1 | P a g e

T S N . L L C

8 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2

TSN.LLC

Recent advances in the areas of wireless communication and sensors have led to a decline in prices for smart technologies despite devices being more powerful and reliable now. Nevertheless, the widespread application as well as the functional range of sensor and wireless communication technology in residential buildings is still limited. This paper discusses the role of smart prevention technologies within this emerging domain using the example of smoke detectors. The research discusses costs, barriers for wide-spread use, and success factors of smart smoke detectors and proposes how to market them.

Marketing Plan for Smart Smoke Detector

2 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Executive Summary

Since the beginning of civilization, fire has been a large hazard facing communities. During the year 2005 in the

United States there were over 1,602,000 fires causing 10.6 billion dollars in property loss and 3,675 casualties. These

numbers seem large, but they have declined from previous years. It is also important to consider that there are over

300 million people in the United States and 3,675 casualties is a small percentage number compared to the

population. The businesses that supply products and services are vulnerable to fire. Production and dispersion of

items require storage and production facilities, all of which are at risk. When fires occur, there is usually one of two

outcomes; loss of property and productivity or quick, decisive action resulting in minimal loss. With a small fire, the

fire department must be notified, detection and suppression systems must be reset, and insurance companies most

likely become involved. When taking downtime into account, a small fire quickly escalates into a costly situation.

There are systems that can be used in conjunction with fire suppression, namely heat detection and smoke detection.

Some of these products are precise enough to detect microscopic smoke particles in large quantities of air. This

particular field of smoke detecting sensors has boomed to such a level that we have recently witnessed systems

which use optical detectors to sense the presence of smoke particles as low as 0.005 percent obscurity per meter,

compared to the average 2 percent obscuration per foot. At present, these high sensitivity detectors are found in

commercial and industrial buildings where suppression can be costly. The best option is human intervention before a

smoldering or overheat condition can progress to a fire. The rise of market awareness and concern over fire related

safety could cause an increase in the market for these high quality ASD detectors. The intent of this report is to

analyze possible markets for high end ASD detectors and doing a competitive analysis of presently available smoke

detectors.

The entire Marketing Analysis for smart smoke detector is based on the major findings and observations from the

recent telephone surveys including, 2008 & 2010 surveys conducted for NFPA by Harris and a Consumer Product

Safety Commissions (CPSCs) 2004-2005 survey. Both these found that 96-97% of the surveyed U.S. households reported having at least one smoke alarm. Some of the major findings are listed below and a detailed analysis of the

same has been done in later part of this report.

Almost two-thirds of home fire deaths resulted from fires in properties without working smoke alarms.

In 2005-2009, smoke alarms were present in almost three-quarters (72%) of reported home fires and sounded in half

(51%) of the home fires reported to U.S. fire departments. Homes include one- and two-family homes, apartments or

other multi-family housing, and manufactured housing. More than one-third (38%) of home fire deaths resulted from

fires in which no smoke alarms were present at all. One-quarter (24%) of the deaths were caused by fires in

properties in which smoke alarms were present but failed to operate. Smoke alarms operated in fires that caused

roughly one-third (37%) of the deaths. One percent of the deaths resulted from fires that were too small to activate

the smoke alarm.

Smoke alarm failures usually result from missing, disconnected, or dead batteries.

When smoke alarms should have operated but did not do so, it was usually because batteries are missing,

disconnected or dead. People are most likely to remove or disconnect batteries because of nuisance activations.

Sometimes the chirping to warn of a low battery is interpreted as a nuisance alarm.

Half of the households surveyed in a 2010 Harris Poll done for NFPA reported they had smoke alarms in their

kitchen. Two out of every five (43%) households reported their smoke alarms had gone off at least once in the past

year. Almost three-quarters (73%) said the activation was due to cooking. Eight percent mentioned low battery

chirps.

If a smoke alarm in the kitchen is sounding too often, the problem could be solved by moving the smoke alarm.

Unless designed specifically for the area, all smoke alarms should be at least 10 feet away from cooking appliances.

If space requires you to have a smoke alarm within 10-20 feet of the kitchen stove, install either a photoelectric

alarm or an alarm with a hush feature that can be temporarily silenced without disabling the alarm. Smoke alarms

3 | P a g e T S N . L L C

should be tested at least once every month to ensure that both the batteries and the units themselves are still working.

Replaceable batteries should be replaced in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, at least once every year.

In one-fifth of all homes with smoke alarms, none were working.

In 1992, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) sent surveyors to peoples homes to find out how common smoke alarms were and what portion of these devices were working in the general population's homes. In

one of every five homes that had at least one smoke alarm installed, not a single one was working. Including homes

without smoke alarms and homes with only non-working alarms, one-quarter of U.S. households do not have the

protection of even one working smoke alarm. In follow-up visits after smoke alarm installation programs, typically a

substantial portion of the installed alarms were not working. Unfortunately, the 1992 CPSC study with home visits

and smoke alarm tests, has not been done again at a national level.

Most homes do not yet have the protection recommended in recent editions of NFPA 72.

Both the 2007 and 2010 editions of NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code require smoke alarms in

every bedroom, outside each sleeping area, and on every level. They should also be interconnected so that when one

sounds, they all sound. New homes should have hardwired smoke alarms. Most homes do not yet have this level of

protection. A 2010 Harris Interactive survey done for the NFPA found that roughly two out of every five households

had smoke alarms in all bedrooms. Only one-quarter of all homes had interconnected smoke alarms.

Most homes still have smoke alarms powered by batteries only.

In the 2009 American Housing Survey (AHS), almost two-thirds (65%) of the respondents who reported having

smoke alarms said their alarms were powered by batteries only, slightly more than one-quarter (28%) said their

alarms were powered by electricity and batteries, and 8% had alarms powered by electricity only. For many years,

NFPA 72 has required smoke alarms in new construction to be hardwired with battery backup. Yet the AHS found

that in more than one-third (36%) of homes less than five years old that had working smoke alarms, the smoke

alarms were powered by battery only. The death rate per 100 reported fires is twice as high in fires with smoke

alarms powered by batteries as it is in fires with hardwired smoke alarms. To be effective, the codes must be adopted

and enforced.

CPSC found that households that had fires had somewhat less smoke alarm protection.

The CPSCs 2004-2005 National Sample Survey of Unreported Residential Fires asked about all fires, including incidents that were not attended by the fire service. Based on respondents reports, 82% of the households that had unreported fires and 84% of non-fire households had smoke alarms on every level. Less than one-quarter (22%) of

fire households had smoke alarms in all bedrooms. In contrast, almost one-third (31%) of non-fire households had

the devices in all bedrooms. Thirteen percent of the fire households and 19% of the non-fire households had

interconnected smoke alarms.

CPSC study also showed how important interconnected smoke alarms were in providing early warnings.

When interconnected smoke alarms were present, they operated in half (53%) of the incidents and provided the only

alert in one-quarter (26%) of the fires. When the smoke alarms were not interconnected, they operated in only one-

quarter (27%) of the fires and provided the only alert in 8%. In many cases, people are in the room or nearby when a

fire starts and notice it before the smoke alarm sounds. In cases where the smoke alarms provided the only alert, the

occupants had not been aware of the fire until the smoke alarm sounded. When smoke alarms did not operate, it was

typically reported that smoke did not reach the alarm

4 | P a g e T S N . L L C

People 55 or older were more likely to have smoke alarms that were more than 10 years old.

NFPA has long recommended that smoke alarms be replaced every ten years. The previously mentioned 2010 Harris

Interactive survey found that among households with smoke alarms, 12% of respondents of all ages and 17% of

those at least 55 years old reported that their smoke alarms were more than ten years old.

A 2008 Harris survey, also done for NFPA, asked for perceptions of how often smoke alarms should be replaced.

Only 12% reported that smoke alarms should be replaced every 10 years. One-third (35%) simply did not know or

refused to answer the question. Four percent thought these devices never need replacing. Roughly two in five believe

that smoke alarms should be replaced at least every 4-6 years, if not more often. Some of the confusion about how

often smoke alarms should be replaced is likely due to different recommendations for replacement schedules of

devices that detect smoke and carbon monoxide. Manufacturers of carbon monoxide alarms and combination

smoke/carbon monoxide alarms often recommend more frequent replacement.

Fire Protection Research Foundation study found that strobe lights, used alone, were ineffective in waking

people who were hard of hearing.

The Fire Protection Research Foundation studied the waking effectiveness of different types of alarm signals for

various high risk groups. The authors of the 2007 report found that a loud low frequency square wave auditory signal

was most effective in waking those with moderate to severe hearing loss. This signal performed better than bed or

pillow shakers and strobe lights. Strobe lights, when used alone, were not effective in waking this population. The

2010 edition of NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, requires audible notification appliances used in

bedrooms for those with mild to severe hearing loss to produce a low frequency signal. Another new provision

requires tactile notification appliances in addition to strobes for individuals with profound hearing loss. These

provisions will take effect immediately upon adoption of the new code.

Progress has been made but more work is needed.

The households with smoke alarms that dont work now outnumber the households with no alarms by a substantial margin. Any program to ensure adequate protection must include smoke alarm maintenance. In the 2010 Harris poll,

only one in five respondents reported testing their smoke alarms at least once a month. Although most homes have at

least one smoke alarm, many homes do not have a unit on every floor. It is easy to forget that a smoke alarms sole function is to sound the warning. People need to develop and practice escape plans so that if the alarm sounds, they

can get out quickly. Because smoke alarms alert occupants to fires that are still relatively small, some people attempt

to fight these fires themselves. Unfortunately, some of these attempts are unsuccessful due to either rapid fire spread

or inappropriate methods of fire control. Meanwhile, precious escape time is lost.

Follow safety tips.

The Educational Messages Advisory Committee (EMAC) to NFPAs Public Education Division developed the following tips for the testing and maintenance of smoke alarms. A condensed list is below.

Choose a smoke alarm that bears the label of a recognized testing laboratory.

Install a smoke alarm in every bedroom, outside each sleeping area, and on every level of your home, including the basement.

For the best protection, interconnect all smoke alarms throughout the home. When one sounds, they all sound.

Replace all smoke alarms, including alarms that use 10-year batteries and hard-wired alarms, when they are 10 years old or sooner if they do not respond properly when tested.

Test your smoke alarms at least every month, using the test button or an approved smoke substitute and clean the units, both in accordance with the manufacturers instructions.

5 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Smoke alarms with non-replaceable (long-life) batteries are designed to remain effective for up to 10 years. If the alarm chirps, warning that the battery is low, replace the entire smoke alarm.

For smoke alarms with any other type of battery, replace batteries at least once a year. If that smoke alarm chirps, replace only the battery.

An ionization smoke alarm is generally more responsive to flaming fires and a photoelectric smoke alarm is generally more responsive to smoldering fires. For the best protection, or where extra time is needed to

awaken or assist others, both types of alarms, or combination ionization and photoelectric alarms, are

recommended

Opportunities & Issue Analysis:

1) Home Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance

a) Presence and Operation in Fires

i) 24 out of 25 homes surveyed by phone now have at least one smoke alarm.

In telephone surveys done for NFPA in 2004, 2008, and 2010, 96% of all households reported having at

least one smoke alarm. The growth in home smoke alarm usage is shown in Figure 1. From 1977 to

1984, the use of home smoke alarms skyrocketed. Most of these smoke alarms were single-station,

battery-operated, ionization-type devices. With this rapid growth in usage and the clear evidence from

actual fire stories and fire statistics showing the life-saving effectiveness of these alarms, the home

smoke alarm became the fire safety success story of the decade. The percentage of homes with at least

one smoke alarm has hit a plateau at 96% in the three most recent phone surveys.

6 | P a g e T S N . L L C

ii) 90% of the home fire detection devices were designed to detect smoke only.

The study shows that smoke alarms or system-based smoke detectors were the type of fire detector

reported in 90% of the home fires in which the type of fire detection was identified. An additional 6%

used a combination of smoke and heat detection. In 2%, more than one type of detection equipment was

present. Because home smoke alarms are so prevalent, the term smoke alarm is used as an all

encompassing phrase throughout this report when describing early fire warning devices or systems.

However, names of earlier studies have not been changed.

iii) Smoke alarms were present and operated in half of all reported home fires.

The discussion that follows will focus on different aspects of Table A. Table A shows estimated annual

averages of home fires reported to local fire departments in 2005-2009 by smoke alarm performance.

Fire departments responded to an estimated average of 373,900 home structure fires per year during this

f

i

v

e

-

y

e

a

r

p

e

r

i

o

d

.

7 | P a g e T S N . L L C

b) Ninety-six percent of all homes have at least one smoke alarm, according to a 2010 telephone survey. Overall, three-quarters of all U.S. homes have at least one working smoke alarm.

c) Interconnected smoke alarms increase safety In a Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) survey of households with any fires, including fires in

which the fire department was not called, interconnected smoke alarms were more likely to operate and alert

occupants to a fire. People may learn about or be alerted to a fire without hearing a smoke alarm.

When smoke alarms (interconnected or not) were on all floors, they sounded in 37% of fires and alerted

occupants in 15%. When smoke alarms were not on all floors, they sounded in only 4% of the fires and

alerted occupants in only 2%.

In homes that had interconnected smoke alarms, the alarms sounded in half (53%) of the fires and alerted

people in one-quarter (26%) of the fires.

d) Home Fires with Smoke Alarms

In reported home fires with smoke alarms:

(1) Half the alarms were powered by battery only.

(2) Two-thirds of the fatal fire injuries were caused by fires in homes with smoke alarms powered by battery only.

In fires considered large enough to activate the alarm,

(1) Hardwired smoke alarms operated 92% of the time.

(2) Battery-powered smoke alarms operated in three-quarters (77%) of the fires.

8 | P a g e T S N . L L C

e) Smoke alarms were more likely to be present and more likely to have operated in confined fires than in non-confined fires.

f) Smoke alarms sounded in one of every three fire deaths. In 2005-2009, more than one-third (37%) of reported home fires occurred in properties with either no smoke

alarms at all or no working smoke alarms. Almost two-thirds (62%) of home fire deaths resulted from fires

without the protection of a working smoke alarm. Figure 3 shows that no smoke alarms were present at all in

38% of the home fire deaths. Alarms were present but did not operate in one-quarter (24%) of the fatalities.

9 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Operating smoke alarms were present in roughly one-third (37%) of the home fire deaths. In 1% of the

deaths, the fire was too small to trigger the smoke alarm.

g) Half of the smoke alarms in reported home fires were powered by batteries only.

Figure 5 show that overall, when smoke alarms were present, they were battery-powered in half (50%) of the

reported home fires and two-thirds (68%) of the home fire deaths. The smoke alarms were powered only by

batteries in two of every five (41%) reported home fires with confined fire incident types and three of every

five (60%) non-confined home fires.

Hardwired smoke alarms were found in almost half (45%) of the reported home fires and one-quarter (26%)

of the fatal fire injuries that occurred when smoke alarms were present. Hardwired smoke alarms were

present in more than one-third (36%) of the non-confined home fires and half (52%) of the home fires with

confined fire incident types. Hardwired alarms include those with and without battery backup.

Table 5 and Figure 6 show the percentage of smoke alarms operating in fires considered large enough to

activate the alarm. When present and the fire was large enough to trigger the device, smoke alarms overall

operated in 85% of the fires. Battery-powered smoke alarms had the smallest percentage operating (77%),

and hardwired alarms with battery backup (94%) the highest. For all power sources, higher percentages of

smoke alarms operated in confined fires than in non-confined fires.

10 | P a g e T S N . L L C

h) Almost two-thirds of smoke alarms in the 2009 American Housing Survey were powered by batteries.

In 2009, the American Housing Survey (AHS) asked about working smoke alarms, smoke alarm power

sources, and, for smoke alarms powered by batteries alone or by both electricity and batteries, whether the

batteries had been replaced within the past six month.

Table 6 shows that 94% of the respondents in occupied housing units reported working smoke alarms. This

figure seems implausibly high. The Smoke Alarm Harris Poll done for NFPA in 2010 found that 96% of

homes reported having smoke alarms regardless of whether they were working. It is likely that the AHS did

not ask for any testing or verification to be sure that smoke alarms were actually working. For that reason,

the other AHS results are presented as results about smoke alarms without mentioning whether they are

working.

The AHS found majority of households in all types of circumstances reported this protection. Smoke alarms

were reported to be less common in two groups:

i) Hispanics (89%);

ii) Households with income below the poverty line (90%)

In contrast, 98% of respondents in homes that were four years or less old reported having smoke alarms.

Almost two-thirds (65%) of the respondents with smoke alarms reported that the units were powered by

batteries only, one-quarter (28%) by electricity and batteries, and 8% by electricity only.

i) Homes built since 1980 are more likely to have hardwired smoke alarms.

Codes such as NFPA101, Life Safety Code have required hardwired smoke alarms in new construction

for years. Since 1976, new manufactured homes have been required to have hardwired A/C-powered smoke

alarms; only 38% of the manufactured homes (all ages) surveyed in the CPSC study had battery-only smoke

alarms. In the 1992 study, 81% of the homes (including apartments and manufactured homes) built before

1980 had battery-only devices; only 31% of the homes built in 1980 or later had smoke alarms powered only

by batteries. More recent statistics on reported home fires and data about all households from the 2009

American Housing Survey suggest that the percentage of smoke alarms powered by batteries has fallen to

11 | P a g e T S N . L L C

slightly less than two-thirds. The same survey found that 36% of the smoke alarms in homes less than five

years old were powered by batteries only.

j) In CPSCs 1992 National Smoke Detector Project, 20% of homes with smoke alarms had none that worked.

The National Smoke Detector Project found that in 20% of the households surveyed with at least one smoke

alarm present, none were operational. However, 46% of the respondents in households in which no smoke

alarms functioned thought that all of them were working. About 20% of the tested devices did not have

functioning power sources. These statistics reinforce the hypothesis that the 94% of homes with working

smoke alarms found in the American Housing Survey is unrealistically high.

k) Best estimates suggest that more than three-quarters (77%) of all homes have at least one working smoke alarm.

If 96% of U.S. homes surveyed by phone5 now have smoke alarms and 20% of those have non-operational

smoke alarms, (based on CPSCs field investigations), then 4% of homes have no smoke alarms at all (100%

minus 96%) and another 19% of homes have smoke alarms that do not work (20% of 96%). Therefore, three

of every four homes (77% of the homes with telephones) have at least one working smoke alarm (100%

minus 4% minus 19%). Restoring operational status to the non-working smoke alarms could have a major

impact and should be considered a priority, along with installing smoke alarms in the remaining homes that

do not have them.

l) Homes with fires had less smoke alarm protection than homes in general.

In 2004-2005, CPSC conducted a telephone survey to estimate the total number of residential fires

experienced by U.S. households, including fires that were not attended by fire departments.6 The study also

compared differences in households that had experienced fires in the previous three months with households

that had not had a fire. They estimated that U.S. households experienced 7.4 million fires per year, including

7.2 million that were not reported to the fire department.

12 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Survey findings related to smoke alarms are shown in Table 7. Figure 7 shows 97% of households that did

not have a fire (non-fire households) reported that they had at least one smoke alarm. That is slightly higher

than the 93% of households that had fires (fire households) with at least one smoke alarm. Non-fire

households reported having an average of 3.54 smoke alarms, while fire households averaged 2.92 alarms

each. Eighty-two percent of the fire households and 84% of non-fire households reported having smoke

alarms on all levels. Only 13% of the fire households and 19% of non-fire households reported having

interconnected smoke alarms. Fourteen percent of non-fire households and 8% of fire households had smoke

detection connected to a home security service.

Among fire and non-fire households combined, homes in which at least one person was under 18 were more

likely to have smoke alarms on all floors and in all bedrooms. Homes in urban areas were also more likely to

have this protection. Homes with at least one person over 65 or older or at least one smoker were less likely

to report smoke alarms in all bedrooms.

Homes with reported fires are much less likely to have smoke alarms than homes in general. As shown in

Figure 1, almost all (96%) of the respondents in Harris phone surveys done for NFPA in 2004, 2008 had at

least one smoke alarm. In contrast, more than one-quarter (28%) of reported home fires in 2005-2009

occurred in properties without smoke alarms. People who live in smoke alarm-equipped homes that have

reported fires may be more likely than people in smoke alarm-equipped homes without reported fires to have

allowed their smoke alarms to become non-operational. If having a fire is correlated with a lesser concern for

fire safety, this lack of concern might be expected to produce a lower rate of smoke alarm usage and a higher

rate of non-operational smoke alarms where these alarms were present.

m) One smoke alarm is usually not enough. Twelve percent of reported home fires were too small to activate smoke alarms that were present in 2005-

2009. Some of these fires may have been out of range of the smoke alarm. Many homes need more than one

smoke alarm for code-compliant complete protection. The 2007 and 2010 editions of NFPA 72 require

smoke alarms in all bedrooms, outside each sleeping area and at least one smoke alarm on every level of the

home. The 1992 CPSC National Smoke Detector Project found that 26% of the households surveyed had less

than one alarm per floor, which indicated too few smoke alarms for compliance with the code provisions of

the time. Additional households may have had too few smoke alarms to protect widely separated sleeping

areas on the same floor. Closed doors that delay the spread of smoke may also delay smoke alarm response

and decrease the likelihood that the signal will be heard. Audibility is discussed further later in this report.

CPSCs National Smoke Detector Project also estimated that 43% of the households had less than one

working smoke alarm per floor.

In 2010, NFPA arranged for a Harris Poll National Quorum to include questions about smoke alarms in

telephones surveys of more than 1,000 households.Table 1 shows that, based on the 96% of households with

smoke alarms,

(1) 80% reported at least one smoke alarm in a hallway;

(2) 43% had a smoke alarms inside every bedroom;

(3) 14% had a smoke alarms inside most bedrooms;

(4) Half (52%) had smoke alarms in the kitchen;

(5) One-quarter (25%) had interconnected smoke alarms;

13 | P a g e T S N . L L C

(6) 87% test their smoke alarms at least once a year;

(7) One in five (21%) test their smoke alarms at least once a month;

(8) 12% had smoke alarms that were more than 10 years old; and

(9) 17% of the respondents who were at least 55 had smoke alarms that were more than 10 years old.

The survey questions change from year to year. The 2008 survey found that 84% of households had an alarm

on every level of the home.

2) Benefits Of Smoke Alarms

a) LIVES SAVED

The risk of dying in reported home structure fires is cut in half in homes with working smoke alarms.

Figure 8 shows that in 2005-2009, the risk of death from a fire in a home that had any smoke alarms (0.61

deaths per 100 fires), regardless of whether they were working, was 36% lower than the risk in a home with

no smoke alarms at all (0.95 deaths per 100 fires). Interestingly, the death rate was substantially higher (1.93

deaths per 100 fires) in fires in which smoke alarms were present but failed to operate than in homes that had

no smoke alarms at all. Households that have deliberately disabled and/or not maintained their smoke alarms

may have different characteristics from households that have not installed smoke alarms.

Figure 8 also shows that the death rate in fires with working smoke alarms (0.52 per 100 fires) was less than

half (56% lower) the risk of death from fires that did not have working smoke alarms (1.18 deaths per 100

fires), either because no smoke alarm was present or an alarm was present but did not operate).

This is not the same as saying you double your chances of surviving a fire that is big enough to be reported to

a fire department. Ignoring fires where more than one person dies, death rates per 100 fires are the same as

percentages of reported fires that are fatal. By that formulation, people die in 0.52% of fires with a working

smoke alarm present and in 1.18% of fires with no working smoke alarm present. At first glance, these rates

seem low. However, There is clearly considerable work left to do to increase fire safety.

14 | P a g e T S N . L L C

3) Different Types of Detectors

Fire detectors are common throughout all commercial and public buildings. These detectors are usually tied

together into a larger system which will audibly and visually notify the occupants, in order to allow evacuation

of the building in a timely fashion in addition to notifying emergency services. When looking into the different

types of fire detectors, it is important to have an understanding of where these detectors are required, and where

they will be placed throughout building spaces. The difference in space usage can mean a great deal, depending

how much dust is in the air, or how often steam or smoke is released into the air in the room. There are three

types of automatic detection systems for fire alarms. They include smoke detectors, heat detectors, and infrared

detectors.

a) Smoke Detectors :

Smoke detectors are used to look for the presence of smoke within a given area. These detectors are

commonly found in commercial buildings, however they are not often found in cooking areas because

steam and smoke resulting from normal cooking activities can result in false positives. False positives

are when a detector goes off because there is dust, dirt, and/or smoke in the air, which has caused the

alarm (instead of smoke from an actual fire). Smoke detectors consist of three general types; ionization

detectors, photo-electric detectors, and air sampling detectors. All three detection methods provide

reliable detection times after combustion particles spark fire conditions.

i) Ionization Smoke Detectors : Ionization smoke detectors ionize the air making a conductive path in which the current flowing through

can be measured. A change in current caused by the presence of smoke particles will trigger the smoke

alarm. One downside to these detectors is that they can easily have a false alarm if the detector is placed

too close to a high humidity area such as a bathroom. (Apollo Fire)

ii) Photo-electric Smoke Detectors: Photo-electric smoke detectors usually contain a light source shining directly or indirectly on a photo-

electric cell. When the light is obstructed or reflected by smoke particles, the change in current on the

photo-electric cell can be measured and interpreted and used to trigger the fire alarm. Photo-electric

detectors are a better choice for steamy areas or areas where ionization could occur in the air, as this will

not create false alarms. However, these detectors are prone to false alarms if located in dusty areas or

areas influenced by outdoor conditions because dust particles can have the same effect as smoke on the

detector. (Apollo Fire)

iii) Air Sampling Smoke Detectors Air sampling smoke detectors are a newer technology which was developed in order to achieve earlier

detection of smoke particles. Air sampling detectors monitor increasing smoke levels in the air and

compare these values to preset threshold limits. These detectors can detect smoke while in the incipient

stage, allowing time for human intervention which can prevent material flame up and costly damages.

Most air sampling detectors pull air into a pipe network through openings in the ceiling. This air is

passed through a filter where smoke particulates can be separated from large dust particles. Then there is

either laser based or LED based smoke detection. These air sampling systems are able to continually

15 | P a g e T S N . L L C

monitor the smoke content of a given area, as it will keep working after it sets off the alarm. This can

provide valuable data to occupants and emergency personnel. (Vision Systems document 10947, version

01)

b) Heat Detectors:

Heat detectors are used to monitor air temperature or to detect the rate of temperature change in a given

area. These detectors are used more often found around bathrooms and kitchens. Heat detectors will not

sense steam released into the air by boiling water or by smoking food. The detector will only be

triggered if the air by the detector reaches a set threshold or by a rapid heating of the air. (McEwen,

R.H.L.)

Sprinkler heads on automatic suppression systems are also heat detectors. As a fire reaches a

sprinkler head and heats it to a set threshold, the fire will cause a metal link to melt or a piece of glass in

the sprinkler head to break. The melted link or ruptured glass causes the suppression system to release

water or other fire suppressants. A flow detector is tied to all automatic fire suppression systems, which

when triggered sets off visual and audible alarm systems. (Rohr and Hall)

c) Near-Infrared Radiation Detectors:

Near-infrared radiation detectors are new technologies which operate on the principle of apparent source

temperatures obtained from spectral radiation intensity measurements at two near-infrared wavelengths.

The system combines smoke sensors and temperature sensors. An advantage of such a system is the

system is less prone to false alarms than a conventional smoke detector. There is also an interest in the

systems due to fast response time and because most natural fires are easily distinguished by the unsteady

nature of the emitted radiation. However, the initial and maintenance costs of near-infrared radiation

detectors are more costly. (Sivathanu, Yudaya R.)

4) Market overview & Major players

The market for commercial fire alarm

systems continues to grow. These systems

provide varying functions, from those that

provide automatic fire detection and alarm,

to those that only provide manually

activated fire alarm, to monitoring fire

protection systems, such as sprinkler

systems, for alarm and supervision. It is

estimated that the market for the installation

of commercial fire alarm systems in the

United States represents $3 billion and will

continue to grow at a 3% to 5% pace. The

market covers all categories of building

occupancies; therefore it will tend to be balanced by both upward and downward trends in the individual

categories. This estimate covers eleven categories of occupancy: Assembly, Education, Health Care,

Health Care (9.98%)

Education (9.33%)Assembly (5.16%)

Office (24.34%)

Public & Other (2.24%)Religious (2.51%)Warehouse (2.89%)

Lodging (8.74%)

Manufacturing (4.72%)

Mercantile (19.17%)

Multi-Family (10.91%)

Fire Alarm System Installation Market($3 Billion)

16 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Lodging, Manufacturing, Mercantile, Mutli-Family/Apartment, Office, Public, Religious, and Warehouse,

with the largest segments being office and mercantile occupancies at just under 25% and just over 19%

market share, respectively.

The market has seen shifts over the last few years that have resulted in a net increase in the annual market.

Further development in the addressable and analog technologies has resulted in higher equipment costs

while this technology reduced installation costs, and the advent of the Americans with Disabilities Act has

resulted in increased requirements for alarm notification appliances and power supplies to support them. In

the future there will be more use of voice evacuation systems, as the requirement for their use has been

expanded to smaller assembly occupancies.

The system installations are grouped into three types

of installation activity: new building construction,

building modernization, and system upgrades. The

new building construction group represents systems

installed in new buildings and new additions to

existing buildings. Building modernization systems

are those systems which are being installed in existing

buildings that do not have systems. Systems grouped

as system upgrades are those system or component

installations performed to upgrade or replace existing

systems. New building construction represents $600

million; modernization, $1,800 million; and upgrades,

$600 million. This is an estimated requirement for

320,000 systems annually, 65,000 for new

construction, 190,000 for modernization, and 65,000

for upgrades. The modernization and upgrade of

255,000 buildings in a year may seem high, but they

only represent five percent of the countrys inventory

of commercial buildings, meaning that on average, buildings are upgraded once every twenty years.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Num

ber

of S

yste

ms

0 to 10,00010,001 to 50,000

50,001 to 200,00

Over 200,001

Building Size (sq ft)

Sy stem Upgrades

Bldg. Modernization

New Construction

Annual Fire Alarm System Installations320,000 Sytems Total

17 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Modernization is the largest portion of the activity. The

installation of full automatic fire alarm systems is a

relatively young industry compared to the age of

Americas building stock. Affordable mass produced

equipment has been available for roughly twenty-five to

thirty years, and various code requirements have been

adopted for only twenty to twenty-five years, while fifty-

five percent of Americas commercial buildings are over

twenty-five years old.

Many buildings which were constructed prior to the

adoption of modern building codes were never equipped

with fire alarm equipment. As these buildings age, they

are modernized with new modern interiors, energy

efficient glazing, and air conditioning systems. When

these buildings are upgraded for visual, environmental,

and occupant comfort, many building codes also trigger

requirements that fire alarm and fire protection systems be installed. The trigger point in many of these

codes is called substantial renovation. The substantial renovation point is a monetary point where the

money spent on voluntary modernization passes a defined threshold. After this threshold is met it is deemed

that the work on the building is not simply maintenance, and it is reasonable to expect that the fire alarm

systems and other fire protection features should be upgraded to a new building performance standard.

Factors driving upgrade requirements for existing systems are a result of market consolidation,

advancements in system technology, and codes and standards changes. Market consolidation, with some

manufacturers ceasing operation, while others have discontinued the manufacture and support of older

technology product models, has caused a void for service and replacement parts for those older systems,

thus creating a market for system upgrades. Codes have increased the requirements for systems, and

standards have changed how systems and components are to be applied, located, and tested.

Additionally, the increased market for the replacement of aging systems is a result of an increased

enforcement of system testing and intolerance for nuisance alarms by the local authorities having

jurisdiction. Enforcing testing requirements forces the discovery of failing or failed components, resulting

in system upgrades. Also many jurisdictions are implementing a fine system for repeat offenders for

nuisance alarms and for properties without a written nuisance alarm reduction policy. Some nuisance

alarms are caused by dirty detectors or aging electronics. Intolerance to these nuisance alarms by

responding fire departments pressure building owners and managers to address system root causes, typically

resulting in equipment replacement.

Systems will be installed in buildings varying in size from under 10,000 square feet of floor space to over

500,000 square feet. Suppliers will find that the amount of spending will be balanced through out the

demographics of building size, although the majority of the systems will be required for small buildings,

those less than 10,000 square feet in floor space. The smaller building system functions will be mostly

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

Annual S

pendin

g (

$ m

illio

ns)

0 to 10,000

10,001 to 50,000

50,001 to 200,00

Over 200,001

Building Size

System Upgrades

Bldg. Modernization

New Construction

Annual Spending on Fire Alarm Systems

$3 Billion

18 | P a g e T S N . L L C

combined with security systems into a single control panel, while the larger systems will be stand-alone,

full-function systems.

Although building codes require many buildings to have fully automatic fire detection and alarm systems,

some buildings are not required to have a fire alarm system at all. Some building codes do not require

occupancies such as storage and industrial to install a fire alarm system. These occupancies, however, may

be required to have sprinkler systems, and those systems are required to be supervised, and OSHA may

require them to have employee notification systems. The supervision of these sprinkler systems requires

less fire alarm equipment than complete detection and alarm systems. Generally, the devices being installed

consist of multiple flow switches and tamper switches. Also, transmission of trouble, supervisory, and fire

alarm signals to a central station is normally required. Therefore, a small fire alarm panel is installed.

The occupancies in which the largest quantity of

systems will be installed are mercantile, office, and

multi-family housing complexes. These three areas

represent over 65% of the annual systems market at

216,000 systems, 84,000 in mercantile buildings,

79,000 in office buildings, and 53,000 in multi-

family residential complexes. 175,000 of these

systems will be in buildings of less than 10,000

square feet of floor space.

The $3 billion market value is the final installed cost that building owners will pay for the systems. The

value added chain for this market includes the installation cost; the cost of installation materials such as

wire, conduit, boxes, and mounting hardware; the cost from the manufacturer of the system equipment; and

the cost from the distributor for designing the system and selling and handling the equipment.

Over half of the market value 55% will go to the

system installers, while approximately 28% will go

to the system equipment manufacturers, with the

remaining 17% being split between the distributors

of the systems and the suppliers of the installation

materials. When comparing specific systems the

installation factor is estimated to be consistent with

all sizes of systems. The other percentages will

vary, depending upon the size of the systems. The

equipment manufacturers portion will range from

34% for smaller systems to 26 % for larger systems.

The distributors portion will increase from 7% for smaller system to 9% for larger systems. As systems

become larger the distribution support activity changes from over the counter selling to include the

provision of system design and final installation checkout. The value received by the installation equipment

supplier will range from 4% to 10%, as the smaller systems utilize lower cost installation techniques.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

AssemblyEducation

Health Care

LodgingManufacturing

Mercantile

Multi-FamilyOfficePublic & Other

ReligiousWarehouse

Annual System Installations320,000 Total

Equipment Manufacturers (28.00%)

Equipment Distributors (8.00%)

Installation Material Suppliers (9.00%)

Installers (55.00%)

How the Market will be Shared

19 | P a g e T S N . L L C

The development of these estimates considered the normal use of various common system components.

These estimates indicate that fire alarm systems will annually use 2.3 million smoke detectors, 550,000 heat

detectors, 1.4 million manual stations, and 4.5 million notification appliances. They will also monitor

500,000 switches providing sprinkler and standpipe system water flow and valve tamper indications, and

400,000 air conditioning duct detectors.

The two most common distribution mechanisms for these fire alarm systems and components are through

wholesale distributors and security system alarm dealers, and engineered systems distributors. The

smaller systems tend to be primarily sold through the wholesale and security system alarm dealer channels,

while the larger systems are sold through engineered systems distributors. Estimates indicate that, on an

installed value basis, the value of the installed equipment that passes through these channels is evenly split

between these two primary channels.

As installation of fire alarm equipment is a pre-requisite but not an alternative, the industry has historically

been an even market exemplified by slow growth and conservativeness in new technology adoption. In

recent years, however, the market has seen the introduction of high-tech products that are not only efficient

but also faster. Changing end-user requirements and a greater need to minimize false alarms have resulted in

advanced products that incorporate multi-sensor technologies. The worldwide fire alarm equipment market

is highly competitive and price represents the key factor among the players in the market.

Demand for fire alarm equipment is highly price elastic, forcing manufacturers to produce high quality

products and offer them at low prices. While established majors can manage price pressures by offsetting

lower earnings through products that provide higher profits, small players would face challenges to remain

competitive. Using an ideal mix of mechanism is likely to trim down production costs and offer products at

reduced prices.

Leading players in the global fire alarm equipment market include:

Bosch Security Systems Inc

Cooper Wheelock

Fenwal Controls of Japan Ltd

Apollo Fire Detectors ltd

BRK Brands Inc(First Alert)

Xtralis ltd

GE Infrastructure

Gentex Corporation

Hochiki Corporation

Honeywell International Inc

Matsushita Electric Works Limited

Napco Security Company Inc

Nittan Company Limited

Nohmi Bosai Ltd

RSG Security Inc.

Siemens Switzerland Ltd Building

Technologies Group

Signal Communications Corporation

Spaceage Electronics Inc

Spectronics Corporation

Tyco Fire & Security

WSA Fire Systems.

20 | P a g e T S N . L L C

5) Suggested Marketing Strategies

a) Market Scope :

Since the Smoke Detector industry is presently at the maturity stage a new entrant should follow a Single

Market Strategy serving a specific spectrum of the market. This would require to serve the market whole

heartedly despite initial difficulties and by avoiding competitions with established brands. This can be

achieved by employing different combinations of product, pricing promotion and distribution strategies in

different segments. Top management commitment is needed to embrace the entire market and there should

be a strong financial position.

b) Market Entry:

Entering the market towards tail end of growth phase has only two feasible entry modes (a) Imitator & (b)

Initiator .Unlike Imitator with having Me Too products we suggest to enter the market as an Initiator with

unique product positioning and unconventional marketing mix.

c) Marketing Mix :

i) Product Design & Product Positioning Strategy:

It is advisable to place the brand in that part of the market where it will have a favorable reception

compared with competing brands. Right positioning is very important so that it can stand competition

from the toughest rival & maintain it by creating aura of distinctive products.

Suggested products design from a marketing perspective:

State-of-the-art smoke detectors are usually either optical detectors or ionization detectors, which

independently indicate a detected fire via an acoustical alarm. But smoke detectors can also be

connected with each other to propagate alarms either via cables or using wireless communication

modules. As per the prior observations a key feature of a smart smoke detector is the communication

with other smart devices including further smoke detectors, temperature sensors, cell phones or external

networks. For the short-range communication, technologies like Bluetooth or ZigBee are adequate.

However, for long range communication such as sending an alarm message to a cell phone, technologies

like UMTS, WiMax or GSM are required. As long-range communication modules are usually more

expensive than short-range solutions, it is not cost-effective to equip each smoke detector with long-

range communication capabilities. Instead, the infrastructure for smart smoke detectors relies on a

wireless communication network, which contains an uplink module to communicate alarms to the

outside world. This approach overcomes some of the significant shortcomings of state-of-the-art low-

cost smoke detectors. The integration of wireless communication capabilities in smoke detectors frees

the infrastructure from the costs and inflexibility associated with cable-based connections between

smoke detectors. The approach also makes it easier to upgrade a building with interconnected smoke

detectors while providing additional mobility to the system by permitting changes in location of each

21 | P a g e T S N . L L C

smoke detector without losing functionality. Another significant shortcoming of standalone smoke

detectors is their local acoustic alarm. To overcome this problem, a smart smoke detector is able to

communicate with external parties and to inform them about a bursting fire in order to avoid larger

damages. To keep the costs of the overall infrastructure low, a hybrid architecture is chosen where one

dedicated node in the network acts as a gateway and provides the desired long-range communication

uplink. Due to the limited communication range of wireless modules and the characteristics of in-door

communication, not all smoke detectors are able to directly communicate with the dedicated base

station. Thus in case of a local alarm, the signal needs to be propagated along the network in a multi-hop

manner to reach the communication gateway, which then calls the house owner on his cell phone or

informs approaching fire fighters about the origin of the fire. Apart from emergency situations the

communication gateway can also be used to monitor and control the status of specific smoke detectors

remotely. For example, it could constantly send information about the operational reliability of the

system to insurance companies, which can then base their fire insurance contracts on the existence and

usage of safety technology. An overview of the smart smoke detectors infrastructure is visualized in

Figure below. The figure shows a one-family house, which is equipped with a total of six networked

smoke detectors that connect to a communication gateway. A detected fire is propagated along the

detectors and the gateway informs the house owner, approaching fire fighters and the insurance

company.

22 | P a g e T S N . L L C

Multiple Products strategy:

Considering the market of Fire alarm installation it would be advisable to design multiple products with

some unique value proposition to cater to the following industry segments:

Assembly, Education, Health Care, Lodging, Manufacturing, Mercantile, Mutli-Family/Apartment,

Office, Public, Religious, and Warehouse, with the largest segments being office and mercantile

occupancies at just under 25% and just over 19% market share, respectively. The products should

complement one another in the entire portfolio. So the ideal strategy should be to have a standard

product with little modifications. Apart from apartments, office premises hotels various other industries

are listed below who could be the major consumers.

Accommodation (Apartments, Hotels, Shops

and Offices)

Correctional Facilities Clean Rooms Cold Storage Cultural/Heritage Data & Telecom Hospitals and Healthcare Insurance

Marine Nuclear Facilities Oil & Gas Portable Switch Rooms Power Generation Records Storage Transportation Wind Power Generation Warehousing

ii) Pricing Strategy:

Most of the players dealing with high-end smoke detectors are priced between $400-$600. Since the

industry is highly price elastic we suggest going for a penetration pricing for the initial phase to attain a

considerable market share. So the ideal price band should be somewhere from $300-$500 per unit. A

combination pricing can also be tested by providing a set of equipments in a package form.

iii) Distribution Strategy:

The ideal distribution strategy would be to have a Multiple channel distribution model. Products should

be made available to all the online portals that deals with home improvement products (for eg :

lowes.com, homedepot.com, doitbest.com, home-improvement-superstore.com, amazon.com etc).

This would help to target household consumers where as appointing Wholesale distributors & retailers

and engineered system Distributors would help to get bulk deals. The major volumes will be dictated by

the later one. Majority of the sales volume is in the hands of the construction companies and builders. So

in order to tap them Authorized Distribution channel set up will be the driving factor to ensure sales

volume.

23 | P a g e T S N . L L C

6) Observation & Conclusion:

From the above findings it is evident that although statistics says that 96% of households have atleast one

smoke alarm present but the demand for these equipments still remains with the changing norms and with

introduction of newer codes from the NFPA. The market has witnessed a massive growth since people are

more conscious about safety precautions. As the market is expected to grow at a pace of 3% - 5% and with

the up-gradation and modernization of old buildings, the demand for these equipments are still going to be

high.People are more inclined towards these products since the competition has eliminated the high cost

barriers. Products are easily available from $9.99 to $650 depending upon their functionalities. The key

factors in-order to succeed in these industry would be to come up with :

An unique product having perceived value to the consumers

o State of the art design having more than 2 detection mechanism

o Implanting latest technologies like ASD, CO detection, Heat sensing, Infra-red detections

ensures highest level of accuracy thereby eliminating the chances of false alarm.

o Interconnection among the smoke alarms makes all of them to sound even when smoke is

detected by a single unit.

o Hardwired as well Battery operated devices to reduce the chance of failures

o Both Short range & Long range Communication gateways like Bluetooth, Zigbee,

UMTS,WiMax, GSM should be enabled so as to inform the house owner , Fire brigade as

well as insurance company via SMS /e-mail.

o Complying to the latest norms prescribed by NFPA

o Making the product available to all the major online portals selling home improvement

products

A unique value proposition can be offered to the insurance companies :

The application of smart smoke detectors in residential buildings, is of special interest for insurance

companies. The application of more effective early detection technology has the potential to reduce

fire insurance claims. This will cause the total loss expenses for insurers to drop because of a

decreased frequency of severe burnings and a lower amount of damages per case. The emergence of

smart home safety technologies also has strategic potential for insurers, who could use smart smoke

detectors as a new link to their customers. Besides the positive effect on the combined ratio due to

reduced losses, the introduction of information technology in the relation between insurers and their

customers makes the product insurance appear more tangible and gives it a look-and-feel. This allows for a modular design of insurances, which for example consist of a household insurance,

smoke detectors, water detectors, and a burglary alarm system. The different detection systems could

be introduced step by step during the renewal of the original insurance contract. As a consequence,

insurers might use the technology to move from selling insurance contracts to selling safety, which means that they decrease the probability of damage from an accident while insuring the remaining

risk. Applying a more holistic insurance concept using smart smoke detectors has the potential to

lead to increased customer loyalty and improves the image of the insurance company, which can

24 | P a g e T S N . L L C

position itself as a prevention insurer. The application of technology also offers the chance that

customers loose the subjective impression, that they never receive any return service for the paid

insurance premiums. In addition, the technology leads to additional contact points, which are the

base for cross and up-selling processes. Insurance companies can also realize first-mover

advantages, if they integrate smart technologies in their customer relations and therefore differentiate

their product portfolio from competitors An open question for insurance companies is how to

distribute the technology amongst customers. Active distribution using the existing channels of

insurance agents is possible, although it is unclear whether insurance companies are interested in

directly providing high-tech solutions to their customers. To hide the underlying complexity of the

technology from both customers and insurance agents, third-party technology providers could

mediate between both parties.. Finally, the applied technology can act like nerve endings for

insurance companies by providing data from customers that was not available before. For example,

an insurer would be able to tell whether the infrastructure for smart smoke detectors is active at a

given moment or which detectors are broken. If an insurer states in the fire insurance contract that

claims are unjustified in case of gross carelessness, and it is assumed that powerless smoke detectors

are a gross carelessness, the insurer will not have to pay for damages if a fire occurs because the

system was not working properly. In general, data coming from smart home environments has the

potential to enable more fine-grained and risk-based ratings of insurance contracts. An insurance

company could base the rates of premiums on the application of smoke detectors. If customers are

expected to buy the technology themselves, the insurer could offer reductions in premiums as

compensation even though this might not be of interest to insurers. On the other hand, demanding

higher premiums from customers, who do not apply the technology, poses risks, that these customers

will decide to change insurers and go with a competitor instead.

Setting up the right distribution Model

In the view of meeting high sales volumes and ensuring bulk deals, appointing Wholesalers &

Engineered System Distributors will be a challenging thing

25 | P a g e T S N . L L C