He tried using a cyclone based system which would extract the dust without clogging
2/
After 5126 failed prototypes over 5 years, any inventor would have given up
But Sir James Dyson stayed put and
- Invented a product which completely transformed the market
- Set up a company with 7 billion $ revenues
- Became the richest man in UK
A thread on Dyson 🧵
1/
He tried using a cyclone based system which would extract the dust without clogging
2/
He presented the concept to many. But most of them rejected saying if the idea was so great, big companies would already have thought of it
3/
He started developing the cyclonic vaccum system in the shed behind his house.
4/
He tried licensing this invention to the companies in UK and US who can manufacture and sell the product. And give Dyson some royalties on sales
5/
And thus manufacturing Dyson's vaccum cleaners meant loss of recurring revenues
6/
But it sold only 500 units in the first year. Hence they decided to drop the product
7/
It became a big hit in Japan and won the International design fair prize in 1991
8/
9/
https://t.co/VY0gxWVqum
10/
It took design decisions which were against findings of market research. Eg: DC 01 retained transparent container for dust despite of market research suggesting otherwise.
11/
2001 - Company had expanded to US and other European nations. DC 01 had captured close to 47% market share in UK
12/
2005 - Became the No 1 selling vaccum cleaner in US by value
13/
14/
More from Business
A solo media founder like Rogan or Mr Beast can make as much money as a strong tech founder, with significantly less managerial stress.
Tech created this ecosystem but there’s a historical cultural bias in tech towards media as unprofitable. That changed a long time ago.
Many more angels that invest in people will invest in media founders. Many traditional media people will *become* media founders.
But not necessarily big companies. Just solo individuals or small groups doing content, like Notch doing Minecraft. Because media scales like code.
Increasingly feeling like “keeping the team size as small as possible, even to one person” is the unarticulated key to making media profitable.
Substack and all the creator tools are just the start of this ecosystem.
The process of converting social influencers into media founders (a trend that has been going on for 10+ years at this point) will be increasingly streamlined.
V1 is link-in-bio, Substack, and sponcon.
V2 likely involves more angels & tokenization a la @tryrollhq. What else?
Why lack of awareness? Influencer monetization numbers are not as public as tech numbers.
There isn’t a TechCrunch & CrunchBase for media founders, chronicling the valuations of influencers.
But that’d be quite valuable. If you are interested in doing this, please DM with demo.
Tech created this ecosystem but there’s a historical cultural bias in tech towards media as unprofitable. That changed a long time ago.
Many more angels that invest in people will invest in media founders. Many traditional media people will *become* media founders.
But not necessarily big companies. Just solo individuals or small groups doing content, like Notch doing Minecraft. Because media scales like code.
Increasingly feeling like “keeping the team size as small as possible, even to one person” is the unarticulated key to making media profitable.
Substack and all the creator tools are just the start of this ecosystem.
Useful concept: the media stack for content creators
— balajis.com (@balajis) January 20, 2020
- Spotify, iTunes for podcasts
- Descript for podcast editing
- Figma, Canva for graphics
- YouTube for video
- Twitter, FB for distribution
- Substack for newsletters
- Makerpad for nocode
- Ghost, Medium for blog
What else?
The process of converting social influencers into media founders (a trend that has been going on for 10+ years at this point) will be increasingly streamlined.
V1 is link-in-bio, Substack, and sponcon.
V2 likely involves more angels & tokenization a la @tryrollhq. What else?
Why lack of awareness? Influencer monetization numbers are not as public as tech numbers.
There isn’t a TechCrunch & CrunchBase for media founders, chronicling the valuations of influencers.
But that’d be quite valuable. If you are interested in doing this, please DM with demo.
Facebook originally a CIA program called "LifeLog".
LifeLog, via DARPA, terminated on Feb 4th, 2004.
Facebook was launched on Feb 4th, 2004.
Many of the LifeLog team became execs at FB.
Zuckerberg is a figurehead.
CIA allowed Cambridge to help Trump win
https://t.co/enzOXDCogV
Pentagon Kills LifeLog
LifeLog, via DARPA, terminated on Feb 4th, 2004.
Facebook was launched on Feb 4th, 2004.
Many of the LifeLog team became execs at FB.
Zuckerberg is a figurehead.
CIA allowed Cambridge to help Trump win
https://t.co/enzOXDCogV
Project: Lifelog
— Robert Horan (@Robby12692) December 13, 2018
Started by DARPA in 1999, the goal of Lifelog was to create a database on civilians without their knowledge, and track everything they do.
The project "ended" on Feb 4th, 2004.
Facebook began the exact same day.
The CIA funneled tens of millions into Facebook. pic.twitter.com/r7hwF0v9kh
Pentagon Kills LifeLog
So I'd recommend reading this thread from Dave, but I thought about some of these policies, and how they fit into the whole, a lot, and want to offer a different interpretation.
I think California is world leading on progressivism that doesn't ask anyone to give anything up, or accept any major change, right now.
That's what I mean by symbolically progressive, operationally conservative.
Take the 100% renewable energy standard. As @leahstokes has written, these policies often fail in practice. I note our leadership on renewable energy in the piece, but the kind of politics we see on housing and transportation are going foil that if they don't change.
Creating a statewide consumer financial protection agency is great! But again, you're not asking most voters to give anything up or accept any actual changes.
I don't see that as balancing the scales on, say, high-speed rail.
CA is willing to vote for higher taxes, new agencies, etc. It was impressive when LA passed Measure H, a new sales tax to fund homeless shelters. And depressing to watch those same communities pour into the streets to protest shelters being placed near them. That's the rub.
It's very in vogue to bash California and this doesn't even reach to some things that deserve scorn, like the continuing control of the Western States Petroleum Association and the state Chamber of Commerce in policymaking. And yet-https://t.co/vHZ6GM7QF8
— David Dayen (@ddayen) February 11, 2021
I think California is world leading on progressivism that doesn't ask anyone to give anything up, or accept any major change, right now.
That's what I mean by symbolically progressive, operationally conservative.
Take the 100% renewable energy standard. As @leahstokes has written, these policies often fail in practice. I note our leadership on renewable energy in the piece, but the kind of politics we see on housing and transportation are going foil that if they don't change.
Creating a statewide consumer financial protection agency is great! But again, you're not asking most voters to give anything up or accept any actual changes.
I don't see that as balancing the scales on, say, high-speed rail.
CA is willing to vote for higher taxes, new agencies, etc. It was impressive when LA passed Measure H, a new sales tax to fund homeless shelters. And depressing to watch those same communities pour into the streets to protest shelters being placed near them. That's the rub.
