T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Stark

The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service

Friday May 15, 2009, 08:59 am ET

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, May. 15 /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.

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.

Ultimately it all comes down to basic economics. Whenever a technology can offer more features for less money that what businesses are currently paying, it's just a matter of time before the flood gates open up with companies wanting to adapt the new standard. According to the Telecommunications Research Institute, headquartered in Miami, Florida, the mass migration to dynamic integrated service offerings is only being held back by a lack of education and/or the ability of carriers to reach their target market. "Most people are leery of advertising and solicitations by phone company salesman." comment Bill Bradley, analyst.

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.

Will this train of innovation, lower prices, and services that add value to SMB's continue to roll down the tracks of progress? It's all up to our government - and which political party controls the FCC. Without the deregulation act of 1996, we would have never known just how much the CLECs were capable of. 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.