T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Michigan Bluff

The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service

Wednesday May 27, 2009, 02:44 pm ET

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, May. 27 /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.

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 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.

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.

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. 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.