Reader Response #4 (Post-Submission Edit)
The Dyson Hot+Cool™ Jet Focus bladeless fan
heater AM09 is no exception. Retailing at £400, it has a height of 23.43
in (59.5 cm), length of 6.02 in (15.3 cm), width of 4.45 in (11.3 cm), and
weight of 5.91 lb (2.68 kg) (Dyson UK, n.d.). The AM09 is a bladeless fan
designed to warm or cool the user. With the Air Multiplier™ technology, the fan
has no spinning blades or exposed heating parts, which makes it safe especially
for children despite dispensing air at a speed 15 times faster than a
bladeless fan (Salisbury’s Appliances, 2024). Despite giving users 10
different strength settings to choose from, the AM09 keeps noise level low,
thus receiving a “Quiet Mark” distinction from the ear-conscious Noise
Abatement Society (Gibbs, 2015). Dyson UK (n.d.) highlighted that the fan can
be adjusted using a remote control, which is curved and magnetized to be stored
neatly on the fan. It can also be switched off with a sleep timer of
predetermined intervals, ranging from 15 minutes to 9 hours.
The Dyson AM09 is quieter and safer than a traditional
fan, with better maintainability and energy efficiency. Those features in
tandem with finer heating/cooling, make
it evidently superior than a tradition fan. However, consumers might
find its exorbitant pricing hard to accept when looking at a price-to-value
standpoint.
For starters, the bladeless design yields finer air
quality compared to traditional fan heaters. According to Dyson UK (n.d.), air
travels over an airfoil-shaped ramp, concentrating its direction and creating
areas of low pressure behind and around the fan. The pressure difference forces
surrounding air to be drawn in, resulting in a powerful stream of smooth
cooling air. Anemos (2024) reinforces this by explaining that because rotating
blades in traditional fans create unevenness and fluctuating turbulence when
producing air, bladeless fans can avoid that and create a steady air
stream that is breezier and more comfortable instead.
Next, the bladeless design is safer and quieter than a
traditional fan. Without sharp blades spinning quickly, there is minimal risk
of injury or damage to property (Megafurniture, n.d.). Taking safety seriously,
the AM09 has automatic cut-out switches that will trigger when it is knocked
over or overheats (Dyson UK, n.d.). This is paramount with the
presence of pets, children, or the elderly. Another key point is that the
absence of blades equates to a quieter and more energy-efficient fan. This can
be seen from the “Quiet Mark” distinction awarded to the AM09 by the
ear-conscious Noise Abatement Society (Gibbs, 2015).
Another advantage pertaining to the bladeless design
is the ease of maintainability. According to Anemos (2024), it is imperative to
keep fans clean to prolong their durability. Since there are no blades and
grills to be disassembled, cleaning is a low-risk and low-effort job. Dyson UK
(n.d.) simply recommends users wipe the AM09 with a dry cloth for cleaning.
This is a massive step-up compared to a traditional fan heater that requires
multiple layers of dismantling, with possible physical and electrical hazards
present due to blades and internal components.
Last but not least, the AM09 triumphs over traditional
fan heaters by being more energy efficient. Firstly, the lack of moving blades
corresponds with a lack of friction and power consumption, hence saving energy
(Anemos, n.d.). Secondly, the AM09 has a “Jet Focus and Diffused Mode” (Dyson
UK, n.d.). This mode grants the AM09 the ability to blast hot/cool air directly
at a user or disseminate it across the room. The mode is something
that only a bladeless design can do, allowing users to conserve energy if only
a certain individual or area needs to be warmed/cooled.
However, at the end of the day, the Dyson AM09 being a
household appliance will have its pricing be a big factor when judged by
consumers. One could argue that the AM09’s exorbitant price tag of £400, which
is over 10 times the traditional fan heater, will motivate
consumers to find other alternatives (Gibbs, 2015). An experiment by Crist
(2015) highlighted that the £349.99 Dyson AM09 took 10 minutes to raise the
room temperature to 70 Fahrenheit while a £25 Lasko 754200 needed 30 minutes.
This is a testament to the capabilities of the AM09, but users might find it
hard-pressed to pay 10 times more for finer heating/cooling. An article from
Dsouza (2022), where he reported a rolling survey, displayed data that 78% of
British and 79% of Americans concur price is a factor when purchasing an
electrical appliance, illuminating the role pricing has on whether consumers
choose the AM09.
In a nutshell, the Dyson AM09 being quieter, safer,
and more maintainable and energy-efficient, in tandem with dispensing finer
heating/cooling than a traditional fan heater, makes it markedly superior
(Anemos, 2024; Crist, 2015; Megafurniture, n.d.). But at £400, it is one of the
most expensive in the market, and by a factor of 10 over other alternatives,
which might make some consumers think twice.
References:
Anemos. (2024, January 02). Bladeless Fans vs. Regular
Fans: Which is the Smarter Choice for Cooling?https://anemos.in/blogs/blog/bladeless-fans-vs-regular-fans-which-is-the-smarter-choice-for-cooling
Crist, R. (2015, February 12). Dyson’s newest air multiplier doesn’t feel so new. CNET. https://www.cnet.com/reviews/dyson-am09-hot-pluscool-review/#google_vignette
Dyson UK. (n.d.). Dyson Hot+Cool™ Jet Focus fan heater AM09. https://www.dyson.co.uk/fans-and-heaters/hot-cool/white-nickel
Gibbs, S. (2015, April 15). Dyson Hot + Cool AM09 review: the world’s best heater fan? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/15/dyson-hot-cool-am09-review-worlds-best-heater-fan
Rishad, D. (2022, September 19). US/Britain: Which factors do consumers consider when purchasing domestic appliances?https://business.yougov.com/content/43856-usbritain-which-factors-do-consumers-consider-when
Salisbury's Appliances. (2024, September 19). Dyson AM09 Dyson Fan Hot & Cool -https://salisburysappliances.co.uk/product/dyson-am09-dyson-fan-hot-cool/
Thanks much for this revision, Austin.
ReplyDelete