VSaaS Usage Statistics 2016 - Still A Long Way From "The Next Big Thing"
Nice update!
The ratio of integrators selling/not selling VSaaS today vs. 2011 was almost identical.
Maybe because falling bandwidth costs have been met with increasing resolutions and frame rates?
A couple years ago Dropcam was making a push to sign up dealers, I take it there is no sign of that amounting to anything?
The Dropcam/Nestcam thing is a little hard to read after the Google acquisition. I've seen Nest at a few industry shows, including ESX, but not 100% sure what their channel strategy is. From their website it looks like they're more interested in building a network of installers vs. doing a more direct RMR-sharing reseller channel.
IMO, Google/Nest seem to be targeting DIYers, but that space is getting crowded quickly Ezviz, Y-cam, and lots of others. On the higher end, Nestcams may not even meet the needs of the most simple commercial user (convenience store, bar, deli, etc.).
If anyone has hard data about Nestcam, particularly as a dealer/reseller, I'd be curious to hear details.
Maybe because falling bandwidth costs have been met with increasing resolutions and frame rates?
No I think because here in the US at least the last mile still tends to be copper and rates are still high for any significant bandwidth. Certainly too high for the type of bandwidth required for hosted video.
Most of our (retail) customers are on DSL or T1 class service from a phone company. Larger customers are using MPLS but bit rates are still generally low at the actual locations. Some have cable (fiber or coax) but those are rare.
Thing is how many commercial businesses see moving large amounts of data around the world as part of their core business and thus worth the cost of greater bandwidth? While the last mile is still copper, and until bandwidth is cheap and plentiful, commercial businesses will go with the cheapest service they can get away with. The value prop of moving the data off site "just because" isn't strong enough to justify any additional cost to that particular part of their infrastructure.
While the last mile is still copper, and until bandwidth is cheap and plentiful, commercial businesses will go with the cheapest service they can get away with.
Yes, telcos have been and are still expensive for WAN services. But why don't more businesses utilize broadband services since:
$50/month = 25 Mbps = 8 cameras
Is that too expensive?
$50/month = 25 Mbps = 8 cameras
What region is that? Around here (Boston), the price is twice that:
$100/mo. just for the bandwidth, then you'd have storage costs as well (see my examples above). But even if the storage was free, the breakeven on $100/mo vs. a $1000 NVR is 10 months. Not very attractive, IMO, unless there is some other extreme upside.
Also, my experience with business broadband is that it isn't reliable enough in throughput or even just daily availability to be truly viable for a VSaaS backbone.
Actually, based on Brian's area, if you achieved and used all available upload speed you would have 10Mbps upload.
That is the bottleneck.
Southern California. Don't know why the big difference.
Storage costs are retention dependent. Yes, overall it still might be more expensive than buying a Hikua NVR, though outsourced services often are.
Agreed that reliability is the biggest concern, connection uptimes around here are at about 99.0%, not great, but probably not much different than owning your own (cheap) hardware.
Steve is right about frame relay and MPLS, they are somewhere around 10x the price on a Mbps basis. Reliability is around 99.999%, which is something you need if your business depends on the WAN to operate. But video availibility may not need the same sigma...
I used to think that no one would pay a monthly fee for VSaaS until I spoke with a customer who put six Dropcams in his business. As absurd as that sounds to trust something like that, he caught a few bad employees and loves the system. He pays $1,200 for the service. After I had left his business that day, I knew we had to come up with a solution that offered a little local storage and cloud recording during alarm events (think of smash and grab NVR's). About a year ago our manufacturer started offering video user verification and central station video verification. At the time, I made the recommendation to include a local storage/display option (helps to solve bottlenecking issues). They released the product last week, I've had it running in my home with no issues. To me, it's a no-brainer to offer a solution like this and collect the RMR.
Cost/Bandwidth is always an issue. We integrate out of the Atlanta area and do full hosting for systems of usually 8 or less cameras. We also don't do 2MP cameras at 15fps......we want the user to be able to see his/her video from a mobile device without waiting forever on a huge file. It's cost vs benefit. Outside of a truck ramming through your pool gate, getting above 5fps doesn't do them a lot of good identifying visitors. I also don't need to see the pimples on the face of a lobby visitor.
Those that have more cameras we do a managed server with same software, and then dual record some key cameras offsite at a low resolution as a backup. We've had more than a couple auto stores have a DVR stolen and that's why they've come out way.
The benefits we sell are: no data stored onsite for theft, we handle all the updates and maintenance, when new phones/browsers come out we'll support them (unlike most dvr installs that STILL don't work on firefox or safari). Many like that they can be hands off. I pay a lawn service to handle it, why not video surveillance?
But it is still a limited business but one that can be good for some. We probably host ~500 cameras and have managed servers on another 1000 so it's good recurring income for a 5 person company. Most of them are between $8 and $20 a month per camera.
The voice of experience!
I'm about to dive into this VSaas world. It would be helpful to see your recent experience. I'm 530 575 0299.
Thanks.
Cost of internet is 100% political and has no relation to technological advancements, or capability. Except in the extreme extreme remote locations. In cities and suburbia its all FCC politics that bar ISP's from offering competing services in regions.
Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.