T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Roseland

Flexible Products, Lower Prices

Tuesday June 10, 2008, 10:54 am ET

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, Jun. 10 /Patrick Oborn/ -- 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.

The adoption of any new telecommunications platform is never instantaneous. Many technologies, like VoIP for example, have been in the works for years without gaining much traction. Enterprises see communications as their life blood. Even though many are becoming aware of newer, cheaper mediums by which they can conduct business, the risk still outweighs the rewards in their minds. Couple the 'if it isn't broken, why fix it?' mind set with the telecom meltdown of the early 2000's and it isn't surprising that widespread adoption of new telecom services has lagged. However, the new technologies of IP-based voice systems are finally starting to gain an audience, and the chorus of satisfied customers continues to grow. As this momentum pushes forward, so does general acceptance of it viability.

At $50 to $75 per month, the average small business telephone customer could expect to pay up to $750 for just 10 regular phone lines, which come with only a standard set of features such as Voicemail, Caller ID, and Three-way calling. From 2000 to 2005, the cost of a dynamic integrated T1 line was well over $800, making it an unattractive option from a pure cost point of view. However, that paradigm has changed with the introduction of sub-$400/month price plans and features that make the old POTs lines look pre-historic.

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.

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. Once a forgotten segment of the business telecommunication landscape, small to medium size businesses are finally being serviced with products (like the dynamic integrated T1 line) at prices they can afford. Gone are the days when the Bells can shove TDM services down the collective throats of SMB's at prices that resemble a mortgage rather than a telephone service.