|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Friday November 14, 2008,
06:49 pm ET
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, Nov. 14 /Patrick Oborn/ --
During the 2000 Internet bubble meltdown, the telecom industry learned the hard way that
wild spending on network infrastructure was not the best approach to attracting new business
and investment. Over the past 7 years the industry, particularly the CLECs (Competitive
Local Exchange Carriers) have been focusing on building products that offer more bang
for the buck in order to compete with the Bells in their own backyards. One product that
has become the flagship offering to small to medium size businesses is the dynamic integrated
T1 line, which combines all the usefulness of 24 regular phone lines into a singe T-1
capable of delivering high-speed broadband on the same connection.
The early adapters of this new technology have realized a cost savings that helps
them be more competitive in the market space. By saving hundreds of dollars each
month, which equates to thousands of dollars per year, small businesses are able
to do more while spending less on their telecom bill. This savings allows for
hiring of additional staff, upgrading equipment, and other activities that make
the enterprise more productive and profitable. Many in the industry see the
lack of mass adoption of this new technology as just shear ignorance and/or
a lack of trust for telecom sales people.
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.
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.
With the help of super-CLECs like XO Communications, PAETEC, Nuvox, One Communications,
Cavalier Telephone, and TelePacific, small business owners everywhere now have access
to non-Bell service that is on par or better than those being offered by the former
Bells. Integrated T1s that do more and cost less have transformed into a solid beach
head for the newcomers.
|
|
|
