Marketing that sucks: Henry vs Dyson

Ask a professional cleaner what brand of vacuum they prefer and there's a high chance they will cite lovable little Henry. This product is popular with people who do a lot of vacuuming. That's not because of its cute face, I suspect, but because it does the job well, is tough, simple to operate and seems to be highly reliable.

But which brand dominates the consumer consciousness when it comes to hoovers? Not Henry, not even Hoover. It's Dyson. The Britsh firm has done a brilliant job of positioning its products as simply better by design. A combination of top-notch engineering and marketing by Sir James Dyson and his team has created a very strong brand that attracts a lot of business and a premium price.

Meanwhile Henry is a great example of a sleeper brand. The product is popular and inspires loyalty where it's used, but it's also under-marketed and ineffectively positioned. It has an iconic design and most people have heard of it, but its identity is unclear, its attributes uncommunicated, its price point well below Dyson.

So here's my suggested positioning for Henry. It's the smart choice - no gimmicks, no gadgets, no see-through dual turbo cyclones. Just great results and reliability at a great price. And the killer brand fact: cleaners (and cleaning firms) like to use 'em. Cue market research to demonstrate this and an ad campaign featuring hard-working people hugging their Henrys.

Henry, your time has surely come.