Arlo|Smart Home Security|Wireless HD Security Cameras

Re: Subscription costs.

Reply
Discussion stats
  • 6 Replies
  • 781 Views
  • 2 Likes
  • 4 In Conversation
Mavrrick
Luminary
Luminary
So it appears today one of the other major cloud based security camera companies updated there pricing plans and it kills Arlo's offerings.

Simply put it is whole home coverage, not per camera and the second teir includes CVR at $12 per month. We can't even gef 5 cameras and cvr on one camera for less then $20 a month. Strongly considering shifting to the other provider simply because of the subscription costs.
Ozphoenix
Apprentice
Apprentice

The latest firmware update has made our picture so pixelated its useless. The only way to get the picture right again is to pay the subscription, and its expensive compared to other providers. 

Model: VMC4030 | Arlo Pro Wire-Free Camera
StephenB
Guru Guru
Guru

@Ozphoenix wrote:

 The only way to get the picture right again is to pay the subscription.


Interesting conspiracy theory, but in my experience untrue.  I have two Pro2 cameras on a subscription, and two other Pro2s that aren't.  Video quality is the same on all four.

 

I agree there is something wrong with video quality at the moment.  

SteelArlo
Aspirant
Aspirant

I so agree with you on the prohibitive subscription cost that we are expected to pay for. I am happy to bin the whole system and advise people against these products. 

Mavrrick
Luminary
Luminary

The thing is i don't exactly want to bin the Arlo System. What I would like is for them to simply adjust pricing to be more inline with  other industry leaders. They need to not ignore other companies like Nest and Ring that have much more reasonable pricing. 

 

At some point the subscription costs of running the cameras outweighs the cost of replacing the system. 

 

Lets be honest in that other then resolution of the cameras, Arlo doesn't technically offer anything above the others. Also when you consider how much space the video actually takes up they are making a killing for storage retention. 

SteelArlo
Aspirant
Aspirant

I’ve been I contact with the team at Arlo they are unwilling, not unable, to alter the cost of the subscription plans. 

I don’t want to bin this product either but I am unwilling to keep stressing about it anymore. 
I would be happy if the non subscribers would have the same functionality without the cloud storage option only. This could lower the cost of the subscription too. 

Mavrrick
Luminary
Luminary

I totally get that. Though i know allot of folks don't like it, the Local storage access on the new hubs has alleviated allot of my concerns. I am a big advocate in only subscribing to the services you need. I have recently found a need for CVR and that is what is triggering me to look at this more. 

 

Arlo needs to create value  for their subscriptions. That isn't done  by crippling our ability to use their product but by the added real  value for of their smart functions. I will likely cut down my subscription to just a few cameras and CVR on one. Then use the rest with local storage. 

 

With that all said. I just exactly pointed out why Arlo may not want to try to do this. They may not want to dedicated any more resources then needed to get us to acceptable usage case. Lets say I downgraded my account for Arlo Smart to only what i needed. I would basically be about the same price as 1 camera and CVR on one camera.

 

The problem is with that being the minimum i would like it doesn't provide me a reason to stick with Arlo. It actually gives me reasons to keep from getting any new cameras and start to phase them out as i upgrade to other updated camears that are more affordable. As a matter of fact, i could  sell my doorbell and 1 inside camera  and save $1 a month,