Skip to main content

Home Security Providers Under an Attack


Home security monitoring revenues are still the financial bedrock of the U.S. residential security industry, constituting 75 percent of all revenue, according to a new market study.

This new report from Parks Associates finds the number of monitored security households intending to cancel their service is only 4-8 percent higher than normal due to the economic downturn. The report also warns that the resilience of this service category will attract new competitors.

"Traditional security providers must anticipate communications and entertainment service providers will introduce their own home monitoring systems," said Tricia Parks, CEO, Parks Associates.

"There have already been announcements in Canada and Europe for home monitoring using security as a primary application. It is reasonable to presume service providers will do the same in the U.S. market"

Parks reports the number of monitoring service subscribers will not increase as quickly now as in past years due to the drop in new starts and the lower number of households moving into new residences.

However, the current base of customers shows a predilection to keep their monitoring services and may even tolerate a small fee increase.

"A slight rise in monthly fees, such as from $25 to $26.95, will not cause current subscribers to abandon their services," Parks said.

Security providers can use a minor fee increase to offset immediate losses due to slower market growth and increased competition. What is critical, nonetheless, is understanding the exact amount of increase that customers can bear.

Popular posts from this blog

Bold Broadband Policy: Yes We Can, America

Try to imagine this scenario, that General Motors and Ford were given exclusive franchises to build America's interstate highway system, and also all the highways that connect local communities. Now imagine that, based upon a financial crisis, these troubled companies decided to convert all "their" local arteries into toll-roads -- they then use incremental toll fees to severely limit all travel to and from small businesses. Why? This handicapping process reduced the need to invest in building better new roads, or repairing the dilapidated ones. But, wouldn't that short-sighted decision have a detrimental impact on the overall national economy? It's a moot point -- pure fantasy -- you say. The U.S. political leadership would never knowingly risk the nation's social and economic future on the financial viability of a restrictive duopoly. Or, would they? The 21st century Global Networked Economy travels across essential broadband infrastructure. The forced intro...