Later this week I will be in Atlanta for a FISPA meeting. One of the sessions I am presenting is Social Media in a Nutshell. This follows my Marketing in a Nutshell session.
The slides are here for your pleasure.
September 2009 Archives
It's funny to watch Ma Bell fight Google, because Bell isn't used to fighting another company that also has billions of dollars - and millions of users. No CLEC was ever this big - nor cable company. And Google is kind of both -- or at least that is what Ma Bell is crying to the FCC about.
Google has more video on YouTube than any DVR or cable company can match currently. Google Voice is the online VoIP service many people wish that an innovative telecommunications services company would have delivered years ago. But Ma Bell isn't innovative. heck, they don't even own the Labs any more - that went out with Lucent.
PC World has some coverage of the fight. The LA Times and 399 other news sources wrote about the complaint. Many in the blogosphere think that this is just AT&T's way to deflect the FCC from pinning them to the ground and perhaps delay a Network Neutrality NOI.
Google responded on their blog quickly.
Note to Randall and Crazy Ivan: Consumers just want you to be a fat pipe to the inter-webs. Not the Weight Watchers version you currently offer and over-charge for. A 10MB super-info-highway. Get out of the way! We want to choose our own content, apps, and Layer 7 providers. You had your chance, but as always greed kept you from doing anything. Heck, you are closing the doors on CallVantage on Oct. 20. And that was such a great service. (Oops, did I just say that?) You could have givrn us Google Voice just like you could have given America fiber-to-the-home in 2000 when you promised many states you would if they would let you have a rate hike.
Keep pouring those billions into TV and 4G. If Sprint and T-Mobile could get out of their own way, they would own your ass already.
Google has more video on YouTube than any DVR or cable company can match currently. Google Voice is the online VoIP service many people wish that an innovative telecommunications services company would have delivered years ago. But Ma Bell isn't innovative. heck, they don't even own the Labs any more - that went out with Lucent.
PC World has some coverage of the fight. The LA Times and 399 other news sources wrote about the complaint. Many in the blogosphere think that this is just AT&T's way to deflect the FCC from pinning them to the ground and perhaps delay a Network Neutrality NOI.
Google responded on their blog quickly.
Note to Randall and Crazy Ivan: Consumers just want you to be a fat pipe to the inter-webs. Not the Weight Watchers version you currently offer and over-charge for. A 10MB super-info-highway. Get out of the way! We want to choose our own content, apps, and Layer 7 providers. You had your chance, but as always greed kept you from doing anything. Heck, you are closing the doors on CallVantage on Oct. 20. And that was such a great service. (Oops, did I just say that?) You could have givrn us Google Voice just like you could have given America fiber-to-the-home in 2000 when you promised many states you would if they would let you have a rate hike.
Keep pouring those billions into TV and 4G. If Sprint and T-Mobile could get out of their own way, they would own your ass already.
Lots of parties last week at Channel Partners Expo. It seems like it is almost 2003 again. So back to the Delano we went with FusionTel. FusionTel wanted to make a splash by having a party at the Delano. It worked about 60 people showed up at 4:30 to have a few drinks and chat.
I got to start a conversation with their President, but we didn't get to finish it. I did get to chat with Stacy Conrad, Senior Director of Partner Sales, about agents selling their Hosted VoIP service. The latest story is about an agent who sold their service.
The vertical was Healthcare. Fusion was sold because the customer, who is based in Massachusetts, was opening a new site in California and needed the combo pack - phones and Internet service. The agent presented the customer with the concept of trying Hosted VoIP instead of buying the traditional phone service and on-premise PBX.
The value proposition that FusionTel presents is lower up front cost (CAPEX) as well as enhanced features. But the sales trigger was likely the ability for the receptionist in Mass. to also answer calls for Cali. and transfer calls for free via extension dialing. This freed the company from needing a receptionist in CA.
"We differentiated ourselves by our expertise, our professional on site installation, and our competitive pricing," Stacy Conrad remarked.
I got to start a conversation with their President, but we didn't get to finish it. I did get to chat with Stacy Conrad, Senior Director of Partner Sales, about agents selling their Hosted VoIP service. The latest story is about an agent who sold their service.
The vertical was Healthcare. Fusion was sold because the customer, who is based in Massachusetts, was opening a new site in California and needed the combo pack - phones and Internet service. The agent presented the customer with the concept of trying Hosted VoIP instead of buying the traditional phone service and on-premise PBX.
The value proposition that FusionTel presents is lower up front cost (CAPEX) as well as enhanced features. But the sales trigger was likely the ability for the receptionist in Mass. to also answer calls for Cali. and transfer calls for free via extension dialing. This freed the company from needing a receptionist in CA.
"We differentiated ourselves by our expertise, our professional on site installation, and our competitive pricing," Stacy Conrad remarked.
I moderated a panel on Telecom Billing Issues at Channel Partners this week. It was a full room. Apparently, one or two people thought it was too hard on the carriers (or I was too hard on a carrier).
If you have been in telecom for more than a year (and have any voice customers) then you know that there are billing issues. Heck, even on simple IP or transport bills there are errors and surprises. And by surprises I mean line items that aren't obvious.
One carrier in the audience to offense to some of the panel discussion, but what it boils down to is that they don't charge what it costs to deliver a minute of service. The numerous extra line items (other than legitimate federal, state, county and city taxes and USF fees) are just ways to make a profit - but confusing the customer. As I said on the panel, if it actually costs 4 cents to deliver a call, why not just charge 4 cents instead of quoting 1 cent then adding $80 in additional charges?
Airlines are the only ones nickel and diming the consumer.
If you have been in telecom for more than a year (and have any voice customers) then you know that there are billing issues. Heck, even on simple IP or transport bills there are errors and surprises. And by surprises I mean line items that aren't obvious.
One carrier in the audience to offense to some of the panel discussion, but what it boils down to is that they don't charge what it costs to deliver a minute of service. The numerous extra line items (other than legitimate federal, state, county and city taxes and USF fees) are just ways to make a profit - but confusing the customer. As I said on the panel, if it actually costs 4 cents to deliver a call, why not just charge 4 cents instead of quoting 1 cent then adding $80 in additional charges?
Airlines are the only ones nickel and diming the consumer.
Just some rambling thoughts on UC as I prepare for a session at Broadsoft Connections. Comments?
The WSJ has an article titled, "AT&T, Verizon Still Pouring Billions Into Mobile Networks". It notes that cellcos have already spent billions upgrading their networks to 2.5G and 3G -- and now will spend billions more on 4G.
In addition, both companies are also dumping billions into International routes, domestic broadband networks, and their respective triple play networks, U-Verse and FiOS.
On top of that, both companies have been acquiring companies, like Alltel and Centennial. Ummm, how are they not toppled over in debt?
These companies have felt intense pricing pressure from cable companies as well as T-Mobile and Sprint. Customer Acquisition and Retention costs have to be high, even as ARPU remains about the same. Debt costs more right now. Wireline income has been declining for at least 4 years.
Where's the money coming from?
In addition, both companies are also dumping billions into International routes, domestic broadband networks, and their respective triple play networks, U-Verse and FiOS.
On top of that, both companies have been acquiring companies, like Alltel and Centennial. Ummm, how are they not toppled over in debt?
These companies have felt intense pricing pressure from cable companies as well as T-Mobile and Sprint. Customer Acquisition and Retention costs have to be high, even as ARPU remains about the same. Debt costs more right now. Wireline income has been declining for at least 4 years.
Where's the money coming from?
As stated previously, as telcos spend billions to deliver TelcoTV to the masses, the masses decided they don't want it.
The cellular companies want to deliver some kind of TV content exclusively to their uses. This makes no sense because these guys bitch a storm when you actually use your EVDO/High speed Internet card, but streaming video to my handset is fine? Schizophrenic much?
Also, these same companies - ATT and VZW - are building out telco TV networks and 4G networks. Can you say redundant billions?
Why they didn't just stick with the satellite TV partnership instead of their current play is beyond me. On top of all this fiber and VDSL deployment, there are head-ends, set-top boxes, ONT's, and disappointed customers everywhere. Plus they have to fight with cable for access rights to sports networks. Oh, and DirecTV and DISH have sweet DVR software. Others not so much.
But does it matter? No. Because people are moving to the Internet as their home entertainment network. Hulu, NetFlix, DirecTV, Joost, and so much more.
So it becomes a fight to be the best dumb pipe to the home - at an ever increasing customer acquisition cost due to a flat market that requires taking customers from each other.
Here's the latest Report: TV Networks Should Be Afraid -- Very Afraid -- of Hulu. Even the TV Networks are in trouble. They will need exclusive content to keep viewers, because Content is still King.
I've been trying to order Dry Fiber out of the AT&T Southeast FCC Tariff # 1 for over a month.
The Service Inquiry used to be manual paper - now it is a system called NSS. No idea how to access that system.
I tried to order it through the Channel. It is not on the commission schedule so my Channel Manager wrote me, "We need to concentrate on products we get paid for, dry fiber is not one of those products." So nevermind helping the customer. Or sell product and bring in some revenue. Or that the customer has a huge spend with AT&T already. (Or that I just need an SI done - nothing more).
The Service Inquiry used to be manual paper - now it is a system called NSS. No idea how to access that system.
I tried to order it through the Channel. It is not on the commission schedule so my Channel Manager wrote me, "We need to concentrate on products we get paid for, dry fiber is not one of those products." So nevermind helping the customer. Or sell product and bring in some revenue. Or that the customer has a huge spend with AT&T already. (Or that I just need an SI done - nothing more).
Product Management indicated that AT&T is no longer offering the Dry Fiber product. "The product was removed once the merger between AT&T & Bellsouth took place." But that is erroneous as the following filings will prove.
BellSouth filed to discontinue Dry Fiber service in July 2007 (see letter PDF here). Then AT&T filed with the FCC to withdraw its Section 63.71 application seeking to discontinue its provision of Dry Fiber service in Jan. 2008 (see letter PDF here). It currently is written into the FCC Tariff # 1 as 4-strand fiber transport (see PDF Tariff here).
Next it's over to the CLEC side of the house where the Wholesale account rep says that she only handles UNE. The other Wholesale rep handles FCC tariff items, but not a word out of her yet.
My big problem is that this service is listed in the tariff. It shouldn't be that hard to order service.
Next step for the client is a phone call. Either to call a telecom attorney (either Kris Twomey or Jonathan Marashlian); or to call the FCC Wireline Competition Bureau (202) 418-1500.
A piece of news hit me that just adds to the bad taste that COMPTEL leaves in my mouth. Here's an organization that is mainly composed of CLEC's. Since MCI and AT&T were acquired by RBOC's all teeth have left the building. I can't think of a single COMPTEL FCC or court victory. The big one was supposed to be Brand-X, but that turned out to be a huge loss.
This morning a CLEC client pointed out all the benefits that he gets from NRTC Coop and I am astounded.
So the news item was about VON. "will host a CTO Summit at which leading competitive service providers will develop a road map for creating a nationwide IP-based peering fabric that will bypass the legacy PSTN and support advanced services such as HD voice.....Committed to attending so far are Alteva, Telesphere, Simple Signal, Callis Communications, ISN Telcom, Broadcore, Global IP Solutions and Consolidated Technologies" as well as Broadsoft and Polycom, vendors for most of those attending.
This isn't really ground breaking because there are IP Peers like Arbinet and Stealth's VPF. But it's the first time that the ITSP's decided to start their own. And I have to wonder why COMPTEL wasn't behind this a couple of years ago. COMPTEL needs to start thinking of ways to add value to its membership, instead of just ways to make it really expensive to network with each other.
Engadget has a rumor that Deutsche Telekom is eyeing Sprint Nextel for acquisition. There are a number of issues here:
UPDATE: MarketWatch article about possible merger and Reuters notes the rise in Sprint's stock and bond prices on these rumors. From this you can almost feel that the bankers are floating a balloon to take advantage of the deltas.
- DT owns T-Mobile.
- T-Mobile is GSM and Sprint is iDEN and CDMA. Not much value in mixing that many signaling protocols. No synergy.
- FTC and DOJ may not like that much Public Safety being foreign owned.
- The cost would be staggering.
UPDATE: MarketWatch article about possible merger and Reuters notes the rise in Sprint's stock and bond prices on these rumors. From this you can almost feel that the bankers are floating a balloon to take advantage of the deltas.
SUTUS sells an Office-in-the-box solution for small business. For 25 and under employees, the Sutus Business Central 200 is a file server, email server, router, wireless access point, and phone system. The BC200 has gotten an upgrade.
- New User Interface: enhanced Flex technology supports seamless installation, management and use of the Business Central 200, onsite and/or remotely.
- Enhanced Desktop Install Tools: enables the set-up of desktops, VPN clients and mail clients in a matter of minutes.
- Enhanced Network Interoperability: the appliance now can seamlessly co-exist within a customer's legacy local area networks; including active directory, hosted exchange, and existing internet routers.
- VoIP Interoperability: ITSP partners added to the VoIP interop menu now include Bandwidth.com, Airespring, Excel and XO Communications.
- Overhead and handset paging
- Open / closed call flows
- Enhanced directory
- Ability to manage Polycom handsets through user interface
ADTRAN announced that it has teamed with telecom master agent, Telecom Brokerage, Inc. (TBI), to help channel partners drive revenue growth and become more competitive in the Small and Medium Enterprise market. (If you aren't a Cisco VAR, you need a hardware partner).
When an agent can combine ADTRAN's industry-leading WAN solutions, including multiservice routers and managed switches, with TBI's partnerships with leading national and regional telecom service providers, agents can benefit from a complete solution; greater account knowledge and control; and generate an additional revenue stream.
When an agent can combine ADTRAN's industry-leading WAN solutions, including multiservice routers and managed switches, with TBI's partnerships with leading national and regional telecom service providers, agents can benefit from a complete solution; greater account knowledge and control; and generate an additional revenue stream.
The Channel is Shifting - and by that I do not mean a paradigm shift. I mean, that some telecom company channel programs are shifting away from a typical Agent focus and aiming squarely at the VAR Channel.
XO has a distribution deal with Tech Data that gives them access to a ide and deep VAR base. Once the VAR's figure out that taking the WAN piece isn't that difficult, the value added reseller will become what the system integrator is to Microsoft Partners: the glue that small business needs to mesh it all together.
The Systems Integrator doesn't just install software, they right API's or drivers or database hooks to make data flow in an easier fashion through the system. The basic MCP just sells licenses and Exchange seats. See the analogy? Are you just selling seats or are you looking to become the partner to small business owners? The Go-To guy for all things tech.
BTW, it's not just XO. L3 is making this shift as are other companies. As I like to say, once the guy has seen your porn files on your hard drive, you are going to buy anything he has to sell. That's why VAR's make big coin pushing back-up and VoIP -- just apps to add revenue.
We'll see how this shapes up as Everything Channel pushes into the Agent space and the ChannelVision magazine launches an agent show at ITEXPO West next year. Two weeks to the Channel Partners Expo in South Beach. See you there! (Stop by the TCA booth!)
UPDATE: According to the latest issue of Phone+, 33% of New Edge Network's revenues come from agents leads. The goal is to move that to 50%. Broadview Networks says that agents drive about 40% of sales and 50% of new sales. With these kinds of numbers, why are these companies not supporting a strong agent channel through support of TCA?
XO has a distribution deal with Tech Data that gives them access to a ide and deep VAR base. Once the VAR's figure out that taking the WAN piece isn't that difficult, the value added reseller will become what the system integrator is to Microsoft Partners: the glue that small business needs to mesh it all together.
The Systems Integrator doesn't just install software, they right API's or drivers or database hooks to make data flow in an easier fashion through the system. The basic MCP just sells licenses and Exchange seats. See the analogy? Are you just selling seats or are you looking to become the partner to small business owners? The Go-To guy for all things tech.
BTW, it's not just XO. L3 is making this shift as are other companies. As I like to say, once the guy has seen your porn files on your hard drive, you are going to buy anything he has to sell. That's why VAR's make big coin pushing back-up and VoIP -- just apps to add revenue.
We'll see how this shapes up as Everything Channel pushes into the Agent space and the ChannelVision magazine launches an agent show at ITEXPO West next year. Two weeks to the Channel Partners Expo in South Beach. See you there! (Stop by the TCA booth!)
UPDATE: According to the latest issue of Phone+, 33% of New Edge Network's revenues come from agents leads. The goal is to move that to 50%. Broadview Networks says that agents drive about 40% of sales and 50% of new sales. With these kinds of numbers, why are these companies not supporting a strong agent channel through support of TCA?
Looks like the latest testimony says that there will only be 2 rounds of funding under the Broadband Stimulus act.
V. Future Funding Rounds
Although NTIA and RUS previously indicated that we planned to hold up to three rounds of funding, our review of our experience in this first round, leads us to now explore the option of holding just one more round of funding. This more consolidated approach may have the potential of yielding benefits for all stakeholders.
Too many apps for way too much money (basic math anyone?) has closed the window for some applicants who were on a holding pattern to see what could be learned from Round 1.
What did we learn? Rules change fast these days. Hoepfully, we will also learn that the second mouse gets the cheese.
Too many apps for way too much money (basic math anyone?) has closed the window for some applicants who were on a holding pattern to see what could be learned from Round 1.
What did we learn? Rules change fast these days. Hoepfully, we will also learn that the second mouse gets the cheese.
Being a telecom agent usually means that you will have commission challenges with your vendors (the carriers). I have been on the receiving end of a big dent in my pay a couple of times. (Netting sucks). But it is the nature of the beast.
I would like to point out that time and again when agents bring their commission issues to me (because I am a blogger and a founding member of the TCA, a non-profit association for the betterment of the agent channel), the dispute is a Contract dispute. Your agent agreement is a contract. If you do not follow the contract, you do not get paid. For instance, if there is a quota which you fail to meet, the carrier has the option to stop paying you. Even some Evergreen contracts have out clauses.
When Carrier A buys Carrier B and you do not sign a new agreement with Carrier A, do you expect them to keep paying you? You probably do, but that's not how it usually works.
So while I was at the ITEXPO West I saw the disgruntled XO agent wearing his shirt, and all I keep thinking is: Would any carrier work with this guy at this point? And has he tried to settle it?
Recent Comments