Talk:The Hoover Company/Archives/2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
History
This entire section is un-cited garbage. Frankly, it would be better to remove the entire section and have no history, than for it to be left as it is. It reads like it was copy/pasted from hoover.com agentlame (talk) 07:15, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
***
I live in North Canton, Ohio. Here are a few Hoover history facts from my records. I will gather more and post them here in this talk article. The North Canton Historical Society and the Hoover museum have numerous documents that cover the Hoover history. I will find citations and documents to substantiate the information I contribute to this talk article.
The Hoover Company ownership transitions: Hoover / Chicago Pacific / Maytag / Whirlpool / TTI Floorcare.
Hoover Family owned until 1940 when it became publicly traded. 1985 purchased by Chicago Pacific Corp. 1989 purchased by Maytag. 2004 consolidated with other Maytag holdings. 2006 acquired by Whirlpool. 2007 Feb 2, purchased by Techtronic Industries (TTI) 2007 TTI closed the North Canton manufacturing facility. 2011 TTI continues to manufacture products mostly in China and Mexico.
Hoover owned manufacturing and distribution facilities in North Canton, Ohio, in Canton, Ohio, and in numerous countries... Whenever the foreign-exchange rate made sense, Hoover imported or exported Hoover products between their foreign factories and the U.S. factory in North Canton, Ohio. They profited by the ability to manufacture and test foreign voltage motors at each factory.
Logo
The Hoover logo is wrongly angled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.103.22.112 (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
- It looks very much like the logos on both the Hoover US and Hoover UK pages - please explain more what's wrong? Mauls (talk) 12:23, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
***
I live in North Canton, Ohio. The QC inspection process used a tool with an angle to gauge how well production placed the logo. It had the specified angle for placing the diagonal line in the logo. I recall the correct angle was part of the logo description language filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). I agree the logo on the article is at an unpleasant incorrect angle. I will find that gauge or a reference to it and post it here in this talk article. Sponsion (talk) 11:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)