CDW: We Love You Axis But Here is Samsung for 50% Less

By John Honovich, Published Jun 12, 2015, 12:00am EDT

Axis steering end users to CDW has been a hot topic on IPVM recently.

Unfortunately, that admiration is not exactly mutual.

Our new Online Surveillance Sales Trends 2015 report uncovered a fascinating dynamic that underscores Axis marketplace challenges.

In this note, we explain what happened.

**** ******** ****** *** recommendations **** ** ****-***** online ************ ********* *** an * ****** ******.

*** *** *** ******* with ****, *********** **** it *** ***** '**-**' and '**** **** ****** use'. *** *** ***** gave * ***** *** all ****, ********* (*)**** *****(***** / ****** / no **) *****. ***** price ** **** *** ~$2,500. ** ******** ***** Axis ****** ********* *** separately ****** * *** or ** *****.

***** ******, *** **** than ** **** *****, the *** *** **** back **** * ***** for ******* **** *** 50% **** *********, ********* a ******** **** * 2TB **** ***** *** 1080p ******* **** **. This ** *******'* **-*** variant ***, ******-*****.

[******: *** *** ******** (4) ***** ******* *** (4) ****** ** ****** cameras.]

The **** *********

**** ********* ************ **** challenge ** *** *** end. **** ** *** supposed ** **? ******* has ***** ** *** same ********, **** **, plus * ********, **** a *** **** *****, for **% ****.

*** ****** *** *****, Hanwha ** ****** ****** ** *** ******* name, ** *** * comparable, ** *** ********, brand.

***, **** ******* ***** to **** ********* *** '*** ** end' ******************* ** *** *** end *** **** ***** how **** ** **.

It **** *****

**** ****** ******* *** 50% **** **** ****, Samsung *** *** *** least *********, ** ***, in *** ********. ** nearly **% **** ********* than *******, *&* ***** offered ***** **-*** *** **** FLIR / ***** (**** *** **** ******** that **** *** ****, not ***** ** *** other *** ****).

*** **** ***** ********** the ******** ********* ***** surveillance ** *** *****, with * ****** ** kits, ********* **, ********* recorder *** **** ** storage, *** ** ***.

*******: *** $*** ** *** is ****.

 

Comments (12)

Undisclosed Integrator #1

06/12/15 12:06pm

John,

You are wrong about Samsung Techwin name change. Hanwah only bought stock in Samsung Techwin. The Samsung brand will not change.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 06/12/15 12:26pm

A, I said:

"And unless and until, Hanwha is forced to give up the Samsung name, it has a comparable, if not stronger, brand."

I am not saying it is definitive. I am saying it is a possibility.

Now, since you have made such a definitive judgement, who are you and how do you know that absolutely the name will not change? Are you an executive at Hanwha? Has an executive at Hanwha told you in writing guaranteed that the name will not change? Please share.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 06/12/15 12:38pm

"Hanwah only bought stock in Samsung Techwin."

This is wrong. As Hanwha itself made clear:

"Hanwha acquires a 32.4% stake in Samsung Techwin, all the Samsung Techwin stocks that Samsung Group held."

Hanwha owns all the stock that Samsung used to own of Techwin, meaning Samsung is 100% out and Hanwha replaces Samsung as the controlling owner.

Now the brand may stay if Samsung group and Hanwha reach an agreement to license the Samsung brand for surveillance products.

However, it is clear that Samsung no longer owns any Techwin shares and that Hanwha is replacing Samsung as the controlling owner of Techwin.

Undisclosed Integrator #1

In reply to John Honovich | 06/12/15 02:36pm

John,

I am an integrator that had concern about the Hanwha investment as well. I was assured by high level US Samsung Techwin executives that this is just a stock purchase and that the brand stays.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 06/12/15 06:44pm

A, thanks for the feedback. Tom Cook and his reps have been saying this to the Samsung channel from right after the deal was announced. He is also on the record to the trade press (later) saying that it was a key negotiation point, contradicting their private statements to dealers that this was already a done deal.

However, the 'this is just a stock purchase claim' is absolutely wrong. Hanwha is taking control of Techwin from Samsung - period. There are numerous Korean news reports that confirm this.

Whether Techwin gets to license the Samsung brand is entirely possible but I'd like to get Tom Cook, on the record, publically declaring that this has been secured, not simply negotiated. To that end, I just emailed Tom asking that. As soon as I get a response, I will post whatever it is. Thanks!

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to John Honovich | 06/16/15 07:02am

Waiting for a response from Samsung.

However, here is a new article from Business Korea which states:

"Samsung Techwin will complete the “big deal” by changing its name to Hanwha Techwin"

I forwarded this to Samsung asking for comment.

Undisclosed #2

IPVMU Certified | In reply to John Honovich | 06/16/15 07:34am

"Samsung Techwin will complete the “big deal” by changing its name to Hanwha Techwin"

Considering the emphatic protestations of 'no (near term) name change' from multiple Techwin executives, it could just be a change to the legal business name with a DBA Samsung Techwin agreement for the time being. Otherwise they are going to look pretty idiotic.

Asking Samsung Techwin this question again is likely to get the same answer as before, since it's not in their control.

Maybe ask Hanwha or the Samsung Group?

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to John Honovich | 06/18/15 06:02pm

Feedback from Samsung Techwin's Tom Cook:

"The transaction is still in process and we will share with everyone once completed."

Despite them making a big show that brand will not change, they still have not secured it.

They certainly may but their claims to dealers that this was a done deal more than 6 months ago were certainly overstated.

Phil Klein

IPVMU Certified | 06/12/15 12:57pm

Can you explain how you can even come close to comparing a Samsung analog camera with a 2 MP ip camera?

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Phil Klein | 06/12/15 01:28pm

Phil,

4 of those Samsung cameras are 1080p SDI, not analog. So those 4 are clearly comparable to 2MP IP. The other 4 are SD analog. I've added a note / update above.

Interestingly, the CDW rep pitched it to Derek as an 'HDTV' solution. It was our mistake not to verify immediately that 4 of the 8 cameras were not 1080p HD.

Thanks for raising this point.

John

Terry Delmonaco

06/14/15 03:09pm

John this may be a bit off subject but since CDW is in this discussion I would be interested how many of us have been burned by end users picking our brains and then buying from CDW. I lost a Panasonic deal to CDW a couple of years ago with a local small town South Florida PD. I had what I thought was a great relationship with the chief doing negociated work for years. On one occation (and the last) the IT guy went around me and bought from CDW to save a few bucks. When he couldn't figure out how to spin up his ND400 he actually called me to ask for help. After bitching to the Panasonic rep I got the standard " we'll look into it" and " you need to register your jobs".

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Terry Delmonaco | 06/15/15 01:39pm

Terry, thanks for sharing!

I created a new discussion here: Integrators, Have You Been Burned By CDW?

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,653 reports, 896 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports