T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Neunert

CLECs Target SMBs with Dynamic T1

Friday April 17, 2009, 03:59 am ET

DRAPER, Utah, Apr. 17 /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.

Illinois 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."

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 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.

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.