Re: Have you heard about the "Unlocker"

["Roland" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with you that someone may have overestimated the value and volume of
sales of this unlock product. Since I don't live in the cutthroat bottom end
of the market and chase the annual recurring revenue stream, I might not
have a clear enough picture of this market. Too many times when I get an
existing account, especially DSC, it is keypad programmed to begin with and
the installer didn't think about or understand remote programming, so it was
all set to factory defaults anyway. With the cost of boards for these low
end systems dropping all the time, it seems that replacing panels is only
slightly more expensive than unlocking them. I don't know what sort of
market there will be for this item in the future. I know if a manufacturer
wanted to kill this product one way would be to offer a one for one swap of
locked for unlocked for 5 or 10 bucks, or even free if they really wanted to
get nasty. I would hate to have a business model that depended so much on
factors beyond my control.

"tourman" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1167851152.474730.65030@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Roland, I am a bit reticent to comment on this approach to unlocking
> boards, because I (and several others on the newsgroup) unlock boards
> as well. So anything I say will be (and likely should be) treated as
> biased. However, having said that, I will  offer a couple of thoughts
> on the matter.
>
> Let me make it perfectly clear, I don't know all the inner workings of
> this device, but I DO know how it achieves it's stated goal. In my
> personal opinion ONLY, this approach applies too much brute force to be
> universally safe for the board. Those who stand to gain by doing it
> this way will surely disagree of course. But whatever the truth may be,
> and for anyone choosing to do it this way, I would STRONGLY suggest you
> check the dialers after doing it, to make sure the board will still
> communicate. Any "active" defaulting method always poses risks. This
> device, if it proves to work, will only work with selected models and
> board versions, and will not work universally (I think they say that
> somewhere on their site). Plus it is expensive given that sending
> boards away in bulk only costs $15 a board (in my case only, not sure
> what Jim charges for bulk orders). And with the huge supply of
> defaulted boards I keep in stock (speaking for myself only), I will
> often give the client another board free of charge, if his board comes
> in defective to start with. But it does mean no changing of boards for
> the installer, and makes the service immediately available. This could
> be quite valuable for any small company who only comes upon a locked
> board on rare occasion. But if it does prove successful, it could
> encourage those who lock boards unjustly (as opposed to those who use
> the feature properly), to do so with more enthusiasm.
>
> I am very surprised that anyone would spend the R&D on such a device
> with such little anticipated payback. I don't know what it cost them to
> develop this product, but I suspect they may have fooled themselves and
> their financial backers with an overly optomistic business plan and
> forecast. Board unlocking has never been a big moneymaker, and likely
> never will be. Even doing it in bulk, and considering all the time and
> monies spent, my profit levels are marginal at best. Speaking again
> only for myself, I get my satisfaction out of doing it by knowing I am
> helping some poor slob save HIS board, and preventing an unethical
> company from extorting a client !!  Profit is a distant second - so far
> it's just covered my costs !!
>
> I have the email addresses of the 2500 alarm companies across Canada
> (inluding a separate list of companies in Eastern Ontario which are the
> only ones I service), but decided that to send them an email message
> would likely be regarded as spam, so I and my Western based friend
> decided up front not to do so. I only got into learning to do it
> because of local abuse of the locking feature, and because I like a
> personal challenge. I am hoping to expand this service into boards by
> GE, Caddx and the Concord line -  time,  demand and inclination
> dependant of course. However, once I am out of the alarm business and
> my son takes over, this service (at least through me) will no longer be
> available. At that point, I will bulk ship my equipment to either Jim
> Rojas or my western based friend free of charge for them to add to
> their equipment resources as they see fit. And since I will be spending
> winters in Florida from now on, I may just deliver it to Jim....but
> it'll cost him a days fishing !!!..))  But that eventuality is still
> several years away.....
>
> I did have one semi serious offer to sell this capability several years
> ago, but refused and always will. I gave my word early on I wouldn't
> divulge what I know, and I will never  break that trust. If this makes
> me a sort of sanctimonious sounding "judge, jury and executioner" by
> default, then so be it.!! If anyone takes offence to my maintaining
> that relative exclusivity, tough shit !!!
>
> I genuinely hope the company selling the product IS successful. I
> admire anyone who takes an entrepreneurial approach to business, even
> when the driving motive is purely financial. I doubt that it will ever
> affect mine, Action Jackson's, or Jim Rojas's business in unlocking
> boards, such as things are. But I  hope these folks have done their
> forecasting homework !!
>
> BTW, to comment on your questions, I doubt that the alarm manufacturers
> could or would bother with objections other than perhaps taking a cheap
> shot at it by scaring them with a lawyer's letter !!  And you'll have
> to take my word for this, there is NOTHING they can do to prevent
> unlocking their panels, although they might be able to block this
> specific device on the short term.
>
> The world is changing through the wide reach of the internet. Where
> there is a will, someone will step in to fill the void. Such is life
> today. I'm sure the manufacturers are smart enough to see that. Besids,
> any efforts to stop this sort of thing would be like "plugging a dike
> with your finger"...:))
>
> Manufacturers, being the big companies they are by nature, unless it
> starts to impact on their sales, the whole thing would be looked at
> like "a fart in a windstorm...a tiny noise but no smell !!"
>
> R.H.Campbell
> Home Security Metal Products
> www.homemetal.com
>
>
>
>
> Roland Moore wrote:
>> Do you think that manufacturers will begin to make the lock out feature
>> more
>> robust and harder to unlock in the future?
>> Have you received any feedback from any manufacturers? Or their lawyers?
>>
>> Do you live in Carlsbad Norm?
>> I am very familiar with that area, or I used to be at least
>> .
>> "Norm Mugford" <1alarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:gjNmh.39438$3v6.35157@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Received this email this morning about this product.
>> > Anyone heard about it?
>> >
>> > The TAKE-OVER Solution You've Been Waiting For
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Reduce Your Labor Costs
>> >
>> > Acquire new accounts for as little as $19.95
>> >
>> > No more pulling panels off the wall
>> >
>> > Reset locked codes in less than 30 seconds
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > The "Instant Unlocker" is scheduled to arrive from our factory on
>> > January
>> > 15. For details, please go to
>> >
>> > www.instantunlocker.com or call 888-869-4737.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dave Castle
>> >
>> > ABT, Inc.
>> >
>> > 5817 Dryden Place, Suite 104
>> >
>> > Carlsbad, CA 92008
>> >
>> > Toll: 760-438-4693
>> >
>> > Toll Free: 888-869-4737
>> >
>> > Fax: 760-438-8790
>> >
>> > Mobile: 619-504-7793
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Norm Mugford
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>> > http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>> >
>