Dedicated Micros Freefall Continues

By John Honovich, Published Mar 14, 2013, 08:00pm EDT (Info+)

Once a DVR powerhouse, Dedicated Micros is rarely, if ever, heard from. Back in the mid 2000s, the company peaked at an impressive ~$135 million USD; Since then, not much good news. Today, though, the HDcctv Alliance Director praised DM, asking for an apology to DM's CEO who publicly criticized IP in 2009. So we decided to get the most recent UK financial report for Dedicated Micros and guess what? Things are getting even worse.

When last we checked for mid 2010, their annual revenue fell 11% year over year to ~$85 million USD. Now, mid year 2011 results show annual revenue dropping a stunning 26% to $60 million USD. Worse, losses exploded from just a few hunderd thousand to over $8 million USD. Plus net cash balances plummeted. Here's a capture direct from the report:

** ** *** ****, ** *** already ** * *** ** *******. We ** *** **** ***** **** are ***** ****** ** *** ************** ** *** ******* ************** ****, ******* ******* ****.

**********, ** ******* **** *** ***** on ************ ********, ******* *** ****** ******* ** video *** *** **** *** *** now ****** *** ************.

Comments (18)

They are a no-show for ISC West again this year.

Who can forget last year's DM press release for ISC West? "We have decided not to exhibit this year and instead invest our resources into serving you better."

Pride goeth before the fallen.

As an ex emplyee of DM here in the UK, this is a sad but very predictable situation.

For years DM ignored its customers and paid little if any notice to the needs of the other companies in the group, such as TSS & Dennard.

As an end user who still has 40 of these boxes across our facility, I can tell you why dedicated micros is failing. Why would I ever buy any new product from them when their original units had issues that were never addressed. From the unbelievably annoying issue of asking a unit for footage only to have it give you footage from an hour later(..it's ok.., just ask it for footage an hour before any incident that needs reviewing), to the non-ability to restrict access to recorded footage for users over a network connection, to the countless other bugs that weren't fixed, the product line has countless issues. Customer support, well if you return it with an RMA in the original box, we'll look at it while your system is down for 5 weeks, and get back to you for a fix that you could most likely do yourself with parts off of e-bay for 1/5th of the cost. The list goes on and on. They got their money from my predecessor. They should have taken that money and developed a tech service team that could write bugs out of software, some engineers that saw the future and designed for it, and better customer service.

For my current NVR company, I can give you the cellphone numbers of two of the best tech support guys, senior tech engineers, one of which returned a call on saturday afternoon because he was locked into a facility support call all week and didn't want to not respond, or the senior product manager for the equipment we currently use(who sent me a 9,000.00 unit for free when his product fell short of expectations on that new product's first deployment), not to mention their regular, have yet to not solve a problem immediately, always there, always friendly tech support people. They support me, they have educated me, they make me better at my job.

That, boys and girls, is where my facility's money now goes.

David, thanks for sharing and I am sorry to hear that. I am sure this won't make you feel any better, but I have heard many similar problems from other DM customers over the last few years.

Good to hear that you have a responsive NVR manufacturer now!

If 'Closed IPTV" had been called "Easy IPTV" or something else that disn't have multiple negative connotations, and if there had been a gateway or other easy way to enable connection to an enterprise network to provide controlled access to video, and if (the biggest "if") the enginneering and support execution has been up to the standards of their earlier years, things might be a lot different now, and the Norbain impact might have been less consequential. But that's a lot of "ifs" and it is hard to recover from flawed engineering, if indeed that's part of the situation. I have no first hand knowledge, but the only comments I have heard from integrators have been consistent with what is above.

ClosedIP was a neat idea, but had a very niche use. It's only real benefit is if you were connecting cameras over a customer's existing network. But you run into the problem of being limited to Dedicated Micros very small IP camera line, and less expensive security measures that would probably already be in place that would do pretty much the same thing.

I agree with these criticisms of DM's Closed IP strategy. Proprietary, non-mix-and-match solutions have a very rough go in the surveillance equipment market. Especially when so advertised.

My point was that John Honovich called Mike Newton names in 2009 because Mike had the audacity to make some of the same points then that John himself makes 4 years later. John's complaint wasn't about projecting profitability, it was about fundamental ROI on IP cameras.

John's ex post facto justification of his attack on Mike, based on DM's subseuent financial results, is disingenuous. The idea that DM fought against all-IP-cams for too long and are now paying the consequences is an example of attributing causality to a correlation. If the causal link were true, then HikVision, who arrived at an IP-camera-heavy strategy even later than DM, might not boast revenues today that are double those of all-IP-camera devotee Axis.

Todd, what specific 'names' did I call Mike Newton? This is what I said in 2009: "The economics in the blog post make no sense to me. I find the technical claims in the webcast/video to be quite weak." That's name calling to you?

The DM blog post I referenced was about DM's specific cost projections where they made up crazy projections about how an IP systems cost 700% more than their offering. This has nothing to do with IP ROI in general - just, as I said, the economics in that specific post.

Hey John,

In that video, Mike used the term "negative ROI" in reference to some IP cameras. I recall that you responded by naming him a troglodyte. Not true? Maybe it was on LinkedIn, not on your blog?

Todd, please go find where I called him a troglodyte or any other name and get back to me.

You really are unbelievable. You make a serious accusation and then when you are called on it, you offer no proof, simply saying that you 'recall.'

Hi John,

I specifically recall "troglodyte" as high-calibre invective that drove me to Merriam-Webster.

I'm not certain whether you ever modify any of the content on your website, nor am I certain that I saw the comment on your website. I'm unable to search all LI posts, and/or any of the blogs. So, I don't have any proof.

You are given to calling people names; for example, you just called me "unbelievable." Not the claim, but me.

In any event, if you really never derogated Mike Newton for making the specific points in 2009 that you yourself finally came around to agreeing with last week, then I agree with you, there is no need at all for you to apologize to Mike. Furthermore, I acknowledge that I would owe you an apology for intimating that you did say anything abusive about Mike back then.

Todd, I have not modified anything but thank you for the quasi apology. Again, you are unbelievable and if you think that's name calling, that's fine. Next time, get real evidence before you drop accusations.

...non ragioniam di lor, ma guarda e passa.

Fitting, but I never thought that an IPVM forum discussion would create a need for me to do some Dante homework!

Sorry to hear this. In its day, it was a great solution, and they knew how to stand by their products with full support.

They did not keep up with the innovation. This goes to show, that if you don't change with the market, the market will leave you in the dust.

Left Behind: Computer Based Systems have taken the marketplace and you either get on board or you get off with the discounted group. A huge separation of class here. High End Quality, and low end cheap, low quality products.

The old saying follow the money trail and you'll see where it's going, and who will survive.

AD Group results for FY ending 30 June 2012 can now be downloaded from Companies House

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts reporting, tutorials and software funded by subscriber's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.
Loading Related Reports