Subscriber Discussion

The Remote Video Monitoring Space Of The New Stealth And New Netwatch

LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 09, 2018
Support Services Group

The basic business model for most firms is this space seems to be the three-d, “deter-detect-defend”. While the providers, like the new Stealth and new Netwatch offer all three, they generally control only the first two, “deter-detect”. Customers are expecting all three-d, thus a source of nasty attrition without “defend”, emergency physical response to the ongoing threats. Similar to the traditional alarm industry like ADT, Moni, NMC, C.O.P.S, Vivint, they have offered the customer all three for many decades, but deliver two. They depend on the local police to deliver the third “d” without costs. Due to the overwhelming and unsustainable false-alarm problem local police now deliver slow or no response to deterrent alarm systems, all across North America… a major source of major attrition. Of course police still provide 911 type response to witnessed 911 type threats, which is a major opportunity for responsible providers of remote witness video and audio.

Source: Lee Jones; Support Services Group; LeeSSG@att

U
Undisclosed #1
•Jun 09, 2018

what is the point of your post?

(1)
LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 09, 2018
Support Services Group
In reply to Undisclosed #1

The point is… dilution of the traditional “public/private-partnership” that seems to be part of traditional business models.

U
Undisclosed #1
•Jun 09, 2018
In reply to Lee Jones

yeah, I'm still not gettin' it.

(1)
U
Undisclosed #2
•Jun 09, 2018
IPVMU Certified
In reply to Undisclosed #1

yeah, I'm still not gettin' it.

Understandable, especially if you haven’t been following Lee’s other related posts, containing blistering critiques and engaging analysis of the gripping false alarm/physical response dilemma, which remains an existential threat to RMR as we know it.

It’s like trying to watch Season 3, Episode 5 of the Sopranos without knowing who Tony is.

Here are a few key posts from earlier in the series:

Abolish Alarm Permits/Registration

Really Big Deal Worth Watching And Planning

NEST And MONI An Oxymoron?

LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 09, 2018
Support Services Group
In reply to Undisclosed #2

Thanks for the interpretation; and for remembering some of my observations.

LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 09, 2018
Support Services Group

Sorry ‘bout that.

The point is…. #2… avoid the boobytrap of offering something you cannot deliver…. aka deceptive business practice.

U
Undisclosed #2
•Jun 09, 2018
IPVMU Certified

The basic business model for most firms is this space seems to be the three-d, “deter-detect-defend”...

I prefer the three-g model, “guards-gates-guns”.

(2)
(1)
LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 09, 2018
Support Services Group
In reply to Undisclosed #2

applause, applause..... room for both business models.  The need for "private security" is growing fast, worldwide!!! 

JH
John Honovich
•Jun 09, 2018
IPVM

Due to the overwhelming and unsustainable false-alarm problem local police now deliver slow or no response to deterrent alarm systems, all across North America… a major source of major attrition.

Lee, in fairness, are not the remote video monitoring providers addressing just this problem? That is, via the use of video and real-time remote video review they can ensure that police are only dispatched to verified real issues, yes/no?

(3)
LJ
Lee Jones
•Jun 10, 2018
Support Services Group
In reply to John Honovich

Absolutely YES….. note the last sentence of the first post that started this discussion…

“…. Of course, local police still provide 911 type response to witnessed 911 type threats, which is a major opportunity for responsible providers of remote witness video and audio…”.

Key word is “witness”. To be more specific, the alarm industry is beginning to separate most alarm systems into two broad categories, “deterrent systems” or “defensive systems”. Most “deterrent” systems are simple motion sensors, activated without remote witness technologies, caused by movement of windows, doors, pets, rodents, blast heaters, etc. (the false alarm problem). Whereas “defense” systems are the same motion sensors with the addition of remote witness interactive technologies like video /audio/analytics (the false alarm solution). The majority of all existing RMR remote monitored customer systems in the US are outdated low priority “deterrent” systems (the market value dilution).  

Avatar
Daniel Cyr
•Jun 14, 2018
Sirix Video Monitoring Central

In my experience in managing a video monitoring station I can say that when we contact local police to respond for an intrusion that is occurring in realtime, in most cases we get a very quick response. We have developed ways to increase this response time with the police with some very simple and logical steps that we put in place on a regular basis.

In exceptional situations it has happened that police could not be dispatched on-site for a longer period of time so we always have backup patrol companies ready to be sent. In major cities they are there in less around 4-7 minutes.

We find our success mainly because we only accept to monitor sites which have solid analytics (Avigilon, Kiwi, OneTrack, etc.), thermal cameras (Axis, Avigilon, Flir, etc.), radars (Axis, SpotterRF, etc.) and we use only the best VMS's to mange the alarms that come in (Genetec/Mission Control, Avigilon, Milestone, etc.). The other advantage is that we don't get hundreds of calls because we are not a traditional alarm monitoring company. Our operators focus 100% of their time watching video alarms popup in realtime and created by the analytics rules or triggered by a validated source (intercom, communication button, request to exit button, etc.).

I believe that by having similar type video monitoring stations continuing to offer these kind of services to security integrators across the globe, it will have a beneficial effect on the overall response time for the end-users. It just makes sense... less false alarm dispatches = more ressources to handle real events and with a faster response time!

My 10 cents! :)

(1)
(1)
U
Undisclosed #3
•Jun 14, 2018
In reply to Daniel Cyr

You have profiled an security provider that seems to be focused on the customer, which includes the special needs when something goes wrong…. WELL DONE.  

(1)
New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions