T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Grandview

Momentum Builds for CLECs

Tuesday October 14, 2008, 03:50 pm ET

CEDAR HILLS, Utah, Oct. 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.

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.

The question remains, if this new technology is so progressive, why did it take over five years to gain broad appeal to SMB's across the country? One industry analyst from the Telecommunications Research Institute observed that many customers who consume commercial-grade phone service became very untrusting of telecom providers after the Internet bubble burst in 2000 and the MCI bankruptcy proceedings full of allegations of fraud and embezzlement. After all, no customer wants to come to work one day just to find out that their connection to the outside world has been shut down due to financially unstable service providers not being able to run a profitable or ethical business. Now, due to a series of acquisitions and mergers, the "survivors" are offering great products at rates that SMB's can't continue to ignore. The CLEC's and Bells are quickly gaining traction with the very important demographic.

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. But how much longer will we continue to see improved technology, services, and prices? It's all in the hands of the Federal Communications Commission, as they have the power to sqwash the CLECs by proxy. No wonder AT&T and Verizon are the two biggest lobbying powers in Washington. It makes you wonder what kind of services they would be able to offer had they plowed that money into R&D instead of politics.