Debunking V/B Research's Absurd Analytic Projections

Published Apr 01, 2010 00:00 AM
PUBLIC - This article does not require an IPVM subscription. Feel free to share.

In December 2010, V/B Research caused a stir by issuing extremely bullish video analytic projections of a $1 Billion market by 2012. Now, we have obtained the 11 page original report and can more deeply examine its methodology and flaws.

The 'research' is based on 22 surveys, 9 interviews and 7 discussions - 90% from manufacturers of video surveillance products. Asking manufacturers how much they sold and how much they plan to sell of emerging technology is highly inaccurate, at best.

V/B estimates the 2009 Intelligent camera market at $378 Million. This number is absurd. There are only a small number of global players offering 'intelligent' cameras - ioimage, OV partners, VideoIQ, etc. These companies are unlikely to reach 1/10th of that level. We suspect the number posted comes from including cameras that ship with motion detection+ or camera tampering (like Sony or Bosch).

V/B claims that the numbers are based on "analysing individual revenue growth rates of video analytics companies that have published 2009 financial results." However, almost no company breaks down their video analytic sales so it's not possible to estimate this from public documentation.

The part we found most humorous was their future projections. On slides 5 and 7, they ask manufacturers where they expect future high deployments of analytics and then list those companies that respond positively.

The remainder of the report is a collection of excerpts from manufacturer case studies and general news articles.

This report was commissioned by a client (presumably a manufacturer) and was disclosed after V/B research created a controversy on LinkedIn by misleading over 100 LinkedIn members into thinking that they were providing the report for free [link no longer available]. After numerous complaints, V/B released the report freely.

We know many in the industry love statistics but it is very important to be critical about the methods and supporting evidence for them.