We have 3 of these systems installed so far. They have proven valueable in preventing break ins but they are not without their issues. They have a new sensor coming out next year that has a built in Gyroscope which will alert the system if a sensor is moved. Right now I consider the lack of this feature a vulnerability.
We have 2 of them as standalone systems and one as a hybrid with additional cameras available for CS operators to further visually verify alarms.
We charge to install the system just like any instrusion system we sell. The monitoring charges depend on what the CS charges you, how many falses you expect, connection method etc.
As far as controlled or uncontrolled just remember to protect assets not open space.
Videofied has been EXTREMELY successful from a selling and monitoring-success-rate standpoint. I would build-in the cost to replace batteries into your monthly fee. The battery life quoted by the manufacturer has not been accurate in our experience and occur nearly once a year. I have sold a service plan with every one, but had I not, I would have a lot of upset customers being charged everytime a "low battery" signal came in. In addition, the other common call customers receive in the middle of the night is the "no contact." Many of my clients, having been bothered by this call several times, have instructed the central station to NOT CALL THEM on a 'no contact' alarm and to automatically put in a service call.
Otherwise, selling it is very easy. It has a great success ratio. There ARE frequent activations for cats and things that "shouldn't" set it off, so your monitoring stations could be busy passing off falses, but it IS verifiable, and we have caught a good chunk of suspects. Verified, imo, is ALWAYS better than not.
IPVMU Certified | 10/29/14 04:21pm
I'm not sure about pricing strategy, but in my area Videofied is generally sold in lieu of other alarm systems, or is kept separate from typical intrusion. Billing is set up like a normal intrusion system: hardware/install up front, monitoring monthly after.
The central station must be 'Videofied' compatible, but I think at this point, most of the larger providers are.
The biggest complaint I've heard from users is that image quality does not compare to video surveillance. However, it shouldn't. Video verification is not video surveillance. If you want megapixel, WDR, color in low light, and fluid motion framerates, then Videofied is not the right answer.
I know of an oil company that uses Videofied at hundreds of remote pumping stations throughout the US and they think it is great. They get many (mostly) false alarms, but they got that before too on standard intrusion equipment. The video verification now lets them see the cause of an alarm before they roll a truck or dispatch a guard.