|
Integrated T1 Progress Report
Friday June 12, 2009,
08:10 pm ET
CEDAR HILLS, Utah, Jun. 12 /Patrick Oborn/ --
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.
Oregon is a place that we found was a hot spot for small business owners
making the move over to dynamic T-1 lines. One business owner that we interviewed
gave glowing reviews of his move to TelePacific's "OnePac" dynamic product.
Keith Gray explained "I used to have a regular integrated T1 with 10 voice
lines and 14 data channels. When no one was using the phone in my office,
we were limited to just 896 KB of bandwidth. After searching on the Internet
for better options, I found that I could reduce my price from $850/month to
$500/month, and at the same time have 14 voice lines and 1.5 mbps of broadband.
I didn't take long for me to pull the trigger and make the change."
One might think that, given the cost - benefit analysis of the integrated T1 value
proposition, more businesses would be changing over to the new platform. However,
the rate of adaptation is rather slow. Rob Butler, head of the Telecommunications
Research Institute, thinks that "phone companies have a problem with trust amongst
their user base. For many years, customers have dealt with increasing rates, long
hold times, and frustration in general. Now, it appears, the ice is finally starting
to melt and customers are opening themselves up to new technology.
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.
Hopefully the CLECs can continue to push the boundaries of innovation and economics.
The only thing that can keep them from the promise land is the gatekeeper of competition:
the Federal Communications Commission, and the huge Bells (AT&T and Verizon - that's you)
who make it a point to spend more money lobbying in Washington DC than Exxon Mobile.
Until deregulation allowed smaller, hungrier telecommunications companies the
ability to compete, the United States was stuck with technologies that were quickly
becoming out of date. Now that the Bells actually have to innovate to keep up with
the smaller CLECs, customer everywhere are reaping the benefits.
|
|
|
