|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Integrated T1 Progress Report
Tuesday July 07, 2009,
09:57 pm ET
VAN BUREN COUNTY, Arkansas, Jul. 07 /Chris McMillen/ --
Is there a resurgence in the popularity of telecommunications providers that compares with
the late 1990's? The answer may surprise you. Since the crash of the Internet bubble,
struggling telecoms have seen Darwin in action as many companies were forced with the
choice of bankruptcy or forced consolidation. However, some companies chose the road less
traveled: innovation. By offering customers more for less, many small to medium size
business customers are finding that they can upgrade to integrated T1 service for the
same cost of five regular phone lines.
According to a recent study conducted by PK Communications Telecom Brokers Inc., the average
cost of a POTS (plain old telephone service) line serviced by the Bells (AT&T, Verizon,
and Qwest) have changed very little over the 10 year span from 1996, the year the
Clinton Administration signed into law the Telecommunications Act, to 2006. The real
change in the industry came in the T-carrier class of products, where customers can
get up to 1.5 Mbps of bandwidth and 24 digital phone lines all in one package. Some
CLECs like XO, TelePacific, Nuvox, One Communications, and even Covad are now offering
rates well below the $550/month level, making the change seem like a no-brainer to
thousands of customers.
"The marriage of lower price points and feature-rich T-1 services have made it so that
customers can now get more bang for less buck" observed Kent Stallions, telecom expert
at PK Communications. "The good old days of the Bells charging people $50/month for
regular POTs lines without them having another alternative are over. With the advent
of sub-$450 dynamic integrated T1 service, businesses are able to get up to 1.5 Mbps
of Internet connectivity and 24 phone lines all in one package, for less than what they
pay now for 5 regular phone lines" Stallions continued.
The irony of the new small business communications revolution is that it took so long
to gain traction. The whole idea of reclaiming inactive voice channels for data applications
is not new, and was introduced by many CLEC operators over five years ago. So why did
it take so long for SMB's to adopt the technology and make the change? One might argue
that the Internet bubble burst in 2000 shook many people's confidence in telecommunications,
one of the hardest hit industries. With so many telecoms going out of business, or merging
with other small players just to stay solvent, many customers took the "wait and see"
approach before making the decision to entrust their communications with a company not
associated with Ma Bell. Now that economic Darwinism has taken hold, the remaining companies
are attracting new customers who see the benefits of the new technology without the downside
risk of loosing service or not being able to get through to customer service in the pinch.
CLECs are continuing to find new and loyal customers in the small business space, but
for how long will this trend continue? Will the RBOCs ever be able to give them a fight
on a level playing field? Only the FCC knows that answer to that question - all we can
do is be thankful for the past 12 years of progress and hope we never return to the
pre-1996 era of Telecommunications.
Evolution has lead to a better, cheaper alternative to TDM services that the Bells were
peddling for decades in a vacuum of competition. Now the industry, lead by the innovation
and great business practices of the CLECs, seems to have turned a corner - leaving the
incumbents playing catchup. Obviously, the main benefactor of all of this competition
is the small to medium size business - a segment of the market that was taken for granted
until today.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
