Re: Commercial Alarm - help

[J. Sloud <jsloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 28 Oct 2005 19:20:01 -0700, "Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>J. Sloud wrote:
>> On 28 Oct 2005 05:00:53 -0700, "Al Colombo"
>> <securitymission@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> >If you're concerned about false alarms, I believe one of the biggest
>> >problems on the consumer side is the mentality of "price shopping."
>> >The cheapest alarm system is not necessarily the best, just as the most
>> >expensive may not be the best either.
>> >
>>
>> Let's take a look at the false alarm problem from 20,000 feet.  I'm of
>> the opinion that almost all residential and the majority of burglar
>> alarm systems are a waste of money.  Name another product that has a
>> 99%+ failure rate.  It wouldn't be tolerated.
>>
>> If the average consumer knew the astronomical false alarm percentages,
>> the ridicuously low police apprehension rate, and the general
>> perception of law enforcement about electronic burglar alarms, nobody
>> would be buying this stuff.  This entire industry is based on a false
>> sense of security.
>>
>> It doesn't have to be this way, but until false alarm ordanances and
>> no response policies force change, there will be none.
>>
>
>
>If I didn't know better, I'd say that your post was made by someone who
>didn't have a clue about the alarm installation business. Addtionally,
>I'd guess that you don't have much to do with residential or with the
>actual installation of systems or actually selling or talking to the
>end users. No insult intended but it sounds as if you've obtained all
>of your information about the alarm industry from reading articles in
>the newspapers.

I've been in this business for a long time.  I've worked in the field
as a resi installer, a sales rep, a first line manager, etc.  Part of
my job is to do market analysis and determine where opportunities are
for product development.  I've been involved in ADT's False Alarm
Dispatch Elimination (FADE) initiative, which is the largest effort
currently underway by any company to actual do something about the
problem.  I've spoken to focus groups and hundreds of individual
customers from our smallest BA customer to multisite national
accounts.

Bottom line is you can blame the consumer because it's easy.  The
problem is that most of you guys make a living selling and installing
residential burglar alarms.  It's tough for you to look at the big
picture.  Looking at the entire electronic security industry, growth
lies outside of the residential intrusion detection segment.  It would
be wise to consider the big picture.  The AHJ's are figuring out that
99% failure is costing them big money.  No response and third party
verification is coming to an area near you.

>
>Video hmmmm?
>Yep, I can just see it now.
>
>Yes Mrs Sloud. I'm proposing that we put cameras in your home so that
>if your alarm trips, we'll be able to look in your house and see if
>it's an actual break in or not. Annnnd of course, your bedroom is the
>most likely place that any intruder would go, so we're going to put TWO
>color cameras with remotely controled PTZ, in there...... OK?
>
>What's that you say? Can't we just turn them on and look in anytime we
>want to?
>
>WHY OF COURSE NOT! ....... Honest, Mrs Sloud, they only turn on when
>the alarm trips. Do you really think that ANYONE would do something
>like that?
>
>Oh ................ you do?

No that's Sonitrol's gig with their microphones.  In many areas,
residential electronic security is going to require third party
verification.  Consumers will have to pay for this service. Obviously,
the video solution is better suited to business/ government apps.  The
point of intelligent video is to eliminate false positives before they
are reported as alarms.  This technology could eventually make it to
the resi market.  Video verification is something else entirely.
Don't confuse the two.