Tuesday, 30 September 2008

Introduction to a major shake up of the industry

Post number 9:
Detailed replies to industry rebuttals and objections to CCCC’s commercially proven cleaning routines. Please read in conjunction with post number 8.

We do not condemn the industry through our agreement with Which? magazine’s investigations or any other means. We merely record in this blog, the results of what we achieved during thousands of man hours of commercial operations using 6 Perc prototypes. Our 4 nano metres filtration efficiency removes soil particles 5,000 times smaller than conventional machines have done in the past or the latest one s do currently.

It is true that we do not have a current prototype to produce and repeat our past performances, but this is a question time until seed capital is obtained for our test bed.

The industry claims that ‘segregation’ already exists and is practised by dry cleaners. We beg to disagree. All cleaners world wide carry out mixed and non segregated dry cleaning. In other words, rugs, blankets, curtains, garage overalls and almost every thing else is cleaned in the same machines and in the same shops world wide. A survey of box advertisements in Yellow Pages will prove our claim instantly.

Non segregated practises deal with a variety of soiling from all environments. This makes the job of machine filters difficult, and it is for this reason that machine filters are selected to remove soiling down to 20,000 nano metres and not 4, in order to reduce filter cleaning and machine down times; reducing precious production times and idle/non productive staff times.

If Which?’s random investigations are any thing to go by, then standards witnessed were not satisfactory. The industry section that issued rebuttals to our CCCC practises, claim that good quality standards do exist, and are found to be quite acceptable to the testing centres for the past 50 years. While this may be true, we found out that the dry cleaning industry has quality standards that are different than those demanded by consumers, fashion designers and tailors.

The removal of stains, touch/feel, colour brightness, convenience, consistency uniformity of service (same result each time) – also known as reliable after care by the fashion industry, compliance with dry cleaning care labels/symbols, and unpleasant odours may not be of prime importance to test centres and the industry itself, but are vital in meeting demands and expectations from end users and the fashion industry.

We agree with our observer that the industry did need a shake up and this is being addressed in this blog. Post number 10 focuses on the major shake up of the dry cleaning industry and places emphasis on the outmoded practices of the and at the spotting table. Every one of the 100,000 or so shops in the world has a spotting table with steam application. They shouldn’t, because conventional spotting tables are not needed!

CCCC remains a great project to invest in, in these lean times and forge all sorts of partnerships with.


Thursday, 25 September 2008

Industry approvals and rebuttals

Post number 8:
Thank you for your e-mail queries. We still have a backlog to catch up on. Here is one from 2 August. An earlier post commencing with paragraph 1 below, produced the rebuttal in paragraphs 2 to 4, also below,:

1. “CCCC predecessors cleaned dry cleaning – literally. The industry has a standard(though don’t recognise it as a vital standard and quality parameter) for the degree of cleaning: The retention of 20 microns (20,000 nano metre) of soiling left in textiles. No matter what solvent and technology is used, the soil removal efficiency remains the same. …”.

2. “No Mohammad, you are writing what you need to believe to promote your CCCC. We don’t see it as reality. You are using the Which? magazine as a vehicle of direct communication with the public in the condemnation of the industry and the promotion of what you feel would be the ideal world. You have not produced any real scientific proof that your filtering techniques is an improvement in cleaning clothes over current practises, or that segregation is not already practised as a best policy working practice. You have some very good principles of operations and deserve to realise the benefits of practising them, but do not consider for one moment that these practises are unique and do not already exist. There does exist, others that equally care enough.
3. The general standard of cleaning carried out by the majority has been quite acceptable to the testing houses for the past 50 years. Those independents that survive in the darker deep corners of the underworld of the industry will always attract some people as customers and will also make some kind of living.
4. The FCRA earlier and now SATRA are government approved testing houses to both the textile manufacturing and textile aftercare industries. They both in turn have worked together and ironed out differences with textile manufacturing and service industries for years. So we cannot be enthused by the possibility of any new approach of cooperation or consideration with one or two fashion designers who have never given a damn about customer problems in servicing the garment other than to off load the problem to be some one else’s responsibility. It requires dry cleaners like you Mohammad to meet that challenge and benefit from it. We do not see any advantage in your analysis of looking in from outside the box. The industry in some sectors and TSA simply needed a shake up and that is what is going to happen. Currently we get the impression there is an attempt to stage-manage the situation by your blog in the interest of promoting CCCC and that will add fuel to the real crime.”

We are grateful for the mixed reactions of rebuttals and approvals of what our hands - on experiences over a period of more than a decade and 6 prototypes revealed to the year 2000. Comments, approvals and rebuttals above are indeed the best form of dialogue we were looking for the past 20 years, and we are pleased to have them at last.

With the publishing of our business plan on this blog on hold, pending editing by accountants and health professionals, we will concentrate on queries above over the next few posts. The result will be the revelation of a rift that CCCC tried and tested practises will reveal in the industry as a whole. A new dry cleaning industry will be born as a result of re engineering dry cleaning with the help of investors, parainvestors, technology and dry cleaning partners, and partners from the fields of fashion, textiles, garment industries, and producers of natural fibres.

For now, we are pleased to announce that despite credit crunch and the literal collapse of investment banking, our main investor Discovery Beach remain firmly by our side. We wish them all the best in these trying times and promise them that we will produce a business plan worthy of their investment and that of other parainvestors that they have on their data bases for the past 14 years while they have been building Discovery Beach. Readers may have realised that DB’s web site is parked by Dreamhost for very good reasons known to DB.

Post number 9 will provide a point by point reply to the industry’s comments above, before other proceeding ones will develop the differences in operational methods that did turn industry practices on their heads. Investors will note that we will be giving away a limited number of hints to develop new intellectual property (IP) in order to sell most of the ones we retain for ourselves.

The industry have been candid (at least to us) in giving us their seriously considered views as cited in 2 to 4 above. We reciprocate this good well by giving clues to IP away so that the industry may take leads and develop their own technologies.

This blog forms a live appendix to our business plan which is evolving as we receive your views and feed backs.


Saturday, 13 September 2008

Breaking news: Xeros waterless cleaning

Post number 7:
Breaking news:
Xeros Waterless washing and dry cleaning as developed by Leeds University in 2007: Please note http://www.leeds.ac.uk/media/press_releases/current/washing_machine.htm. Contacts: Mr Martin Gregson on 07828 573 827 and Dr Rob Rule on 07917 584 354.

Post number 7:

Breaking news:

Xeros Waterless washing and dry cleaning as developed by Leeds University in 2007: Please note http://www.leeds.ac.uk/media/press_releases/current/washing_machine.htm. Contacts: Mr Martin Gregson (previously, technical director of Johnson Cleaners and failry familiar with CCCC's new improved Perc technolgy) on 07828 573 827 and Dr Rob Rule on 07917 584 354.

The press release is a godsend to the long awaited and difficult problem of replacing Perc as the dominant solvent in commercial dry cleaning. Hydrocarbon (early 90s), Liquid CO2 in the last few years (Fred Butler in Germany and Holland), and GreenEarth (UK in 2004) have found it difficult to replace Perc. Will Xeros succeed while others haven't?

DEFRA has given Perc a lease of life for another 2 decades or so until suitable replacements are found. Our findings reveal that Perc’s failure to clean adequately and new technologies not succeeding to replace it, caused panic in the fashion industry. The latter has almost turned its back on dry cleaning altogether and produce washables in ever more volumes.

We phoned Dyllis Williams of the London College of fashion last year who stated that an after care fit for purpose is of prime consideration for the fashion industry before they attempt manufacturing any thing that needs dry cleaning. Hence, the prevailing collapses of the British and world wool and silk industries, as is evident.

The unsatisfactory performance of new technologies and Perc’s failure brought to the fore the need for the introduction of a suitable technology instantly to restore confidences in fashion and garment industries. The consumer must also sorely miss the lack of alternatives to jeans and t shirts such as pleated skirts, jackets and suits.

Nearly 5,000 Perc machines need to be replaced in the UK at the drop of a hat to remove suffocating bottle necks. Therefore, Leed’s innovations are indeed timely, or are they? We had a closer look:

We phoned Dr Rob Rule on Monday 28 July this year to find out more. He stated that the technology is not for commercial use. More plastic chips is required than the volume of clothes in the ‘washer’ drum to achieve results that are indeed comparable to results achieved in the current domestic washers. Chips also remove stains fairly effectively.

We note at first glance that Xeros’ commercialisation for dry cleaning purposes, if considered, would require larger drum sizes and hence wider and taller or deeper machines. Space requirements in all the existing 5,000 shops may not permit instant machine replacements. The application would seem to be suited for new installations with larger floor areas, and/or higher ceilings, one would imagine.

Also, care labels in use such as P and P_ were devised for cleaning by Perc, White Spirit (phased out long ago), and Fluorocarbon, also phased out. Strictly speaking, fashion and garment industries may have to work with a new set of care labels to be designed by Xeros.

In conclusion, it would appear that CCCC and it’s improved 'segregated', and public health oriented technology is the only option to come to the rescue of all concerned, instantly RIGHT NOW and at the drop of a hat; and still worth investing in, until teething problems with Xeros and other technologies in the pipeline are sorted out.

Domestic users of Xeros will be given more pressing/ironing/steam finishing to do on their dry cleaning needs just cleaned by Xeros. It may be that existing ‘non segregated’ dry cleaners of today will get busier in offering ‘press only’ services, or there may be growth in businesses for man/woman with vans offering pressing and ironing services.

‘Segregated’ work from the domestic sector ending up in the 'non segregated' shops and vans will cause cross infections to occur (spotting table practices). Future public health regulations and byelaws (to be devised by CCCC, local authorities and NHS’s NISE) will ensure Xeros’ home cleaning to end up in the CCCC 'segregated' licensed shops for pressing/finishing needs. Who knows? May be CCCC and Xeros will end up working side by side. We at CCCC can do that right now and help Xeros plan ahead.

Feed backs are welcome.


Friday, 12 September 2008

Which?'s phone in session

Post number 6:
Phone in session with Which? Magazine: The magazine held its phone in session yesterday 11 September between 11 am and 3 pm UK local time.

I had a detailed discussion with a senior editorial staff who is in a supervisory capacity with the investigative team. It was revealed that no feedback from the industry, the chains and the independents have been received for publication. Which? has been and is working behind the scenes to obtain reactions from all concerned in which case their findings may be published in a future issue.

The industry may not be answering Which? or send in comments to this blog, but efforts must be under way to come up with a fit for purpose dry cleaning regime that should remove bottle necks placed in the way of so many related businesses such as sheep farming/wool production, yarn making, weaving, knitting, tailoring, fashion design, and mass production of garments. The production of other natural fibres such as silk and linen to some extent has also suffered of late, because fashion firmly believes that if it cannot be given satisfactory after care, then do not touch it.

It is widely known that the use of wool is limited to the production of carpets and building insulation. With the credit crunch and the downfall in the housing market even lesser quantities of wool will be used for carpets for the foreseeable future.

High energy costs should drive people to wear wool in winter if one could adequately clean it. The BBC reported recently that UK sheep farmers realise 60 pence from the fleece of one sheep and it costs them 90 pence to sheer a sheep to keep their skins healthy. How many billions of wool jumpers could keep people warm in cold northern hemisphere winters only if we could clean the ‘Fibre of The Gods’?

CCCC and its offshoot www.homewardbounddrycleaning.com are well placed to offer solutions and generate big businesses for commercial reality and kick start the dormant ones. Our draft business plan is now ready and copies have been forwarded to our chief investor Discovery Beach Australia for raising seed capital through parainvestors world wide. Publicity and marketing sections are currently being edited by Enterprise First with the involvement of Business Link Surrey in our efforts to publicise the business plan widely and independent of our chief investor’s efforts.

NISE of NHS will kindly contribute to health issues (spotting table and associated risks of cross infections).

Our door is open to the chains such as Johnson Cleaners, Morrisons, Persil, and Sainsbury to let us have the use of one of their production units so that we prove the concepts of CCCC as was done in 6 Perc prototypes earlier. Our business plan will be published on this blog to draw their attention to vast business opportunities in these lean times when there are so few opportunities to invest in any thing sustainable.

Our door is also open to Which?’s investigative team for any specific queries they may send our way, especially those that the industry has not been able to provide answers for. They have our e-mail address and phone numbers to get in touch.