I agree. It sends the message that they can't sell on the value of their brand and support alone and have to try and make false (or vague) claims about what differentiates the product. Why not just say "we found it more cost effective to OEM products in this line to give our partners easy access to a broad portfolio under a single brand and channel management structure"? Or, something along those lines.
There are legitimate scenarios where economies of scale, and handling 1st/2nd tier support directly can net you a significant discount relative to a similar/same product sold under the manufacturers own brand. Look at companies that release public financials, and you will see they tend to spend a lot on "sales and marketing" expenses, the cost of having a field team, marketing, etc., adds up quickly. Honeywell should have the buying power and channel structure to find an OEM/ODM product that they can bring to the market cost-competitively (even with all their overhead and bloat). This would of course require them to actually want to "hunt", vs. the "farming" mode they are really in.
On the one hand, I can sympathize with Honeywell's marketing team here. Acknowledging such things are awkward, at best. And I give them credit for even responding.
I will say that Honeywell probably has their hands tied legally with what they can or cannot comment on partnership wise. It's pretty common for most vendor agreements especially OEM/ODM to restrict Honeywell making a comment on the partnerships and or Honeywell legal 10 pay grades higher than the lowly marketers tying their hands for comment. Honeywell has always been upfront with us as dealer partners with the fact that they outsource a large portion of their camera manufacturing to other companies and it was obvious from the first screenshot of the 30 series cameras that they were rebranded Vivotek. I mean I won't say we're at the point of muckraking but these seem to be a lot of the same articles over and over again about UTC/Honeywell/(insert major manufacturer here) without original content. For what it's worth I've had Avigilon reps tell me they make their own NVRs when they very clearly are Dell boxes.
The reality is the surveillance and security market has become so commoditized no one wants to invest in manufacturing the edge camera devices and everyone wants to make their profit on being a transactional agent for a slight markup with a large profit center in selling software licenses and SSA's.
John, rather than just going for the low hanging fruit I would enjoy reading an article about the business economics of producing cameras in North America or Europe and how that is even feasible to be competitive in the major segments of the market at this point because the way I see it everyone is practically doing the same thing as Honeywell/UTC/Indigovision/Etc. etc. at this point spare a few companies that are running up against the ceiling of their growth and are trying to make up for it with an "end to end approach."
It's not a bad camera, honestly. Also, it isn't twice the price for less camera when it comes to Dahua pro, the Dahua images are trash; and you should be pitching to a customer or client that you are putting something in their home or business that isn't Hik. It's a start to OEM it from Vivotek and get their hand out of the cookie jar of Hik. I will commend them for any steps moving away from Dahua and Hik.
My first try at a Dahua mid grade was monumentally bad. I assume defective and it's definitely going back, but just one example issue that's probably a deal breaker - is there no option to set a post event trigger record time on the Dahuas? (Ideally, there is an "area is off limits" option such that once a person or vehicle enters a target zone, that person or vehicle is recorded for the entire time they remain in view of the cam including if they leave the zone, but that's a different question.)
This question brings up a feature set suggestion for IPVM. I don't see many details on various key firmware features in the tests, and those could influence buying decisions.