Dyson Loses Fight For $198 Million Compensation Over EU Energy Labeling Rules (reuters.com) 50
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Britain's Dyson, which makes bagless vacuum cleaners, on Wednesday lost its fight for $198.4 million in compensation from the European Commission for alleged losses due to EU energy labelling rules. Dyson had challenged the rules introduced by the EU executive in 2014, saying the labelling requirements on vacuum cleaners discriminated against its technology, misled customers about the efficiency of some vacuum cleaners and unfairly benefited its German rivals.
It won the backing of the Luxembourg-based General Court, which in its 2018 ruling scrapped the EU energy labelling rules. Dyson subsequently went back to the same court seeking 176 million euros in compensation for losses allegedly incurred due to the rules. The court dismissed its claim. "By using the standardized empty receptacle testing method, the Commission did not manifestly and gravely disregard the limits on its discretion or commit a sufficiently serious breach of the principles of equal treatment and sound administration," judges said. Dyson said it would appeal.
It won the backing of the Luxembourg-based General Court, which in its 2018 ruling scrapped the EU energy labelling rules. Dyson subsequently went back to the same court seeking 176 million euros in compensation for losses allegedly incurred due to the rules. The court dismissed its claim. "By using the standardized empty receptacle testing method, the Commission did not manifestly and gravely disregard the limits on its discretion or commit a sufficiently serious breach of the principles of equal treatment and sound administration," judges said. Dyson said it would appeal.
They can... suck (Score:4, Interesting)
Well deserved after they marketed their "digital motor" and "air watts"
Re: The EU SUCKS BALLS!!! (Score:2)
Dyson, is that you? How's life in Singapore?
Re:They can... suck (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
OMG... I didn't know
Re:They can... suck (Score:4, Informative)
Not only are there blades in the base, they are so poorly designed that they clog up exponentially worse than a standard fan. We bought one last Dyson product from Costco on stupid optimism. Thankfully when it failed we just brought it back for a full refund. It amazes me they are still around.
Re: (Score:2)
"air watts"
A new Nike shoe sold exclusively in parts [wikipedia.org] of Los Angeles ...
all legislator are elected in EU (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
European Parliament - yes. European Commission - these are nominated. Theoretically they don't have legislative power, practically they create "directions" how to enforce the legislation/laws, and have some crazy amount of leeway in doing so, to the degree that they are often the actual legislature and the EU parliament often must fight back against them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you give an overview of how that happens *actually*? Not on paper, by the book, theoretical process, but how so many people with direct connections and vested interest in big business end up there - as some of the most anti-consumer, pro-censorship, anti-freedom regulations ( like ACTA [wikipedia.org] ) are conceived there, how do these people get in there and pass the EU parliament scrutiny?
Re:The way of the world (Score:5, Interesting)
These were not regulations of the products, they were just labels that showed how well the vacuum cleaners performed in EU tests.
There were multiple categories. Power consumption, noise, exhaust emissions (very important for people with allergies), cleaning performance on hard floors and cleaning performance on carpets.
The issue Dyson raised was that the tests were done with an empty bag/bin. Their argument was that rival vacuum cleaners' performance decreased as the bag/bin filled up, and theirs didn't. Therefore the label was misleading as consumers wouldn't get the expected performance.
None the less, Dyson was just about the only company that scored A+ in every category, so it's very difficult for them to prove losses based on how much a consumer would weigh A+ against a B or C from a rival.
I hope they bring the labels back because they were quite useful and did lead to manufacturers improving their technology. All Dyson has done is given their rivals an easier time by removing the labels, and the need to improve their products.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They scored A+ in the noise category? I need to wear hearing protection when I use my Dyson. It does do a good job vacuuming though.
The aptly named turbine upholstery attachment in particular sounds like a jet airliner taking off in my house, the regular attachments are not that bad though. My corded Dyson is also quite a bit louder than my cordless one. Both of them really suck though. In a good way.
Re: (Score:3)
From memory, yeah... Can't remember the model. The new ones push some of the motor noise into ultrasound so you can't hear it.
Re: The way of the world (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And we get the Volkswagen Test Mode. Manufacturers instead of competing to remove flaws and have a well-rounded product with great reviews from satisfied customers, race to excel at the strict tests and half-ass everything not covered by tests.
A laundry machine that takes 4 hours to finish one batch of laundry, and uses 2 kilowatt-hours over that time (mainly just to keep the water warm as it grows cold over time), will average 500 watt and score better at "energy rating" than one that manages to do the sam
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
EU legislators are elected, and energy efficiency must be forced upon the market if the market won't do it themselves.
Are Dyson vacs power hogs or something? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't read about the case, but, while I do not own one, the reason you pay a lot of money for a Dyson vacuum is that it sucks the same no matter how much dirt there is in the canister. From TFS it seems to me the EU made efficiency ratings with empty canister. For most vacuums apart from Dyson, this would make them have a great rating even though in real world performance once you start getting some dirt their efficiency could potentially drop rapidly. Similar to how EPA does not lift the cars off the g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Are Dyson vacs power hogs or something? (Score:2)
You're allowed to give official ratings for other places, though. Just find some island that's nominally self-governing with a population of about 10. Get them to pass it as an official standard. Now you can use it.
Re: (Score:3)
For Dyson, that's the default condition when it's empty, but for a bag-system, not putting in a bag means they are tested under much better conditions than normal use. Dyson succesfully argued that it's not a level playing field, because the competition is evaluated at a better-than-normal-use state, while they are tested at equal-to-normal levels.
Re:Are Dyson vacs power hogs or something? (Score:5, Informative)
The problem, according to Dyson was that when the EU brought in rules about maximum power a vacuum could consume that it unfairly favoured some manufacturers over others.
I believe the thinking was that a 2KW crappy vacuum performs about as well as (say) a 1200W Dyson - the 2KW one being woefully inefficient and poor designed, and say what you like, but Dyson do spend a lot of time finessing their designs - not sure if we can call them ultra-efficient, but they're certainly not complete laggards. Dyson was able to sell based on the suck, not the raw power consumed - and of course did quite will at it.
When the EU said 1800W was the maximum you could ever have, it brought the raw power of a vacuum into the buying decision (and defocussed the suckiness), so people bought 1800W vacuums thinking they were better than a 12000W Dyson - guess who makes 1800W vacuums? Loads of people, mostly German.
The EU should indeed take some responsibility here - they could have made a limit based on efficiency or something, but they went for a simpler maximum power draw from the wall socket - which achieved their aims, but didn't really help the market out. It's debatable if they owe Dyson anything for their decision though, but that's what the courts are for.
Had they mandated that you had to have a certain "suck per watt" or some such, then Dyson would have out-competed many because of their lower wattage, but if someone wanted to suck up a hurricane, they could have bought a 2KW beast to do it. Both would have been equally "efficient", yet one more capable than the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It was the opposite of that. The EU brought in the power limit because manufacturers were pushing the wattage of their cleaners heavily. The box would say "3000W" and consumers assumed that more power = better cleaning.
The EU labels were designed to help dispel that myth too, by giving consumers test data showing how well the machines actually worked.
Even 1200W is a lot for a vacuum cleaner. Japanese models are often in the 300-500W range and do very well in tests. In fact Dyson's own cordless ones are in t
Re: (Score:2)
I've got a miele. It's shit. The dust bin doesn't seal against the tubing, the head constantly gets clogged and needs to be cleaned by hand, and it shoves dirt around instead of sucking it up.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that those "tests" they do "very well" in are about as realistic as the "tests" than EU dishwashers and clothes washers/dryers do "very well" in, IE complete bullshit that leads to a product that's utter garbage in the real world to the point it's more wasteful than before because of how atrociously it performs. Like showerheads and toilets that are so low flow you need to spend four times as long rinsing your hair out, and flush three times to get everything down.
Or allegedly "green" washers and d
Re: (Score:2)
The reason low flow toilets are rubbish is because they are badly designed. If you look at Japanese designs, they accelerate the water so that it swirls around the bowl with some force. Much less water is needed and it clears the waste even more effectively.
The reason low flow shower heads are rubbish is because they are badly designed. In fact the whole shower unit is badly designed in most cases. Having water simply fall from above in a wide spray is very inefficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Hold on I think I remember this Calvin and Hobbes strip...
Re: (Score:2)
Dyson complaining about the tests being unfair ... but the Dyson models all scored in the top category and so were labelled as being the best ... ?!
The only loss of sales was due to their 'premium' prices compared to vacuums that can be shown to perform as well in *any* test not just the EU ones ...
Re: (Score:2)
However a typical vacuum cleaner is far below 1800W. So your reasoning does not really make sense.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of Europe has much higher capacity outlets. That said, I purchased a 6 HP = 4500 W vacuum at Home Depot on the weekend. Many have questioned the correctness of power ratings of vacuums.
A typical U.S. outlet can only power a 1 HP = 750W motor. The circuit itself is often rated at 110 V / 15 A i.e. 1650W. However, motors commonly draw many times the rated current at startup. This means if a 2 HP or larger motor is connected, then it will often blow fuses on startup.
Also, for most products, a U.L.
Re: Are Dyson vacs power hogs or something? (Score:2)
I like the 3600W vacuum cleaners that a company made by bolting 3 1200W motors+turbines together. They even have 3 on/off switches so you don't blow the fuse when it starts up. Or if you want to run at partial power.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If Dyson complained (Score:2)
And yet apparently had the best ratings, then Dyson is not a company that has demonstrably suffered losses.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you figure? Some consumers will just go for max performance, so Dyson isn't losing them with the testing. And some will just go for lowest cost, and Dyson isn't getting those customers anyway. But the majority of consumers will make a choice based on price/performance. And if flawed testing inflates the price/performance of a competitor, then you certainly can suffer loses due to the flawed testing, regardless of whether you test better than them.
Politically motivated (Score:3, Interesting)
Dyson's case appears politically motivated. He is part of a cabal of notorious brexit backers who managed to bounce the UK out of the EU to avoid the consequences of the EU anti-tax avoidance laws.
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_... [europa.eu]
Re: (Score:1)
Well that not so good for them. (Score:1)
I mean it really sucks bur Dyson should be used to sucking. Its there number one product feature.