 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Thursday June 26, 2008,
06:16 pm ET
SEAMAN, Ohio, Jun. 26 /Daniel Johannesburg/ --
For many small to medium size businesses, higher productivity with relation to their broadband
and voice services is just around the corner. Thanks in part to the recent price reduction trend
in the industry, carriers have deemed it necessary to consolidate in order to offer more services
at a lower cost than their rivals. Overlapping networks have been consolidated into leaner, more
feature-rich versions of their previous selves, dramatically lowering the price small businesses
pay for the popular dynamic integrated T-carrier (T-1) lines that combine local voice and
high-speed Internet service into one connection.
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.
To illustrate the types of decisions that small business owners are faced with
on a daily basis, we interviewed Glenda Probst, small business owner in Los
Angeles, California, about her recent move to a dynamic integrated T-1.
"I was in a quandary about how to go about expanding the number of voice
lines to my business. Before making the move to a dynamic integrated line,
I was using POTs lines. After the fifth line, my bill was above $300/month,
not including my $100/month DSL connection. Now, I have 12 pure digital
voice lines, 1.5 MB of broadband, and I pay under $400 for it. It was a major
upgrade in service with a reduction in total price. I only wish I'd learned
about this product sooner."
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.
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.
Will this train of innovation, lower prices, and services that add value to SMB's continue
to roll down the tracks of progress? It's all up to our government - and which political
party controls the FCC. Without the deregulation act of 1996, we would have never known
just how much the CLECs were capable of.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
