Re: Which system is better?

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Sep 7, 7:13=EF=BF=BDpm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > This is my take on it.
>
> > In inquires on this subject that I've made in the past, it seems to me
> > that it's a cyclical catch 22 problem. =EF=BF=BDThe objection is, that =
it
> > requires more operator time which the central has to devote to each
> > call .... the increased cost would have to be passed on through the
> > dealer to the end user which puts the dealer at a disadvantage
> > compared to the competition. Even if offered as an option, the end
> > user will go for the less expensive route. The dealers don't offer it
> > because they know the end user doesn't want to pay for it so the
> > centrals don't offer it.
>
> > In my opinion though ..... if the centrals could afford to invest in
> > the process over a period of time, I think that eventually they could
> > create another revenue source.
>
> > This speaks nothing as to the actual value of "listening in"..... "two
> > way voice"
>
> > Would it actually cut down on false alarms? =EF=BF=BDI don't think it w=
ould
> > have a substantial impact but it's just a guess on my part. But you
> > could say =EF=BF=BD..... every little bit helps.
>
> > Would it deter burglaries? I don't think this would be substantial
> > either. Once the siren goes off, the sound of a voice may make the
> > intruder move a little faster but ..... depends on the nature of the
> > intruder and the circumstances of the intrusion.
>
> > Would it provide a greater "catch" ? =EF=BF=BDSame answer as above.
>
> RHC: Well, if push comes to shove, I have to admit my view of 2 way
> voice is coloured by Alarmforce and their idiotic advertising. I can't
> see how it would involve much cost at the monitoring station end;
> however, I can see lots of opportunities for confusion unless the
> operators adhere to strict "rules of engagement", any of which would
> basically nullify any real or perceived advantage to it. At the alarm
> system end, companies like DSC sell a small speaker that sits
> alongside the keypad, and you simply activate it in the programming
> options. I haven't priced it out recently, but I do seem to remember
> it was pretty inexpensive.
>
> I do know that Alarmforce have turned it into what they perceive as a
> major marketing advantage. And their customers are well sold on his
> rubbish !! They seem to honestly believe it when he peddles his
> bulls*it..." if you don't use Alarmforce, you've wasted your money on
> anything else". But I've also had other people mention the concept
> right out of the blue as a pretty good idea for an alarm system, so
> I'd really like to hear from a monitoring station about this.-

The main objection for centrals is that incoming alarm signal lines
are being tied up with voice traffic. Under normal conditions an alarm
signal comes in, reports, hangs up ..... next signal comes in,
reports, hangs up. Voice traffic on these lines means more .... and
probably many more, incoming lines are required.

"Right out of the blue" it does sound good ........ to the uninformed.
You could tell the client that you will install a telephone line and a
handset at every kepad so that when central called they could talk to
the operator. They'd say no.
BUT ..... you tell them that when the alarm goes off an operator will
speak to them out of a little box ...... now THAT"S different.

In my opinion .... when you get right down to the nitty
gritty ......It's just glitz and easy to sell to the uninformed.

Lookit how far Sonitrol has gone using this idea.