[Joe H]

I didnt particularly find a problem with what Dave was posting.
Think it was a case of once one of you started having a go, the pack dived in.

I reckon he will carry on and be successful doing the dry if thats what he wants to do.
Think he might struggle on upholstery with "dry" methods, though I am sure he will give it a good go.

[jasonl]

No carpet cleaner has ever gone out of business because of his method used, most because of attitude, service or lack of marketing skills .

[Simon Gerrard]

The problem with carpet cleaning customers is that they are very fickle. Even if you do a fantastic job for them, the next time they want their carpet cleaned they still ring around for prices and often go with the lower price, believing that they are getting the same thing this time, only cheaper. If you really did do a fantastic job then they will be disappointed with the outcome of the current job and think it isn't as good as last time and come back to you because they have now learned that you do the better job, albeit for slightly more. That is when they become YOUR customer.
They also don't tell you that they became disappointed when the carpet appeared to become dirty again only a few days / weeks after the clean, what they do do is decide there and then not to use you again and will go elsewhere next time around.
Using an obscure cleaning method like VLM where your chances of getting the carpet thoroughly clean are so much less, that then increases the chances of the customer becoming disappointed only days after and kills any chance of you getting a repeat job which is the life blood of any carpet cleaning business.
Your initial marketing gets you through the door, but it is the quality of what you do when you're in their that decides the future of your business. Every job is an advert and using the least effective cleaning system that leaves a residue and therefore cannot be done repeatedly is going to reduce your chances of building a successful business that is based on repeat and referral work and that in the end is bad marketing. I'm not saying you can't build a business on that basis, but it's going to be really tough going with a perpetual chase for new customers.
It's a bold decision to go down that route and I think that is all people were trying to point out to David.
The art of building a successful carpet cleaning business is to put your customer in a position where they can't get what you do anywhere else.

Simon

[robert meldrum]

If I soak a cloth in water with an additive to release surface tension then wring out the cloth leaving it damp I can apply that cloth to carpet or upholstery or whatever and by scrubbing I will release soiling from the surface and retain much of it in the cloth.
If I take another cloth which has only been soaked in water and repeat the exercise I will collect the remaining soil in the second cloth.
By rinsing each cloth after each action I can successfully remove the soil from the carpet pile or the upholstery fabric.
If ( as an American company did in the 1940's ) I use a rotary machine with pads made from terry towelling to replicate what I was doing manually I can effectively clean carpets at speed.
If I use the latest technology in terms of machinery and products I can clean carpets as well as any other method and gain a following of very happy customers.
As nothing will ever suit everyone the alternative method of squirting water at the carpet and recovering most of it with an extraction machine could be offered.

[The Great One]

Using an obscure cleaning method like VLM where your chances of getting the carpet thoroughly clean are so much less,

This really made me giggle

I have used this apparently obscure method for almost 7 years and have come across 1 carpet I cannot clean.

I try to stay out of the dry v wet debate slagging match that ensues and if young david does that he will be come a valid member of this forum. I usually just read these threads and stay out because this theme will run on and on.

But you really gave me a laugh on this dull sunday.

Martin

[Doug Holloway]

Hi Guys

Simon's assumtion is that all customers want the best cleaning possible.

Some customers put having dry carpets at the top of their list and this is where dry is very marketable!

Cheers

Doug

[Simon Gerrard]

Robert,
Obscure in that the vast majority of carpet cleaners right across the world choose HWE as opposed to VLM.If you're having success with VLM then hats off to you.

Simon

[Simon Gerrard]

Doug,
I simply cannot remember when the last person asked us if we do Dry Carpet Cleaning. We do get a lot of people that ask how long the carpet will be wet for, there's no denying that, but that is totally different to suggesting that people will settle for a lower standard of cleaning in exchange for it being dry more quickly.

There are a lot of customers out there who have had a bad carpet cleaning experience, where their carpets were left soaking and when it finally dried looked no better than before, we hear that on a regular basis, but that does not mean they are looking for a dry system, merely that they want their carpet cleaned without experiencing the same problem and most carpet cleaners worth their salt can meet that requirement without resorting to a lower standard of cleaning.
Simon

[Doug Holloway]

Hi Guys

Simon, there are literally thousands of carpets  in the City which are cleaned using dry methods.

This is the only system they allow, I have a friend who has made serious money out of it.

TM's are out and with all the electrics involved they just don't like water.

People wanting dry carpet cleaning contact companies offering that service.

Cheers

Doug

[wynne jones]

No carpet cleaner has ever gone out of business because of his method used, most because of attitude, service or lack of marketing skills .

I reckon that's right.

It goes to show that we my realise what is best for the custy but in the end it's what they think. For many they see the visable difference and that's good enough for them, the LM guy is off to his next job in half the time and can make twice the money.