Steven, I have made this its own discussion as its an important point that is worth discussing directly on its own.
(1) I am not inferring that Axis is buying spec. I am saying just that. These events are attempts to buy specs. Why do you think Axis is spending all this money on you?
(2) IPVM is the best, bar none, at providing in-depth testing of cameras and VMSes. For example, Panoramic Fisheye Camera Shootout - Avigilon, Axis, Dahua, Hanwha, Hikvision, Oncam And Vivotek and VMS Mobile App Shootout - Avigilon, Dahua, Exacq, Genetec, Hikvision, Milestone. You are free to ignore it and get your information at various manufacturer junkets.
(3) As I said before, I'd love to find evidence of these events but most manufacturers, unlike Axis, are well aware of what they are doing at these events and therefore try to hide it. Axis was foolish enough to brag about it on social media with pictures.
(4) The bashing Axis point is silly. Axis gets the most positive coverage on IPVM and if you don't believe that, ask a Dahua or Hikvision employee. And that's because Axis overall does a very good job on their products but that does not mean we cannot or will not criticize them on points we see problems with.
I like the IPVM reviews, installation guides, experience, opinions (biased or not) along with some good old fashion internet drama here and there.
Word of the Day: "Relax"
You can't please everyone and if you do, you're probably not worth reading. I always thought you were Pro Axis and anti Hikvision. Probably with good reason. Keep up the good work.
I'm not going to say I'm the fence on this one - as I can appreciate all views and sentiments.
We all know John is reveling in the Shock Jock experience and just being "disruptive" to cause a reaction, but there are still some worthy points.
He is wide of the mark by general consensus on the whole notion that attendees lacked integrity, were suspectable to coercive behavior through alcohol/food etc, and denigrating the value of the event to this level is juvenile. But the wider issue of consultant and manufacturer engagement is a far deeper matter.
What we see this side of the pond, (UK), is "consultants" asking manufacturers to write the spec around their kit, which has gone on for years now - although with the quality and integrity of consultants dropping through the floor - it's just brazen now with part numbers and data sheet verbatim common practice (where there is no requirement to work with legacy installations or a client global solution preference).
I really don't see any criticism of manufacturers being justified, they are simply trying to get their kit out there. Unless you have a smoking gun of a "brown envelope", a beer and burrito simply don't cut it as a covert inducement.
The issue is the quality of consultants. Don't get me wrong - there are plenty of excellent ones out there - but let's be honest, there are also some dogs as well. When challenged in tenders regarding the OR, they just ignore the question as they are clueless (because it's not on datasheets or the manufacturer hasn't told them). Oddly enough, integrators are possibly the best and most independent source of verification of a good consultant. We know when it's a good spec or a crap spec and we know the quality of the consultant far better than the client, manufacturer or any certification and membership body. Ironic isn't it that consultants seek to provide the "independent" interface between client and integrator? As I say, there are some excellent consultants out there who put together an outstanding spec that any decent integrators can work to and the client receives a great result. There are also consultants who are lazy, inexperienced, lacking in integrity and generally useless. Picking these out as an Axis event may not be easy, but it's unfair to tar all consultants with the same brush.
Back to Johns own style of disruptive journalism....
I often find myself questioning whether the subscription is worth the editorializing and shock-jock nonsense from John. I enjoy and appreciate a large majority of articles and reviews, and I even enjoy somewhat controversial topics being presented neutrally for discussion.
However, I have no time for "content" that tries to tell everyone how to think. I'd just go spend more time on Facebook if I wanted that.
So if the Axis event was a lock-in at an Embassy Suites in Oklahoma City, with box lunches and convention center style buffets, would everyone still attend?
Once again, nothing but your opinion at work. And it underscores nothing other than the fact that I seek out the knowledge I need to do my job no matter where it is to be found.
We are very careful to not offer reviewers anything other than a product to review and access to support if they need it. As far as partners we do offer reward trips sometimes for performance. We don't confuse the two. We have flown out people from IHS to speak at events but just gave them a general idea about what we think they should cover in their presentation. We in no way told them what to say. We wanted them to talk about the industry and what our partners perhaps did not know on a global basis and trend they are seeing. In this case we pay for their flight out and lodging but we do not edit their content.
John, your opinion that it was a junket is your own - it's not a statement of fact but your perception. So lets stick with the Axis 3 day A&E Event and drop the emotive, opinionated sensationalist sound bites.
A junket would be applicable if Axis had paid for someone to go on holiday for personal benefit only - clearly, no matter how you dress it, the event was not pitched or delivered as a personal benefit, but as an education, knowledge sharing and networking opportunity.
You can be very selective on your expression of the english language, sadly not always accurately.
Granted, independent "consultants" have no obligation to these standards. Does ASIS have similar ethical standards?
National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics
It's amazing that this thread continues. Steven, don't cancel your script, you will regret the insight that IPVM has to offer.
John, play nice. The chip on your shoulder has turned into an unsustainable boulder you will not be able to bear much longer and will permanently scar and adversely impact your ability to be a neutral , unbiased party in the eyes of your peers and paid subscribers.
We are all professionals with different levels of contributions. IPVM does not exist without the feedback from your paid subscribers. They (we) are your paycheck efforting that awesome talent pool in your employ. Yes, it sucks, but don't ever forget that.
Not a life coach, just an Integrator (Steven, notice the I in "Integrator" is upper case).
A couple of things;
Why are the most recent response(s) to this conversation inter-mixed within the same vs the most recent post showing as the last response?
A far more sensitive issue, I noticed you did a LI profile lookup on me this evening.
Does this have anything to do with me trying to moderate peace between yourself and the community over the last 24 hours as it relates to the AXIS binger you were on?
Do you, as the purveyor, host and holy grail of IPVM, have the ability to ascertain the identity of those posting as Undisclosed? Of course you do. It's a Yes or No. You need to answer to the community.
"Well, that is why I participate in these discussions, even when criticized on IPVM. If you have specific questions that I did not answer, please let me know and I will respond."
Sorry, John, I must have missed you providing disclosure of your own personal tax affairs and that of IPVM to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you have not benefitted financially from inducements from manufacturers or lobbying entities that may have had an influence on the article you have published.
But feel free to correct me by providing the links to the information requested.
It's not unreasonable to expect that you really are entirely impartial in your equipment reviews and editorial posts, so to underline that I'm sure you'll have no issues in proving it. Not to do so, would appear, to some, as avoidance of disclosure for reasons that can only be speculated.
IPVMU Certified | 03/13/19 05:44am
This is not at all the level of professionalism I expected to encounter upon joining this site. You are not going to like this, but I have held off as long as I could. Do you know what arguing on the internet and competing in the Special Olympics have in common? Even if you win . . .
In Europe, when you go into one of their market stores and "consider" making a purchase but hesitate (mostly because your bags are already packed full), you will be offered a drink. I don't remember if it was vodka or not, but this happened several times. So... if Axis (or any other manufacturer / similar) buys you a drink so you can become best buddies with whomever bought you that drink... chances are you are going to give them a call. In many ways, they are buying you a drink in return for loyalty. Simple psychology. Easier to attract with honey then... can't remember how the saying goes but I'm sure you get what I'm trying to say.
Don't be insulted, I love going to those things and drinking/eating what they put out. Sometimes I even make a friend or two. It's called a "networking event" and the purpose of that is to connect and get your business or potentially a lead from them.
FYI to all those taking issues with a suggestion of impropriety, I've worked at 3 large (multi thousands of employees and sites worldwide) "electronics" companies in the past 20 plus years, and they all have formal codes of ethics that if strictly followed, would not allow employees to be accepting anything more than a basic meal. In general, my thought has always been that I'll enjoy the nicer meals because I know it's not going to influence me, but at the same time it has occurred to me on a few occasions that someone could be unhappy to learn more than the basic meal was accepted. I'll assume that smaller companies, and/or the companies employing those who see no problems, do not have any codes of ethics remotely similar, or perhaps they have none at all.
Refusing to accept advertising is the same story, a la Consumer Reports and IPVM. In my mind, you could do honest reviews and still accept advertising. All I need to see is the company/site that does accept advertising bash some products from their advertisers where it looks like the bashing is justified. Others may not agree with this philosophy.
It’s friday and I am going to enjoy a nice undisclosed beer when I get home. Can we end this discussion on a high note?