Recently in SIP Category

Recently I commented about how Verizon's doubling of its early termination fee to $350 makes sense as the company needs to keep investing in ensuring its network is the best in the US. I may be the only person who appreciates having a fee go up as evidenced by the noise from journalists which is not subsiding. One of my favorite writers and video producers, David Pogue of The New York Times comments today that Verizon is gouging and has a plethora of ideas the company can implement to save consumers money.

Pogue has the following and very interesting comment to share:

Why wouldn't it be a hugely profitable move to start pitching yourself as the GOOD cell company, the one that actually LIKES its customers?

Verizon has some of the best customer service in the country. It has the best network by far. Everyone seems to want to switch to Verizon if they were to carry the iPhone for example. This is because the company has made absolutely massive investments where the competition has cut corners on a relative basis.

So perhaps the most succinct question to pose is what is the cost of being on the best network, having the fastest data download speeds and the least dropped calls? For many, there is no price tag too high to pay for these features and parting with an additional $5/month for phantom data charges and even more for high termination fees is fair.

I look at Verizon Wireless like I look at BMW. Both tout relatively low prices to start. But if you purchase a 328i, metallic paint will cost you $550. Cruise control costs $2,400! Navigation (which Google now gives away) is $2,100, and 19" wheels will cost you over $5,000!

If you think BMWs make some of the best cars around, you hold your nose and pay. Ditto for Verizon Wireless.

Verizon has always been the most restrictive carrier around and they locked down Bluetooth on their devices for many years except for pairing with a headset. Likewise, GPS has been locked down on most devices unless you purchased VZ Navigator for a minimum of $9.99/month or $2.99/day.

But as a customer, these annoyances and high fees were balanced by consistent spending of billions of dollars on wireless and now fiber networks.

Users should keep in mind they can always switch to AT&T, T-Mobile or Sprint if they think Verizon Wireless service isn't worth the extra money.

In fact the massive defection away from Sprint shows consumers consider more than price when it comes to making phone/network purchase decisions. In fact, I would say from a pricing perspective, Sprint may be the most customer friendly company around. I would posit that if AT&T Mobility didn't have the iPhone, consumers would be fleeing from them as well.

The iPhone threw Verizon for a loop and as predicted it is getting clobbered because it did not have the foresight to work with Apple when it had the chance.

So now, the enemy of its enemy is Google and Verizon is allowing a number of new Android phones on its network. They will get a cut of ad revenue by doing this but they are giving up virtually all services which they used to be able to charge for. Google just gave away turn-by-turn GPS for example meaning Verizon can no longer charge $10/month for the same service.

Moreover, Google will roll out dozens of new services which will be ad supported. Verizon will not be able to launch competing services as we all know a carrier can't compete with a software company.

In a moment, Verizon went from being the most closed network in the US to perhaps the most open and there is a cost associated with this move. Again, this is all pro-consumer behavior.

In fact, it seems at this point Verizon has leapfrogged AT&T in terms of openness. Especially when you consider the restrictive policing of the App Store by Apple/AT&T. Anyone who has seen the rich applications and joyous battery-sucking multitasking available on a jailbroken iPhone understands how users are being penalized by Big Brother Apple/AT&T.

So the full question to those upset with Verizon's fees should be, would you pay more for the best network and the most open ecosystem where you can take advantage of the best applications and service values around without the worry of a nanny telling you what you can and can't do?

The author switched from Verizon to AT&T because he wanted an iPhone. For about a year he carried around a Verizon phone for voice and an AT&T phone for data but that proved cumbersome and now he experiences dropped calls and other network snafus which he didn't deal with on Verizon Wireless. He not so secretly despises the App Store Nanny.

TMC's latest gadget blog Gadget Inspector (get it?) kicks off with author Marisa Torrieri performing a video interview with a Verizon Wireless representative comparing the latest Droid phones - the Motorola Droid and the HTC Droid Eris. You can subscribe to her XML/RSS feed to stay up to date on the latest in the world of gadgets and consumer electronics.
 

HP is acquiring 3Com for $2.7 billion and there are a number of reasons for this move. First of all, it is obvious the tech market is hot and Cisco and other companies are optimistic about the future as evidenced by the pace of tech acquisitions which is reaching the pace of the glory dotcom days. Moreover, large companies with strong balance sheets are able to access capital if they need it, allowing them to more easily acquire.

3Com for its part is a company with a broad range of networking gear which HP needs to go head-to-head with Cisco. Specifically, 3Com focuses on the SMB space while the TippingPoint division focuses on Security and H3C focuses on large enterprise and is very strong in Asia. I was at 3Com's headquarters about five weeks ago and spoke with Anna Dorcey and John Vincenzo who were very high on the company's future.

You may not know this but 3Com has about 35% marketshare in China and a strong manufacturing base there, meaning their costs are low. Their go to market strategy is customer focus and value. 3Com has been a networking and communications value player for years but at the beginning of the decade, the company left enterprises hanging with a shifting strategy which enraged many resellers and customers.

Over the last few years, the company has improved its management and it seems unclear as why now was the time to sell. Perhaps HP gave an offer which was too good to refuse? Or perhaps company execs realize with the HP brand behind them, the company can raise prices and compete with Cisco and have fatter margins.

The worst part of this deal for Cisco is that we can expect the EDS division of HP to really push 3Com products at the expense of Cisco.

Also, if you are playing chess, you would imagine Dell and IBM are picking up the phone and having conference calls about purchasing Adtran and or Brocade as they are similar in product-line to Cisco and 3Com. Remember Dell just picked up a systems integration firm Perot Systems and the next step for them would be to add more products to their mix.

Other targets with substantial integration value worth watching are Plantronics, Polycom and Avaya.

While I am in the predicting mood, expect Cisco to pick up wireless backhaul vendor DragonWave or Ceragon in the near future as they build out their wireless networking strategy focused on wireless carriers.

But in the end, there are only a handful of tech companies who have shown they can acquire well. Oracle is best, Cisco is second best and IBM is good. HP is also doing pretty well in their area. It is early to predict how Dell will fare.

I am frankly surprised at the absolute pace of M&A activity but I should point out that this is great news for tech and telecom as it is a signal that companies feel confident about the future of the market and the growth in spending they anticipate in the future.

If you are interested in the Skype/Joost/eBay soap opera of recent months, be sure to check out this article from Brad Reese which shows a chain of emails between Mike Volpi and a number of other execs involved in the Skype deals as of late. You rarely if ever get a look at these sorts of communications and for that reason alone this piece is worth looking at.

We are thrilled to announce a slew of top notch keynoters for the upcoming ITEXPO which takes place in Miami, FL Jan 20-22, 2010. I will share them with you by first explaining why they were invited:

A keynote picture from ITEXPO East 2009 in Miami

Open Source

One of the biggest trends in tech this last decade has been open source and while you may not know this, I was a UNIX (the Linux precursor) system admin at TMC back in 1982 or so and I am a big fan of this OS which is reliable, stable and the strong basis for cost-effective solutions in a number of fields. Without a doubt, Asterisk is the major force in the open-source communications space and as such, Digium's CEO Danny Windham (the company behind Asterisk) was the perfect choice to address the audience of businesses, carriers and resellers. By the way, Digium Asterisk World (DAW) is collocated at this show and I hear it just sold out of exhibit spaces and my team is looking for ways to get the waiting list
of companies into an expanded DAW pavilion on the exhibit hall floor.

Digium Asterisk World Photos from ITEXPO East 2009 this year

Google Voice vs. AT&T

Google Voice has been one of the most disruptive influences in telecom these past years and this service has single-handedly become a point of public argument between the search leader and Apple and AT&T - with the FCC acting as referee of sorts. The argument revolves around net neutrality - the concept that carriers will apply discrimination to traffic on their networks based upon traffic, application type or source. Google obviously wants their services to run on any network in an unencumbered fashion while AT&T has said since 1995 when they were SBC that they want to charge for their pipes. AT&T actually then pointed out to the FCC that Google Voice does not terminate all calls on its free Google Voice service meaning it is not adhering to the principles of net neutrality. The reason of course as Google points out is traffic pumping and bizarre intercarrier compensation rules which allow some rural carriers to charge exorbitant rates for calls terminating in their areas. Craig Walker founded Grand Central, the company purchased by Google and the basis for Google Voice and as the Group Product Manager for the Real Time Communications Group at Google, he was a natural person to invite to speak with us at the show. It seems his accomplishments have unleashed a firestorm of controversy which should hopefully clean up some of the ugly mess that is telecom policy and regulation.

Exhibit hall pictures from ITEXPO East 2009 in Miami

HD Voice/SIP and Video

Another major trend in our markets is that of HD voice, video adoption and of course SIP endpoints. AT ITEXPO last year, we had the first panel in the world focusing on HD voice (video) and since then I am excited to see other conference organizers throwing their hat in the HD ring. A major player in all of the above spaces is Polycom and they have done an amazing job of working with disparate vendors on interoperability issues which has moved the market forward by reducing the friction caused by proprietary endpoints. In the world of video, the company has been a major player - developing telepresence systems all the way down to video phones. To get a bead on where this market is heading we invited Polycom Co-Founder, and the CTO of the Voice Communications Group Jeff Rodman to join us as a keynoter.

HD Voice Panel I moderated from ITEXPO East 2009 in Miami

Skype

No matter how you break out the IP communications market, Skype is likely a factor in changing the market in a pro-consumer manner. By giving away global voice calling with quality which far exceeds the PSTN, they have disrupted while getting users used to better voice quality. On top of that, they give away video calling as well, making them a company which excites consumers and scares carriers and anyone else who dares compete with their network of hundreds of millions of subscribers.

Interview I had with Skype's Ian Robin

Skype has been making a major push into the enterprise and is working on enhancing relationships with carriers as well. They are even looking for channel partners who can share in the newly created revenue streams from a number of products like Skye for SIP. When you take all of this into account, it does make great sense to invite Skype Chief Strategy Officer Christopher Dean to speak, doesn't it?

Smartphones, Wireless and Smart Ecosystems

One of the biggest trends in the world of communications is smart devices and ecosystems. What is an ecosystem you ask? Well it is a group of companies who develop products which work with a product or service offered by a host company or companies. The iTunes App Store may be the best example but certainly Avaya's DevConnect or Cisco's Partner Programs are good examples as well. You may know that TMC has focused a tremendous amount of resources on educating the world on smart ecosystems via our new SPEC site. I truly believe ecosystems have a bright future.

In order to bring attendees up to speed on all these topics we invited two top keynoters to present on the matter. Sprint's Mathew Oommen is the vice president of device and technology development at the company and uniquely positioned to share with us his company's view on the future of wireless technology. Oh and by the way, be sure to check out my recent interview with Sprint's Wayne Ward who heads up the company's M2M activities (did I mention there is a collocated M2M conference at ITEXPO?).

To get a handle on wireless devices as they pertain to ecosystems we invited Brian Higgins the Executive Director for Ecosystem Development within Verizon Wireless to join us so we can learn where the company thinks the market is headed. Verizon has been very ambitious in its goal to develop an ecosystem of products and applications which interoperate in the hope of one-upping the iTunes App Store.

We continue to work to add fantastic new speakers to our roster and you can expect this ITEXPO to be the most comprehensive and educational ever and a must-attend. I personally hope to see you there.

Oh and by the way, we have secured great rates this year at the Loews Miami Beach Hotel - you can save $150/night if you book now - the rate is $249 vs. what is typically a $399 rate at prime season. There are many advantages to staying at the show hotel such as networking, etc - and I have always been a fan of the Loews. In fact I was a guest the first day the hotel opened about ten years ago or so.

I got a tip that Adtran was acquiring Objectworld. My take? Objectworld is a company with great UC technology and no brand recognition. Adtran is a company with a product line similar to Cisco but much smaller. Still, with a market cap of over $1.4 billion, Objectworld can really get a boost from Adtran's access to capital, infrastructure, reseller network, carrier relationships  and improved branding.

Here is a link to a cached page mentioning the acquisition. Keep it tuned to TMCnet and my blog for more.

Today I am headed to Huntsville, AL where I will be giving a presentation on the state of the industry to Adtran customers and I am really excited to be meeting with a number of carrier representatives and resellers at the event. Typically to get from New York to Huntsville I drive from Nashville, TN which a direct flight from New York but a 131+ miles away. Today I am connecting via Detroit directly to Huntsville - I am a bit surprised that there is such a direct flight when there isn't one from NY to Huntsville but then again I know there are auto plants in Tennessee which could explain why there are flights from Detroit.

Anyway, I was reminded of the importance of face to face communications as I saw this video interview of Scott Kargman by Suzanne Bowen. Suzanne works for DIDX, a company supplying DIDs to carriers worldwide. Scott runs Crossfire Media, a TMC partner in our M2M, 4G and Smart Products initiatives or SPEC. Check out the interview which took place at Supercomm 2009 in Chicago.

Bill Gurley writes correctly that Google is positioned to take over the world. I am certainly paraphrasing and adding some personal bias - he describes in detail how the company invested great sums of money to assemble a superior turn-by-turn GPS database which includes a street view and in so doing is now able to take marketshare from competing mapping vendors by using advertising to subsidize the cost of acquiring this information.

Advertising revenue in fact will drive the company's operating system, software as a service and just about everything else.

As the company shares part of this revenue with partners you have seen wide adoption of Android by wireless carriers and no doubt hardware vendors installing the Google Chrome OS are next.

Expect the company to continue going after Microsoft products - by giving services away and supporting them through ads.

Any competitor which has an inferior ad network and generates less money from advertising (this is all of them) is pretty much domed.

The only way to stop the onslaught is to build a far superior search engine and hope the world switches. At this point the sheer marketshare Google commands in search allows them to utilize their massive database of user behavior as a massive focus group allowing them to improve by the second.

I just can't see anything stopping this company besides, a scandal, high level departure, illness or something similar. Even then, the company is a monopoly at this point and perhaps momentum will ensure their future success.

Is the company using its power in a way which warrants them being broken up by the DOJ? Possibly, but Google reminds me a heck of a lot of Wal-Mart as the larger it gets, the better consumers do. Giving away free GPS for example is a pro-consumer behavior and as long as the company keeps breaking into new markets and giving things away, it is tough to see how the Google could be considered to be harming customers.

Getting back to the headline of this article -- do I really think Microsoft is doomed? Yes. Immediately? Obviously not. But any time a company with a quality name in the market can make money while giving away good products which you charge for, you are done.

Just a kid, that's all I was in the early eighties in high school as I took a class in BASIC. I was always fascinated by all things electronic and whether it was video games or advanced scientific calculators, I couldn't get enough. At Westhill high School, they had a Prime minicomputer and it was on this machine where I was instructed how to program. I also had a Commodore 64 at home and with it I wrote my own video games at night and on weekends.

In the early eighties, Route. 128 in Boston was the stuff of legend... It is where all the minicomputer companies lived - Wang, Prime Computer, DEC and many others. Prime was my link to this area and it seems like it was yesterday when I wrote a math quiz program on the schools's minicomputer which I used to better prepare me for the math portion of the SAT. Today, Rt. 128 is a distant second to Silicon Valley in terms of technology and of course all the minicomputer companies missed the PC altogether and are gone.

If you are wondering why Silicon Valley took the lead over Boston, you may want to refer to this article from Vivek Wadhwa which discusses how the Valley follows a more open model where innovation is more readily shared with small companies and moreover spread through job hopping. In addition, he points out a book from AnnaLee Saxenian (which was published in 1994 predicting that Boston would be the loser in the tech race

Here is an excerpt from the article:

She noted that Silicon Valley had an amazing dynamism about it. There were extensive professional networks, job hopping was the norm, information was exchanged openly, and the culture encouraged risk taking. The Silicon Valley ecosystem supported entrepreneurial experimentation and collective learning. In other words, Silicon Valley was a very open network--a giant social networking site working in analog before the concept of such a thing even existed.

This organizational mechanism was in sharp contrast to that of Route 128. Dominated by large, vertically integrated, and secretive minicomputer producers such as DEC, Wang, Prime, and Data General. Technology, skill, and know-how were trapped within the boundaries of the large corporations.

The differences were evident at many levels: venture capitalists in Silicon Valley had deep roots in local networks and were far more nimble than their east coast counterparts; educational institutions and research labs in the West partnered with local startups as well as more established firms, while those in the East worked only with the largest corporations; and the meritocratic openness of Silicon Valley made it a magnet for non-traditional talent and immigrants.

By the mid-1990s the east had missed the shift from minicomputers to personal computers as the flexible Silicon Valley ecosystem sped ahead with innovation across a diversifying range of components and systems going from chips, routers, and application software to ecommerce and search engines. Today Silicon Valley is the leading location for cleantech venture activity, an area widely considered to be the next big value creation engine for the U.S. and the world.

Boston, however, is no slouch. The Route 128 community remains the second biggest in the U.S. in terms of venture funds committed. Boston has powerful research institutions, still, and lots of very strong companies. In some areas, such as biotech, Boston may even rival Silicon Valley. But overall, its pretty clear that the Valley has not only won but is racing further ahead.

Most entrepreneurs and engineers that come to Silicon Valley, come to experience this network and to embrace the culture it has created. That's why I came, too. Network effects don't just work for fax machines. But then again, most of them knew that intrinsically. University guys like me need to do a bunch of surveys to figure it out. They voted with their hearts and feet.

At this point the game is even tougher to win if you aren't in Silicon Valley due to the propensity for exit strategies to present themselves more readily where the acquirers are. Yahoo, Google, Cisco and Oracle are just a few of the companies responsible for billions of dollars worth of M&A dollars. And as this these companies have grown, they  have made so many millionaires that they in turn go out and launch new companies and/or invest in others which are nearby.

If you are looking for a lesson here it is that a company which mirrors Silicon Valley and is more open, flexible and shares information more readily will likely always beat the company which is inflexible and contains many silos.