The former vacuum cleaner champion Dyson is now facing fresh turbulence in its after-sales service management across China. Recently, several former employees of Dyson's Chengdu repair center disclosed that in July of this year, the facility was abruptly closed, affecting dozens of staff members who had been assured they would receive N+1 severance compensation. However, with over two months having passed since their departure, approximately twenty employees are still waiting for their payouts to arrive.

Dyson's official customer service has confirmed to the media that the China region now operates only three divisions—Beijing, Shenzhen, and Suzhou—while the Chengdu division has ceased providing services. Adding to the unrest, one employee revealed that this upheaval is not confined to Chengdu alone. The engineer supervisor who managed the western region, which includes Chengdu, also oversees the eastern Suzhou team. Due to Dyson's adjustment of its authorized partner institutions, word has spread that the Suzhou team may also be heading for closure. Several affected workers have already filed for labor arbitration and initiated lawsuits over the matter. As of now, Dyson, as the brand owner, has not given a direct response regarding the compensation issue.

From Four After-Sales Divisions Down to Three

A former employee surnamed Li, who has been waiting more than two months for his severance payout, recounted that in July, he and the entire after-sales video engineering department were suddenly informed that the company would be disbanded due to internal restructuring. Although the news came as a shock, Li signed the termination agreement after the main entity behind Dyson's after-sales service center—the Chengdu branch of Electrolux Supply Chain (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.—promised N+1 compensation and affixed its official seal. Yet, despite signing the agreement, the compensation never arrived, and more than two months later, his repeated appeals to center leadership and Dyson customer service have yielded no substantive progress.

According to a feedback message from the service center's engineering supervisor, which Li provided, the delay was attributed to "certain internal reasons at Dyson," with a pledge that employees would be notified as soon as a final decision was reached. Multiple employees confirmed that before the Chengdu closure, Dyson China operated four after-sales divisions—Beijing, Shenzhen, Suzhou, and Chengdu—but now only three remain. Closing one of the nation's only four after-sales hubs is hardly a trivial matter for Dyson's Chinese operations.

The core of the dispute lies in a structural loophole: the affected employees hold labor contracts with Dyson's authorized service provider, not with Dyson China directly. By outsourcing its services, Dyson retains the power to restructure its channels while shifting all employment costs and risks onto a third party. Several employees noted that the termination agreement explicitly stated that compensation would be paid "upon Dyson's confirmation." One exasperated worker remarked, "We were doing Dyson's work, wearing Dyson's logo on our uniforms, and our wages used to flow from Dyson to the center's parent company before reaching us. Now we can't get our severance, and the excuse is that Dyson hasn't confirmed it!"

The fallout appears to extend beyond Chengdu. With the supervisor overseeing both the western (Chengdu) and eastern (Suzhou) teams, the Suzhou center—home to roughly 60 employees—is now rumored to be next in line for closure as Dyson reshuffles its authorized partners. If these adjustments hold, dozens more after-sales staff could face job changes. Meanwhile, multiple employees have already pursued legal avenues through labor arbitration and litigation, yet Dyson, as the brand, has remained silent on the compensation front.

A Luxury Toothbrush Stumbles Just Ten Days After Launch

While its after-sales network buckles, Dyson's product innovation is also hitting a credibility wall. On September 1, Dyson globally unveiled the CameraJet AI smart toothbrush, featuring a built-in 100,000-pixel macro camera inside the brush head to track brushing coverage in real time. Priced at 3,899 yuan in China and 479 euros in France, the company touted it as a six-year R&D effort that would redefine oral care. Yet, within just ten days of its release, this flagship annual product suffered a major setback in the French market.

Days ago, Dyson confirmed to French media that it had voluntarily paused CameraJet sales in France due to "component defects in a limited number of early production batches." User complaints from France, Australia, Singapore, and other countries have highlighted issues such as water ingress into the battery compartment, charging failures, and automatic shutdowns after power-on—a bitter irony given Dyson's claims of IPX7 waterproofing, which suggests the device can withstand immersion in one meter of water for 30 minutes. The faults appear concentrated in the battery seal, with moisture entering the compartment and disrupting power, sometimes triggering overheating warnings. Overseas teardowns have revealed visible water stains inside the battery area, pointing to design flaws in the sealing mechanism.

However, Dyson has neither disclosed the specific batches or quantities affected nor initiated a formal recall, only stating that it would isolate the problematic batches and provide after-sales support to purchasers. In China, Dyson has not officially listed the product, but cross-border sellers on platforms like JD.com and Taobao are still offering it, and a small number of users have already reported similar power anomalies. This is hardly Dyson's first misstep with a cross-category product. Its earlier Dyson Zone air-purifying headphones, priced between 6,699 and 7,199 yuan, followed a similar high-profile-downfall trajectory—marketed as a dual-function "noise-canceling plus air purification" wearable, they failed to gain traction due to their nearly 600-gram weight, a limited-use purification feature that critics mocked as a "portable mask," and audio quality that paled against comparably priced rivals, ultimately becoming a gimmick that tech reviewers tested and quickly returned.

Similarly, the OnTrac over-ear headphones launched two years ago, which leaned on noise cancellation, extended battery life, and 196 custom color options, generated buzz at launch with their quirky concept and premium pricing, but post-production sales fell flat, well short of expectations. From air-purifying headphones to camera-equipped toothbrushes, Dyson's cross-category launches share a consistent pattern: eye-catching gimmicks, top-tier pricing, but deeply divisive real-world experiences where novelty overshadows actual utility.

Playing Apple's Game Without Apple's Foundations

In the home appliance arena, Dyson has earned the nickname "the Apple of home appliances." Its early successes stemmed from solving real problems with genuine technology—cyclone technology in vacuums to prevent suction loss, and high-speed motors in hair dryers to accelerate drying while reducing heat damage. These innovations gave Dyson the confidence, much like Apple, to lead categories and command premium prices. Yet industry observers argue that its recent innovation has shifted toward "differentiation for differentiation's sake": inflating toothbrush prices to squeeze in a camera, or sacrificing headphone comfort to add purification features, with technology straying from genuine consumer needs.

More alarming is the slide in quality control. A flagship product developed over six years, the camera toothbrush, launched with fundamental waterproof-sealing failures, exposing gaps in the R&D validation process. Whether Dyson's development pace and quality assurance systems can sustain its frequent cross-category expansion is now a legitimate question. To an extent, Apple's high margins rest on a robust ecosystem: iOS, the App Store, iCloud, and cross-device integration create formidable user loyalty and switching costs, with hardware serving merely as a gateway to that ecosystem. In contrast, Dyson's products are largely standalone devices: vacuums, hair dryers, fans, headphones, and toothbrushes share no interconnectivity, no software ecosystem, no account system, and no subscription revenue. Consumers buy a Dyson for the function and design of a single product, not as part of a brand ecosystem.

This means Dyson's brand premium relies entirely on each product's individual appeal and novelty. Once innovation wanes or quality issues surface, consumer trust in the brand takes a direct hit. According to a research note from China International Capital Corporation, for the first ten months of 2025, Dyson's online market share in China's vacuum segment stood at 29.75%, with both sales value and volume declining year over year. Even heading into 2026, the brand has yet to recapture its former glory.