T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Centralia

Flexible Products, Lower Prices

Monday September 22, 2008, 10:50 am ET

DRAPER, Utah, Sep. 22 /Patrick Oborn/ -- Higher productivity for small to medium sized businesses is just around the corner thanks to commercial grade broadband services that are now being delivered at a fraction of their previous cost. Due to the ever increasing competitive marketplace and a mad dash to consolidate networks, telecoms are offering their premium business services to small businesses for a fraction of what they used to cost just a few years ago. Businesses who use more than four regular phone lines can now upgrade to dynamic integrated T-carrier circuits for the same price.

With any new advancement in technology there is usually a lag in the time it take users known as "early adapters" to try out and begin using the new services themselves. Although dynamic T1 service has been available in many US markets since 2005, it's just now that we have observed people beginning to embrace the new technology. One such business that recently changed from a voice PRI and data T1 line on to one, dynamic T1 line is Jason Oliver, a small business owner in Los Angeles, California. "When I found out that I could replace my two T1's with one single dynamic integrated circuit (offered by TelePacific Communications), I had two thoughts: 1- where do I sign, and 2- why didn't someone tell me about this sooner!"

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.

Given the fact that many companies still to this day have yet to make the change to digital SIP-trunking enabled dynamic T1s, one must ask why the delay? The value proposition that dynamic adds and the economic benefits are there, however, the technology is slow to be adopted by mainstream corporations. One reason for this lag is the bad reputation that telecom companies have built for themselves through the meltdown of the industry from 2000 to 2003, when many companies either went out of business, merged with other larger companies, or just hunkered down and weathered the storm. Now that the industry has made great strides to stabilize by offering better rates, better products, and better customer service, small business owners are gradually starting to listen to the presentations being made by consultants and inside sales agents. With that increase in confidence, and with the growing number of testimonials being offered by happy customers, businesses are becoming less reluctant to make the jump.

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. 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.