|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Tuesday June 17, 2008,
07:57 pm ET
PETOSKEY, Michigan, Jun. 17 /Richard Anderson/ --
Small businesses all over the country are discovering a whole new universe of broadband access.
As the price of commercial-grade telecommunication services continues to drop, more and more
enterprises are starting to drop their plain old telephone service lines in favor of all-digital
T1 trunks that deliver voice and data over the same connection. These new enhancements were
made possible by the increasing pace of consolidation in the telecommunication industry along
with the increasing value bigger phone companies can provide.
Given the fact that many companies still to this day have yet to make the change to digital
SIP-trunking enabled dynamic T1s, one must ask why the delay? The value proposition that
dynamic adds and the economic benefits are there, however, the technology is slow to be
adopted by mainstream corporations. One reason for this lag is the bad reputation that
telecom companies have built for themselves through the meltdown of the industry from
2000 to 2003, when many companies either went out of business, merged with other larger
companies, or just hunkered down and weathered the storm. Now that the industry has made
great strides to stabilize by offering better rates, better products, and better customer
service, small business owners are gradually starting to listen to the presentations being
made by consultants and inside sales agents. With that increase in confidence, and with
the growing number of testimonials being offered by happy customers, businesses are becoming
less reluctant to make the jump.
To see how customers are reacting to this new product, we interviewed a series of
small business owners in Michigan who are currently using the service. One such
individual shared with us his enthusiasm for the enhanced capabilities dynamic
service offers. "When I was first contacted about the dynamic integrated T1,
I was deeply skeptical of what I was hearing. Over the course of my brief
dealings with telephone companies, all I got was less service with more cost.
Now I am happy to say that I am getting more for less, which makes for one
very happy customer."
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.
The golden age of telecommunications may be upon us, based upon our research and
recent uptick in customer satisfaction. Although the industry has years of
bad blood to overcome, recent innovations such as the dynamically configuring
T1 line are proof that progress is indeed being made.
The recent progress made by CLECs leaves us thinking in hypotheticals. "What if the
Clinton administration wouldn't have passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, requiring
RBOCs to lease their lines at reduces rates to the CLECs?" "Will the FCC continue to
enforce this law, or will it be overturned by the powerful AT&T and Verizon lobbyists?"
It is impossible to know either way, but for the time being we can just be grateful
that the industry has evolved to the point were small businesses can actually benefit
from telecommunications at an affordable rate.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
