How End Users Purchase Maintenance - Stats

By Brian Rhodes, Published on Aug 20, 2012

If end users had their druthers, security systems would never stop working. However, like any complex system, pieces break and things need periodic adjustment. How do end users prefer to buy maintenance services for surveillance equipment? We asked a group of globally located end users that question. In this note, we analyse their votes and breakdown their responses.

Maintenance Options

A number of methods of maintaining security equipment exist. For many, the simplest strategy is to call the repairman when something breaks. Others prefer to buy a maintenance agreement so that the 'cost' of service is controlled and predictable. Still others simply chose to fix the problem themselves, avoiding having to pay for service altogether.

We broke down survey responses according to system size. The preferred methods of maintenance differ in each group, with larger end users (>100 cameras) choosing to handle problems on service calls or under a maintenance agreement, and smaller end users (<100 cameras) electing to handle issues in-house. The charts below show the sharp differences between these groups:

Detailed Responses

These charts indicate the differences, but they do not explain the rationale behind them. We asked end users to explain their answers, and even with answers coming from diverse markets, answers fell into common groups.

Maintenance Agreements Too Costly

The strongest answer from end users were that formal maintenance agreements do not deliver enough value to justify their cost. Some responses suggested that integrators do not deliver on the expectations of the contract, and really see agreements as little more than an opportunity to take money with little in return.

  • "Service contracts benefit only one party: the vendor."
  • "Vendors never write up a service contract they're going to lose money on."
  • "I can control costs better without one."
  • "We paid initially for a service contract but didn't use it enough to warrant the cost."
  • "Being a non-profit volunteer based organization we cannot afford the ongoing service contracts."
  • "On going service contracts have not worked well. Usually more expensive than Time and Materials (per incident)."
  • "Our service contract ended and the renewal rates were exorbitant."
  • "Too little is actually covered by the contract. Everything ends up costing money anyway."
  • "It's cheaper and more efficient for us to do the work ourselves"
  • "Service contracts mostly seem to be unsuccessful in providing timely and cost effective support."
  • "The cost of a service contract for 800+ camera's is far too expensive to justify"
  • "Service contracts too costly"

We Fix It Ourselves

Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News
Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News

Some of the smaller system users suggest they have no option to hire outside help, and must fix problems on their own. However, many end users in both categories suggested they have built up staff and expertise to the point they manage maintenance themselves. This selection was the single most popular answer in the larger system user group, which indicates that even when an end user has money to purchase outside maintenance labor, they still prefer to handle these activities in-house.

  • "We have a team of technician in electronic in our units to achieve the jobs"
  • "I have the technical background to make repairs myself."
  • "we have the in house skillset"
  • "IT Department"
  • "Many times we do fix it ourselves."
  • "We try to fix most things ourselves so this made the most sense for us."
  • "Since we typically purchase and install the equipment, we also repair and replace them."
  • "We fix what we can, when something breaks since there is no dedicated surveillance budget."
  • "Have on site maintenance people who are familiar with system."
  • "As long as I have a good team of in-house techs, the value of a service contract never seems to equal what a vendor charges for them."

"Per Incident" Maintenance is Cheaper

For many years, the standard method of buying maintenance was opening a service call with an integrator on an 'as needed' basis. For security users, this remains a popular option for a variety of reasons. Some users suggested they are able to better control the cost of maintenance on a 'time and materials' basis, while others suggested this is an escalation step in a 'maintenance triad' for problems that cannot be fixed in-house.

  • "Time and materials approach and depot repair processes are generally better for us."
  • "We usually do time and material. On going service contracts too expensive."
  • "We make yearly decisions to consider a pay-per-incident."
  • "Per incident as needed."
  • "Big problems are handled by integrator on a per-call basis"
  • "T and M, only when needed. Saves money."
  • "No budget means repairs only as needed."
  • "If we can't fix, we place a call."

Interestingly, not all comments centered on the high cost of integrator maintenance. Several responses, including several from the smaller system category, suggested that formal maintenance agreements enable those costs to be programmed into budgets in expected amounts:

Agreements Are Easy to Budget

  • "Can plan better for expenses"
  • "Executive Management team knows what our Service costs will be."
  • "Maintenance contracts are easier to budget."
  • "Spread risk and cost over a fixed period."
  • "It seems the best possible way to hedge against later budgetary cuts/restrictions."

Some end users answered that their security budgets fall under 'allocative' type budgets, where they must previously ask for funding for maintenance in order to receive it. Unpredictable costs are not funded, so maintenance becomes an expected, calculated cost of operation.

Comments : Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

End User Buying Axis At Prices Better Than Axis Gold on Jan 10, 2020
IPVM recently found an integrator contract with an end-user that guaranteed...
Pivot3 Mass Layoffs on Mar 27, 2020
Pivot3 has conducted mass layoffs, the culmination of grand hopes, a quarter...
AHJ / Authority Having Jurisdiction Tutorial on Aug 06, 2020
One of the most powerful yet often underappreciated characters in all...
Help Security End Users Facing Coronavirus Improve Remote Access on Mar 24, 2020
Many end-users and integrators are struggling with the impact of coronavirus...
Trade Groups Request NDAA Blacklist Delay Citing Coronavirus on Apr 06, 2020
Two trade groups representing government contractors have asked Congress to...
Dynamic vs Static IP Addresses Tutorial on Apr 16, 2020
While many cameras default to DHCP out of the box, that does not mean you...
Access Control Levels and Schedules Tutorial on Sep 29, 2020
Configuring access levels and setting up schedules is central to maintaining...
US GSA Explains NDAA 889 Part B Blacklisting on Jul 31, 2020
With the 'Blacklist Clause' going into effect August 13 that bans the US...
Access Visitor Management Systems Guide on Jul 22, 2020
"Who are you, and why are you here?" Facilities that implement Visitor...
Drain Wire For Access Control Reader Tutorial on Sep 23, 2020
An easy-to-miss cabling specification plays a key role in access control, yet...
Disruptive Free Lead Generation Added To IPVM on May 15, 2020
IPVM has added lead generation for sellers, for free, disrupting the...
Monitoring Alarm Systems From Home - Innovation or Danger? on Oct 13, 2020
Remote monitoring by alarm companies since COVID-19 is bringing cost savings...
Vehicle Gate Access Control Guide on Mar 19, 2020
Vehicle gate access control demands integrating various systems to keep...
Convergint Coronavirus Cuts on Mar 25, 2020
One of the world's largest security integrators, Convergint, has made a major...
Face Masks Increase Face Recognition Errors Says NIST on Aug 04, 2020
COVID-19 has led to widespread facemask use, which as IPVM testing has shown...

Recent Reports

GDPR Impact On Temperature / Fever Screening Explained on Oct 22, 2020
What impact does GDPR have on temperature screening? Do you risk a GDPR fine...
Security And Safety Things (S&ST) Tested on Oct 22, 2020
S&amp;ST, a Bosch spinout, is spending tens of millions of dollars aiming to...
Nokia Fever Screening Claims To "Advance Fight Against COVID-19" on Oct 22, 2020
First IBM, then briefly Clorox, and now Nokia becomes the latest Fortune 500...
Deceptive Meridian Temperature Tablets Endanger Public Safety on Oct 21, 2020
IPVM's testing of and investigation into Meridian Kiosk's temperature...
Honeywell 30 Series and Vivotek NVRs Tested on Oct 21, 2020
The NDAA ban has driven many users to look for low-cost NVRs not made by...
Avigilon Aggressive Trade-In Program Takes Aim At Competitors on Oct 20, 2020
Avigilon has launched one of the most aggressive trade-in programs the video...
Mexico Video Surveillance Market Overview 2020 on Oct 20, 2020
Despite being neighbors, there are key differences between the U.S. and...
Dahua Revenue Grows But Profits Down, Cause Unclear on Oct 20, 2020
While Dahua's overall revenue was up more than 12% in Q3 2020, a significant...
Illegal Hikvision Fever Screening Touted In Australia, Government Investigating, Temperature References Deleted on Oct 20, 2020
The Australian government told IPVM that they are investigating a Hikvision...
Panasonic Presents i-PRO Cameras and Video Analytics on Oct 19, 2020
Panasonic i-PRO presented its X-Series cameras and AI video analytics at the...
Augmented Reality (AR) Cameras From Hikvision and Dahua Examined on Oct 19, 2020
Hikvision, Dahua, and other China companies are marketing augmented reality...
18 TB Video Surveillance Drives (WD and Seagate) on Oct 19, 2020
Both Seagate and Western Digital recently announced 18TB hard drives...
Watrix Gait Recognition Profile on Oct 16, 2020
Watrix is the world's only gait recognition surveillance provider IPVM has...
Intel Presents Edge-to-Cloud Ecosystem for Video Analytics on Oct 16, 2020
Intel presented its processors and software toolkit for computer vision at...