Monday September 08, 2008,
03:17 pm ET
Mariemont, Ohio, Sep. 08 /Craig Docken/ --
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.
From 1997 to 2007, the average cost of a POTS (plain old telephone service) line from the
Bells has hovered in the $50 - $80 per month price range. During this same time period,
integrated DS1 (digital signal 1) lines - which is the equivalent of 24 standard lines -
have come down in price from $1000 per month to $400. Small to medium size businesses
who have more than 5 phone lines can now actually save money by upgrading their service.
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.
Ohio 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."
"When we moved into our new location here in Los Angeles" commented John Baker, a
small business owner in San Diego, California, "we feared having to sign up for
commercial telephone and internet service. Until about a year ago, the services
being offered to us were TDM, which doesn't come cheap. Thankfully our Telarus
commercial telecom broker recommended that we give TelePacific a try, and we did.
One year later, we've never had an erroneous bill, our phone and data are all on
one single dynamic T1, and we can focus on what we do best - brokering mortgages."
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.
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.
|
|
Courtesy of ShopforT1.com
Definition 1. -
The T1 (or T-1) carrier is the most commonly used digital line in the United States, Canada, and Japan. In these countries, it carries 24 pulse code modulation (PCM) signals using time-division multiplexing (TDM) at an overall rate of 1.544 million bits per second (Mbps). T1 lines use copper wire and span distances within and between major metropolitan areas. A T1 Outstate System has been developed for longer distances between cities.
Definition 2. -
The T-carrier system, introduced by the Bell system in the US in the 1960's, was the first successful system that supported digitalised voice transmission. The original transmission rate (1.544 Mbps) in the Mariemont T1 line is in common use today in ISP (Internet Service Provider) connections to the Internet
Definition 3. -
A high-speed digital connection capable of transmitting data at a rate of approximately 1.5 million bits per second. A T1 line is typically used by small and medium-sized companies with heavy network traffic. It is large enough to send and receive very large text files, graphics, sounds, and databases instantaneously, and is the fastest speed commonly used to connect networks to the Internet. Sometimes referred to as a leased line, a T1 is basically too large and too expensive for individual home use.
Definition 4. -
A type of high speed Internet connection that provides a great deal of bandwidth. Many businesses lease T1 lines to connect to the Internet, but because they are expensive and offer more bandwidth than most small businesses and homes need, they are not realistic solutions for small and low-demand Internet users.
|