2000, thus improving filtration.

Later S-Class filters had an additional 'honeycomb' layer on top of the pleated filter, as seen in reply #2.
 
I finally got to work on one the other day. They were never sold here. It had a blown motor full of dirt.
It had been in storage for a few years.

Here is a pic of the cyclone too.
Its a very noisy vacuum.

gsheen-2015100615091806797_1.jpg

gsheen-2015100615091806797_2.jpg
 
These are just a few examples of incorrect statements from said article:

"Just a few years earlier, they advertised a FREE Airline Ticket, to any destination, IF you bought a new Hoover. The problem was, they failed to place a price limit on the model you purchased"

"The very first Hoover Dual Cyclonic vacuum cleaner, the Triple Vortex, in stunning candy apple red"

"At about 2/3 the price of a Dyson, it was an instant hit. People who thought the Dyson "too expensive" bought the Hoover. "

"The Triple Vortex model was pulled from the market, and a filter fitted to the inside of the clear bin. Making the Triple Vortex, a single Vortex machine"

You can't have done that much research then??
 
Thanks for posting your points of disagreement. It makes it easier to have an intelligent debate rather than just posting insults.

"Just a few years earlier, they advertised a FREE Airline Ticket, to any destination, IF you bought a new Hoover. The problem was, they failed to place a price limit on the model you purchased"

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hugh-salmon/immigration-uk-politics_b_4657324.html :
"The Hoover Free Flights Fiasco is recognised as the biggest disaster in the history of the UK sales promotion business... In 1992, Hoover was losing money and under pressure to sell off the excess stock that had piled up in their warehouses. A sales promotion campaign was developed whereby customers who spent over £100 on any Hoover products would receive two free flights to first, Europe, and then, disastrously, America...
At this time, the days before budget airlines, the value of these flights was estimated to be £600 - far greater than the £100 that Hoover invited customers to spend."

It's pretty clear that Hoover failed to set the bar high enough to cover the costs of the promotion. I hope you don't think the promotion was a success given all of the money Hoover lost.

"The very first Hoover Dual Cyclonic vacuum cleaner, the Triple Vortex, in stunning candy apple red"

I think you're reading too much into this line. The very first Hoover Dual Cyclonic vacuum cleaner was the triple Vortex, was it not? The candy apple red is referring to the picture of the version he photographed.
 
"Just a few years earlier, they advertised a FREE Airline Ticket, to any destination, IF you bought a new Hoover. The problem was, they failed to place a price limit on the model you purchased"

That's just it Ralph, you've said it yourself. The promotion was not to ANY destination. It was selected European destinations first, which was a huge success, and then either New York or Florida. It was the US flights that caused the problem. It also wasn't applicable to any Hoover product. It was only available when the customer spend over £100.

School boy errors for someone who has apparently done their research.

It's also important to note that the Hoover company responsible for free flights and the company behind the Vortex were 3 completely different companies. Hoover Europe was sold off to Candy in 1995, 2 years before the Vortex was even in development.

If you read reply 2, you'll find more info.
 
Personally I dont see anything wrong with the article. Its a well summarised version of what happened.

Haveing actually seen a vortex it was a rush job design its clearly visable. Hoover was running scared They messed up big time when they could have owned the patents and burried them. But they made a huge mistake and needed a come back. The vortex was another bad decision from a company that should have known better
 
British Hoover

Very briefly,the secondary fallout of the 'buy a cheap Hoover-get an expensive airline ticket'was that when the new Hoover owners returned from vacation they might put the new unused Hoover in a garage sale at a low price for someone who would now not have to buy from a Hoover dealer.
I may add more later on this lengthening thread but now have to service a US Hoover with a throwaway bag.
 
I have learnt so much about Hoover UK thanks to Roger, since his YouTube channel, "ibaisaic" started and he has taken the time to upload videos and detailed written posts elsewhere about the company and its history, not to mention the brochures, catalogue scans and experiences with the actual cleaners that I have had in the country they were marked, sold and I grew up in!


 


I am a big Hoover collector and like to think I know what I am talking about, when it comes to Hoover UK, of course I don't know everything and don't claim to.


 


When you are going to post something for the public to see, you must do it professionally and have the facts right. To me, I can't really take the article seriously, I feel it was all a bit bitter. Just my opinion.


 


Despite everything I say and how much of a Hoover fan I am, I do know they have pros and cons, unlike some collectors (I am not being suggestive here, I am just saying).  I am not actually Biased towards Hoover's, I just love the company, cleaners and the legacy/heritage of the company...Bare in mine, there would be no Dyson if it wasn't for Hoover!!


 


I do really like Dyson's. I don't agree with everything the chief executive of the company (James) has to say, but I feel he has made some good products over the years and I own and have used quite a few examples of them, his latest machines are better than ever.


 


In the case of Dyson and Hoover at the end of the century...All facts aside, this is my opinion now, I believe James took Hoover to court, not really anything to do with the product, I think he sued them out of spite and greed.


 


What James said about Hoover turning him down in the early 90s and a lot of you are forgetting...That statement was pretty irrelevant, because the Hoover that brought out the Vortex was not the Hoover that told James to get on his bike, with his technology!


 


Alex.

[this post was last edited: 10/7/2015-10:37]
 
Alex,
I am in agreement that when somone appoints themselves as an authority they should be judged with a more critical eye, and you should not feel shamed for having equeal or more knowledge, nor for pointing out  inaccuracies. 


 
 Court findings, are much like the decision process itself; purely interpertative.   To be awarded millions only nets thousands in most cases, so the bragging point is to post the award, not the actual amount received.

In the end we are not speaking of Hemmingway, Tolstoy or even Susann. It's an article for a trade magazine whos readers for the most part scanned it while sitting in the bathroom.   The longterm effect on the literary world is minimal, but you are correct in the fact that even the Enquire should care about accuracy, though they rarely do.  In any case a writer should be aware that in publishing they will be open to criticism and their professionalism should be extended to be accepting.


 

[this post was last edited: 10/7/2015-12:54]
 

Similar threads

suctionselector
Hoover Won against Dyson?
Replies
25
Views
329
parwaz786
P
turbo500
James Dyson: "The EU should spur invention, not mediocrity"
3 4 5
Replies
131
Views
869
sptyks
sptyks
V
Sebo Customer Service...
Replies
15
Views
564
blackheart
blackheart

Latest posts

Back
Top