This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent in a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and has no place on the BBC website. There was no questioning of his astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of journalism. You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world". EU membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here freely. The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire highly-paid engineers but that could have been brought in while we were an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development of the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating vaccine produced in record time, and that's because we produced it." In fact there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that and our development started while we were still subject to EU rules in the transition period. The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.

His claim that Brexit is boosing innovation is the complete opposite of the truth as funding for research is substantially lower than before. Just ask any scientist or engineer.




--
Clive Page

On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
snip

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out.Â* Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems.Â* Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.


Are those claims about efficiency based on the same methodology that the
ECJ found against in 2018?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8623591.html


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In article ,
Robin wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
snip

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.


Are those claims about efficiency based on the same methodology that the
ECJ found against in 2018?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8623591.html


ISTR Dyson being against the power figure as he thought it too high?
Higher than any of his models?

I could be wrong, of course.

--
*Succeed, in spite of management *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent
in a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and
has no place on the BBC website.Â* There was no questioning of his
astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of
journalism.Â* You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world".Â* EU
membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all
around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here
freely.Â* The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire
highly-paid engineers but that could have been brought in while we were
an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with
us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out.Â* Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems.Â* Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development
of the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating
vaccine produced in record time, and that's because we produced it."
In fact there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that
and our development started while we were still subject to EU rules in
the transition period.Â* The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely
nothing to do with Brexit.

That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:19:03 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
snip

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.


Are those claims about efficiency based on the same methodology that the
ECJ found against in 2018?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8623591.html
ISTR Dyson being against the power figure as he thought it too high?
Higher than any of his models?

I could be wrong, of course.

I thought it was because they were measuring power used rather than air-watts (which dyson preffered)
which was suction power based.
Otherwise you could place a 1KW heater inside the cleaner and people would think that you got 1KW worth of suction.

In which case I agree with Dyson.

On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 13:34:57 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent
in a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and
has no place on the BBC website. There was no questioning of his
astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of
journalism. You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world". EU
membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all
around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here
freely. The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire
highly-paid engineers but that could have been brought in while we were
an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with
us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development
of the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating
vaccine produced in record time, and that's because we produced it."
In fact there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that
and our development started while we were still subject to EU rules in
the transition period. The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely
nothing to do with Brexit.
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Yes I think that was the case and they even said so in that all countries had to agree before proceeding.

Also our govenment (about the only thing they have got correct) paid up front for vaccines
around £100m to Oxford for vacines that may not have worked , but the money was needed for R&D.
While the EU waited until,all countried agreed with what to do how how to do it.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought
in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems.

Unfortunately the EU regs tended to produce a lot of vacuum cleaners that
were lower-powered but also had correspondingly poorer suction so didn't get
carpets clean. The skill, as you say, comes from a cleaner that has lower
power without sacrificing the very thing you buy a vac for - suction. If you
have to leave the vac on for longer while you go over the carpet again and
again and again, you've lost the energy advantage.

There is also the problem of being first to the market (with technology that
was current at the time) and then failing to update that technology to match
the competitors who were later to the market.

On 14/04/2021 13:38, whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:19:03 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
snip

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.


Are those claims about efficiency based on the same methodology that the
ECJ found against in 2018?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8623591.html
ISTR Dyson being against the power figure as he thought it too high?
Higher than any of his models?

I could be wrong, of course.

I thought it was because they were measuring power used rather than air-watts (which dyson preffered)
which was suction power based.
Otherwise you could place a 1KW heater inside the cleaner and people would think that you got 1KW worth of suction.

In which case I agree with Dyson.


Dyson's case against the EU was that it purported to tell consumers how
energy efficient and effective at cleaning a cleaner was in use when it
measured them only when clean and empty. Read the link I posted or the
press release from the final EU court

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_1430408/fr/

Bear in mind that big EU manufacturers are very much inside the tent
when the policy and technical details of such measures are prepared.
All of course with only the best interests of EU consumers in mind.




--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Well it depends whether its just his opinion, and I guess it is, but well, I
guess there is a disclaimer on the web site like we use, opinions expressed
are those of contributors, not necessarily those of the organisation.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Clive Page" wrote in message
...
This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent in
a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and
has no place on the BBC website. There was no questioning of his
astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of journalism.
You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world". EU
membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all
around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here freely.
The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire highly-paid
engineers but that could have been brought in while we were an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with
us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models with
1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with more
efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these inefficient
models in the far east from where they could be sold anywhere in the world
(now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development of
the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating vaccine
produced in record time, and that's because we produced it." In fact
there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that and our
development started while we were still subject to EU rules in the
transition period. The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely
nothing to do with Brexit.

His claim that Brexit is boosing innovation is the complete opposite of
the truth as funding for research is substantially lower than before.
Just ask any scientist or engineer.




--
Clive Page

On Wednesday, April 14, 2021 at 1:34:57 PM UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent
in a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and
has no place on the BBC website. There was no questioning of his
astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of
journalism. You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world". EU
membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all
around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here
freely. The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire
highly-paid engineers but that could have been brought in while we were
an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with
us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development
of the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating
vaccine produced in record time, and that's because we produced it."
In fact there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that
and our development started while we were still subject to EU rules in
the transition period. The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely
nothing to do with Brexit.
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Not so. There would have been nothing stopping the UK paddling its own canoe within the EEC

On 14/04/2021 21:40, fred wrote:
On Wednesday, April 14, 2021 at 1:34:57 PM UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
This article on the BBC business news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56741000
is an astonishing bit of PR for the Dyson organistation, and I've sent
in a complaint to the BBC as follows:

This article is nothing more than a public relations piece for Dyson and
has no place on the BBC website. There was no questioning of his
astounding claims which means this is not a serious piece of
journalism. You need to post a retraction.

For example: "we can employ people from all around the world". EU
membership had no effect on the UK's ability to employ people from all
around the world, only from the EU who could in the past come here
freely. The new points-based system may be allowing him to hire
highly-paid engineers but that could have been brought in while we were
an EU member.

He also claimed 'Dyson's British suppliers "didn't want to expand with
us".' - that is an extraordinary claim which should have been questioned.

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.

On the vaccine: he claimed "We weren't part of the European development
of the vaccine. We had to develop our own... a world record-beating
vaccine produced in record time, and that's because we produced it."
In fact there was nothing in EU rules that prevented us from doing that
and our development started while we were still subject to EU rules in
the transition period. The success of our vaccine effort is absolutely
nothing to do with Brexit.
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Not so. There would have been nothing stopping the UK paddling its own canoe within the EEC

There was nothing to stop Germany, the Netherlands, France and Italy
either, until pressure was applied and they fell into line. Indeed it is
reported that the German Health minister was forced to apologised for
the four-countries' attempts in a €œhumiliating tone,€� so that Ursula von
der Leyen and Angela Merkel could make the €œgrand gesture€� of letting
the EU take charge.

On 14/04/2021 16:06, Robin wrote:
On 14/04/2021 13:38, whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:19:03 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
snip

Many of us know why Dyson is against the EU: it is because it
brought in
efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners which meant that his models
with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out. Other manufacturers with
more efficient models had no problems. Dyson chose to make these
inefficient models in the far east from where they could be sold
anywhere in the world (now including the UK) except in the EU.


Are those claims about efficiency based on the same methodology that
the
ECJ found against in 2018?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8623591.html

ISTR Dyson being against the power figure as he thought it too high?
Higher than any of his models?

I could be wrong, of course.

I thought it was because they were measuring power used rather than
air-watts (which dyson preffered)
Â* which was suction power based.
Otherwise you could place a 1KW heater inside the cleaner and people
would think that you got 1KW worth of suction.

In which case I agree with Dyson.


Dyson's case against the EU was that it purported to tell consumers how
energy efficient and effective at cleaning a cleaner was in use when it
measured them only when clean and empty. Read the link I posted or the
press release from the final EU court

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_1430408/fr/

Bear in mind that big EU manufacturers are very much inside the tent
when the policy and technical details of such measures are prepared. All
of course with only the best interests of EU consumers in mind.

Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

What consumers wanted to know is what suck their vacuum clear has, and
that is best measured in air-watts. Possibly again with bags etc part full.

If that was done, there would be little need for inefficient motors and
would make dinosaur cleaners extinct.

The EU made sure that it was all a compromise and scam; where "the
policy and technical details of such measures are prepared" was dictated
by EU manufacturers.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Now there's an about face. Thought the EU was run by Germany, in the
interests of Germany? Or was that just said when it suited?

--
*A fool and his money are soon partying *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Robin wrote:
Dyson's case against the EU was that it purported to tell consumers how
energy efficient and effective at cleaning a cleaner was in use when it
measured them only when clean and empty. Read the link I posted or the
press release from the final EU court

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_1430408/fr/

Bear in mind that big EU manufacturers are very much inside the tent
when the policy and technical details of such measures are prepared.
All of course with only the best interests of EU consumers in mind.

If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce a
machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one which
didn't work?

--
*Some people are alive only because it's illegal to kill them *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

What consumers wanted to know is what suck their vacuum clear has, and
that is best measured in air-watts. Possibly again with bags etc part full.

If that was done, there would be little need for inefficient motors and
would make dinosaur cleaners extinct.

The EU made sure that it was all a compromise and scam; where "the
policy and technical details of such measures are prepared" was dictated
by EU manufacturers.

Are you saying it is OK to produce vacuum cleaners that don't work
properly? And they will sell well?

What ever happened to market forces?

--
*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 15/04/2021 11:02, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Now there's an about face. Thought the EU was run by Germany, in the
interests of Germany? Or was that just said when it suited?

I've never said that.

On 15/04/2021 11:06, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
Dyson's case against the EU was that it purported to tell consumers how
energy efficient and effective at cleaning a cleaner was in use when it
measured them only when clean and empty. Read the link I posted or the
press release from the final EU court

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_1430408/fr/

Bear in mind that big EU manufacturers are very much inside the tent
when the policy and technical details of such measures are prepared.
All of course with only the best interests of EU consumers in mind.

If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce a
machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one which
didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been about
efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for washing
machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but grade them on
efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient models. What
makes vacuum cleaners different?

On 15/04/2021 11:06, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
Dyson's case against the EU was that it purported to tell consumers how
energy efficient and effective at cleaning a cleaner was in use when it
measured them only when clean and empty. Read the link I posted or the
press release from the final EU court

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_1430408/fr/

Bear in mind that big EU manufacturers are very much inside the tent
when the policy and technical details of such measures are prepared.
All of course with only the best interests of EU consumers in mind.

If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce a
machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one which
didn't work?


You are swerving to absolute power consumption when Dyson's case was
about efficiency.

And if consumers will just buy ones which work once a maximum power is
set why do they need the maximum power limit?

I don't understand what market failure you think needs fixing.

PS
Does your support for absolute limits on the power consumption of
consumer goods extend to cars? If not, why not?



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce a
machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one which
didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been about
efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for washing
machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but grade them on
efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient models. What
makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same way
as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy a
vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

--
*Remember not to forget that which you do not need to know.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 11:02, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Now there's an about face. Thought the EU was run by Germany, in the
interests of Germany? Or was that just said when it suited?

I've never said that.

Sorry to lump all you types who bring an irrelevant point about the EU
into any discussion together.

But I'm sure you are searching far and wide for such things since the
Brexit Nirvana we were promised seems ever further away.

--
*Can vegetarians eat animal crackers?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 15/04/2021 14:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce a
machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one which
didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been about
efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for washing
machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but grade them on
efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient models. What
makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same way
as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy a
vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

You can't just nip into your local shop and buy one though. They are
simply not available in normal high-street shops.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 14:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce
a machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one
which didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been
about efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for
washing machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but
grade them on efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient
models. What makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same
way as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy
a vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

You can't just nip into your local shop and buy one though. They are
simply not available in normal high-street shops.

You mean the same as many light bulbs? Something you might need quite
quickly, unlike a new vacuum cleaner.

--
*WHERE DO FOREST RANGERS GO TO "GET AWAY FROM IT ALL?"

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 15/04/2021 18:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 14:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce
a machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one
which didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been
about efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for
washing machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but
grade them on efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient
models. What makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same
way as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy
a vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

You can't just nip into your local shop and buy one though. They are
simply not available in normal high-street shops.

You mean the same as many light bulbs? Something you might need quite
quickly, unlike a new vacuum cleaner.

I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard and no
spare vacuum cleaners.

As to which is more urgent - if I had no spare bulb, I'd borrow one from
somewhere less important in the house or use a table lamp. If I've been
doing some DIY and have dust and debris everywhere, I might well need to
vac up straight away to be able to live in it.

On 15/04/2021 11:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 11:02, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Steve Walker wrote:
That is the only thing that you've said that I might disagree with. I
think that if we had not been leaving the EU, we would have been
persuaded (like Germany [and the Netherlands IIRC] were), to abandon our
own efforts to procure vaccine supplies and to rely on the EU
procurement effort.

Now there's an about face. Thought the EU was run by Germany, in the
interests of Germany? Or was that just said when it suited?

I've never said that.

Don't worry. Dave will happily put the words in your mouth.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard and no
spare vacuum cleaners.

I have a wet or dry one kept in the workshop. Which would do if the
upright failed completely. And a hand held cordless one too.

With a purchase like that I don't tend to just go out and buy the first
one I can find.

Don't with light bulbs either.

--
*Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Steve Walker wrote:

I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard

I recently chucked out all my spare CFLs, I have one spare LED bulb in
the cupboard (because I bought a pack for use in the kitchen) and a
spare incandescent oven bulb.

and no spare vacuum cleaners.

I have a boxed pre-2017 Miele vacuum in the loft, same model as I'm
currently using.

On Thursday, 15 April 2021 at 18:58:11 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 18:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 14:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce
a machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one
which didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been
about efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for
washing machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but
grade them on efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient
models. What makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same
way as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy
a vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

You can't just nip into your local shop and buy one though. They are
simply not available in normal high-street shops.

You mean the same as many light bulbs? Something you might need quite
quickly, unlike a new vacuum cleaner.
I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard and no
spare vacuum cleaners.

I have 3 spare vacuum cleaners and I only have a 2 bed flat.
I have 3 tin/can openers too.
Got loads of screwdrivers, most of which I won't be able to find if looking for a specific one.



As to which is more urgent - if I had no spare bulb, I'd borrow one from
somewhere less important in the house or use a table lamp. If I've been
doing some DIY and have dust and debris everywhere, I might well need to
vac up straight away to be able to live in it.

You don't have a dustpan and brush I have 3 sets somewhere .

I wouldn't use my dyson for DIY debris like wood shavings or metal ,or plaster or brick.
Wouldn;t us it if I spill water or cooking oil or pertrol.
Don't use it for vacuuming up lost screws/nuts/bolts either.

On 14/04/2021 10:11, Clive Page wrote:
it is because it brought in efficiency standards for vacuum cleaners
which meant that his models with 1500 Watt motors had to be phased out.

I had a Dyson DC01 absolute vacuum cleaner. I had it a long time but
mainly because it was easy to get parts when it broke and easy to
dismantle. It broke a lot. Apart from filters it needed 3 drive belts,
new sole piece, edging rubbers, mains switch, 2 mains cables and a
motor. All that in 18 years.

When we got it we noticed a few things... it was bloody deafeningly
noisy compared to the old cleaner. It sucked like a $20 whore in
comparison to a bagged cleaner. Oh how we were impressed with what it
picked up. Well we were once our hearing returned.

Then many years later Dyson wrote and said "no more parts soon" and so
if it broke again, which I knew it would, it would be time for a new
one. My wife said "don't buy another Dyson and I want a cylinder not an
upright next time" as she was fed up with its over-temp cut-out
triggering regularly.

The day came when it failed again. My suggestion I would go to the
tip/recycling depot and fill the boot with Dysons people had scrapped
and make a good one out of all the bits was met with one of those hard
stares you don't ignore. So I bought an AEG cylinder bag-less cleaner. A
new EU approved one with a smaller motor, I think it's 600W. It was
pricey but had a 3yr warranty. Not as pricey as a new Dyson though.

Oh wow what a difference. For a start you can have a conversation whilst
it is working it is so quiet in comparison. It also cleans ever so much
better. It doesn't suck like a $20 whore but more like a $1000 call
girl. It does a better job and is quieter and I have only had to buy a
new hose for it after the dog attacked it and chewed a hole in it.

Dyson does appear to be full of **** about vacuum cleaners. The new
lower power one cleans better than our Dyson did and is so quiet in
comparison. And it has washable filters so you don't have to keep buying
them from Dyson. I now treat most of what Dyson says with the contempt
it deserves.

On 16/04/2021 14:52, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 15 April 2021 at 18:58:11 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 18:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2021 14:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
If you set a limit on power consumption, decent makers will produce
a machine that sucks (works) OK. Others won't. Why would you buy one
which didn't work?

But that still may mean that the best is not as good as one of equal
efficiency, but a little more powerful. The rules should have been
about efficiency, not maximum power. We don't set a maximum power for
washing machines, dishwashers, microwaves, light bulbs, etc., but
grade them on efficiency and even ban the sale of the less efficient
models. What makes vacuum cleaners different?

It doesn't. The limit is for domestic vacuum cleaners. So in the same
way as you might want a 500 watt light source in your bog, you can buy
a vacuum cleaner which uses more power than the domestic limit.

You can't just nip into your local shop and buy one though. They are
simply not available in normal high-street shops.

You mean the same as many light bulbs? Something you might need quite
quickly, unlike a new vacuum cleaner.
I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard and no
spare vacuum cleaners.

I have 3 spare vacuum cleaners and I only have a 2 bed flat.

Why?

I have 3 tin/can openers too.

Two here and one of those was only bought because my wife has badly
arthritic hands and needs an electric tin opener.

Got loads of screwdrivers, most of which I won't be able to find if looking for a specific one.

I've got the same, but I also have a wall mounted set in the garage,
that I am being very careful to replace after every use.

As to which is more urgent - if I had no spare bulb, I'd borrow one from
somewhere less important in the house or use a table lamp. If I've been
doing some DIY and have dust and debris everywhere, I might well need to
vac up straight away to be able to live in it.

You don't have a dustpan and brush I have 3 sets somewhere .

Dustpan is currently full of muck, on a pile of stuff that is due for
the tip (the dustpan is not going), but I have no idea where the brush
for it is at the moment.

I wouldn't use my dyson for DIY debris like wood shavings or metal ,or plaster or brick.

Ours is a Henry, it thrives on abuse. I have used a Dyson a number of
times (in a holiday rental over Christmas mainly) and found it
appallingly easy to block up - streamers and sometimes the cardboard
disks from party poppers would clog it ... while Henry will happily vac
up the entire plastic body of a party popper too!

In article , Andy Burns
writes
Steve Walker wrote:

I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard

I recently chucked out all my spare CFLs, I have one spare LED bulb in
the cupboard (because I bought a pack for use in the kitchen) and a
spare incandescent oven bulb.

You got an incandescent oven? What upset it?
and no spare vacuum cleaners.

I have a boxed pre-2017 Miele vacuum in the loft, same model as I'm
currently using.

--
bert

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Andy Burns
writes
Steve Walker wrote:

I don't know about you, but I have spare bulbs in the cupboard

I recently chucked out all my spare CFLs, I have one spare LED bulb in the
cupboard (because I bought a pack for use in the kitchen) and a spare
incandescent oven bulb.

You got an incandescent oven? What upset it?

Its british and was forced to cook wog food.

and no spare vacuum cleaners.

I have a boxed pre-2017 Miele vacuum in the loft, same model as I'm
currently using.

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 07:20:57 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH troll**** unread

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID: