Valeant stock is off by 95% from its peak in August 2015.
"Valeant acquired Salix for $11.1 billion and got what has become a key franchise of gastrointestinal drugs. Yet the products haven't sold as well as expected, and Ackman said that it now looked like Valeant "substantially overpayed for Salix, and it has not yet achieved the results anticipated by prior management."" Doesn't that sound like every telecom acquisition since 1999?
"In the letter, Ackman said he had learned lessons, including that "a management team with a superb long-term investment record is still capable of making significant mistakes"." The leadership that got you to one point may not be able to get you to the next point. We see it all the time. CEOs are blind to their own shortcomings and when they should look for advice.
"The highly acquisitive nature of Valeant's business required flawless capital allocation and operational execution, and therefore, a larger than normal degree of reliance on management," Ackman said in his letter. "In retrospect, we misjudged the prior management team and this contributed to our loss."
Frontier has bought territories from AT&T and Verizon in the last 3 years. Yet they are losing subscribers and morale is at an all time low. Bankers want Frontier to spend (millions) on network upgrades. Other RLECs have learned that without investment in network to compete with cable broadband, revenues steadily decline. Here's what the LECs spent in CAPEX. Comcast and Charter together spent $16B on network Bell Canada is spending $637M. You have to still work the acquisition. You still have to compete and sell and market.
INCOMPAS argues CenturyLink/Level 3 combo won't promote competition. I think it will be a complete flop. C-Link's HQ is in Monroe, LA. The telecom hub of talent is in Denver. Will the talent needed move to Monroe?
We have Fairpoint merging with another RLEC, too. It is NOT just about scale. It is about strategy and its execution.
These mergers won't stop, but they aren't exactly wins. It's more like: I'm tired; someone buy me. Or buy something to obscure our abysmal organic growth.
SIDE NOTE:
Two out of 5 of these Ethernet providers are gone!
]]>They are jumping on the bandwagon for a number of reasons.
One is Consolidation. The new landscape of Ethernet is cable and ILEC. The CLECs are mostly all gone. You have to expand the catalog beyond just network operators and VoIP.
The other reason is price pressure. Pricing across all telecom products - mobile, bandwidth, Ethernet, VoIP - has been declining about 3-10% year over year, creating a problem for the operators and partners. When pricing craters, you have to sell more and more and more to maintain the same commission level. At some point, just selling network isn't going to work because you can't close enough deals or even fill a funnel fast enough.
When 1GB pricing is less than what 10MB pipes were just six years ago, think about how much you have to sell and how fast.
Even the current price war in VoIP/UC isn't helping. Because there isn't enough Demand for UC - the demand is for POTS replacement and dial-tone - the price per seat has dropped. It hovers just below $20 right now.
I understand that the customer wants the cheapest price - and it is easier to take the order when you find the lowest price - but you have also just lowered your commission.
Providers are starting to cut commission points when they lower the price. Partners and Channel Managers aren't happy. Well, then sell it at rack rate.
So carriers consolidation means fewer vendors and pricing compression means less overall commission. More vendors are needed. Luckily over 600+ vendors have entered the space in the last three years while more than one-quarter of the partner channel have moved on. Retirement, M&A, and business shift/pivot have resulted in a lot less sales partners at a time when there are so many more vendors to choose from.But to be realistic choosing a UC vendor among the 2000+ available is like picking Red Delicious apples at the grocery store. They all look the same. How many do you want to smell and test for firmness before you pick one?
The cloud computing piece, as we found out two weeks ago, is owned by Amazon. AWS and S3 are hosting about one-third of the web!!!! Rackspace, CenturyLink, Azure, Google Compute, IBM/Soft Layer and the others haven't really stepped up their marketing game (even in the wake of Amazon's outage.)
Businesses are moving to SAAS, IAAS and other computing environments. Partners are in a position to offer assistance to businesses in this regard. It is uncharted territory for many, but the business model has shifted to wallet share. If you want to survive (and thrive), it is about getting more wallet share from the customer. That means selling them email, Office365, VoIP, colocation, security and more on top of the network and bandwidth that makes up the typical sale.
We have seen a number of press releases in the last 4 months about SD-WAN - mainly about SD-WAN providers signing up with carriers and with master agencies. SD-WAN the new UCaaS!!! This technology could be the next big thing, but they said the same think about IP Centrex (VoIP) over 15 years ago and about WebRTC.
Our biggest problem: We push Product. That's right. We are a bunch of Product Pushers. We would make ideal drug dealers because we don't create demand, we just push a product on someone who wants it.
We don't sell Solutions. We don't even offer Solutions. The vendors don't offer solutions either. They pimp products. It makes all of this really hard to sell.
]]>If you can't see that flash mp3 player, you can download the mp3 or listen on Soundcloud.
]]>As I watch Hurricane Matthew, I wonder how many elderly and infirm still have POTS lines.
Verizon workers can now be fired if they fix copper phone lines for DSL, according to reports (and HERE). Verizon wants people to buy fixed wireless and 4G LTE-A in place of anything copper.
Certainly, VZ needed the money when it sold off VZT in Cali, Texas and Florida to Frontier. It had to pay the FCC $10B for spectrum - and that is what the sale price was to Frontier. But it wants out of the union labor based telco business. Buying Yahoo and AOL is a way to be a mobile and entertainment business. So copper has to go.
Windstream is using copper for G.Fast and VDSL2 in Project Excel as it beefs up broadband in its ILEC regions. Their ARPU is up, which is what they need - to pay for the upgrades AND to keep Wall Street happy AND to pay down debt.
AT&T uses copper for VDSL2 for the now retired brand U-Verse. "AT&T notes that "AT&T Fiber" may not actually mean fiber -- the telco noting that "under the AT&T Fiber umbrella brand we will use a variety of network technologies." That's likely to include wireless broadband, and should it ever come to market, AT&T's AirGig initiative which utilizes power lines." [DSLR]
After Google Fiber finished up its acquisition of WISP, WebPass, it started thinking about fixed wireless in places, instead of always actual fiber. Why? It got exhausted trying to jump through hoops with local governments for rights of way, pole attachments and more. Then there was the matter of the electric companies who also own poles. And finally dealing with the ILEC, who also owns poles, and who along with cable was suing to slow it down. Louisville being a good example.
Google Fiber reminds me a lot of Covad and the DLECs (and Earthlink's Muni wi-fi project): Good idea, poor execution, no telco experience, learning the lessons all CLECs know the hard way: ILECs will screw you to hamper competition. So will cable. Monopoly mentality just can't be changed.
It would be nice if the copper plant could be rolled up into a nationwide REIT (similar to CS&L), so that EoC, DSL and T1s could still be utilized by alternative carriers. It is the one thing that other CLECs find a use for XO: EoC. We'll see how it plays out.
]]>"About 50 percent of the Ethernet circuits Windstream buys from XO, or about 32 percent of its Ethernet expense with XO is provisioned as EoC. By using XO's EoC services, Windstream can provide symmetrical bandwidth of up to 100 Mbps to business customers." So XO is a vendor for Windstream for EoC. They want to preserve the supply of EoC, not something that VZ cares about. Verizon is allergic to copper.
Meanwhile Sprint is really pushing its wireline portfolio, something that it had forgotten about for ten years. Sprint's new Ethernet strategy involves two new options -- Ethernet over Copper (EoC) and Ethernet over DOCSIS (EoDOCSIS). Sprint must have struck a deal with Charter and TWC for EoCoax is strictly a MSO offering.
This FCC complaint is just another lever of negotiations. XO used it when Level3 was buying Global Crossing. It happens often.
I'm surprised that either Global Capacity or GTT haven't stepped up to offer WIND and Transbeam EoC services, although maybe the price point isn't as low as XO was offering. Who knows?
]]>In 2003, a business would have ACT! CRM installed on one computer. They probably ran Hosted Exchange from an MSP, but had MS Office with Outlook on most computers. They probably had a website and used ADP for payroll. And maybe they had a file server running either Novell or Windows NT.
ADP at one time said they were the first cloud application. Email was probably the first public cloud application that most people used. (There were others before that.) The website is on a public cloud. So there are 3 apps running in the public cloud arena.
The file server and ACT! are running in the local LAN - or what we call today servers in the data center, even if that data center is a closet. That is the private cloud. The MSP is running MS Exchange in his data center on his private cloud, sotospeak.
Today, SAAS like Salesforce and Microsoft Office365 are public cloud apps. The data center is now a colocation in a data center. The company might use AWS or S3 for file storage. Azure or Google Compute for storage or apps. The Hybrid Cloud scenario is more defined today and a little more complicated,e specially if you throw in some VPS or IAAS platform too. But the WAN today has to connect all of these parts and pieces into an efficient network. That is where you, the telecom expert, come in.
Where is the Upsell?
Just asking the questions will put you in a different light. But asking the questions let's you see the whole picture, not just the Internet pipe at 2 locations. You can add value (and upsell) if you see the whole picture.
Hybrid Cloud has been around for a while. The concept is not complicated. And after you map it out, it isn't that complex. Make it simple. That is where the money is.
]]>Over the last seven years, I have watched many network admins try to wrestle with MPLS. Virtual pathways on a private network have been around since the days of frame relay. PVCs and SVCs were just traffic pathways in the frame relay cloud. ATM was more complicated to explain. "Frame relay won in the WAN over ATM, which proved too expensive despite its good points, such as five levels of QoS." The same will be said of Ethernet over MPLS - too expensive and complex despite its good points, such as security and QoS.
I think folks forget when you had to buy CIR (committed information rate) on WAN ports. VLANs are just dedicated bandwidth pathways for selected traffic. You want real-time traffic to have priority over email and web traffic. VLANs create that. The VLAN is not dynamic, so that might be why admins are leaning towards ethernet in the WAN.
Plus network admins are comfortable with ethernet. It has been the default for LANs, since before many of them were born. Not many remember ArcNet and Token Ring -- and the pain of running those LAN protocols.
Personally, IP-VPN is just adding more traffic to the Internet which is congested enough as it is. Over the top video buffers and OTT VoIP is jittery and cuts out like a cellphone call with bad reception.
WAN Optimization companies want to replace MPLS with broadband. That should work out well. The network admins will be happy because it will simplify the WAN. It will add security issues in a time when everyone is being hacked including the federal government and even security firms like Kapersky and LastPass.
The biggest complaint I get about MPLS is the expense. It does cost more than the Internet, but then it is more secure and dedicated bandwidth end to end. The configuration of the network is also complex, but you can outsource that.
"According to analyst firm Gartner, "Most network managers are feeling the pain of an increasingly complicated WAN with costly and time-consuming branch office solutions." This is true, especially for satellite offices of less than 10 people. However, if retail chains can utilize MPLS over DSL for POS, credit card processing, inventory and VoIP, why can't other industries?
The new thing is SD-WAN - the software defined WAN. This is basically on-demand bandwidth. Dial it up, dial it back, pay for usage. The CEO of Cogent used to say, "Just throw more bandwidth at it" as the answer to any problem on the network. This is a way to throw more bandwidth at an immediate problem.
SD-WAN will likely win, because it will put control in the network admin's hands. It is Ethernet. TW Telecom already had this option on some routes (where they owned the fiber). The added cost wasn't that heavy.
Frame Relay died. It was fairly easy. (Certainly easier to explain than ATM.) IP-VPN waned. Networks were segmented; now they are converged - with not just voice and data, but voice, data, Internet and video. IP-VPNs are coming back because Metro Ethernet has made the WAN pipes fairly inexpensive (moreso than DS3's!). WAN optimization and software defined networks will give the IP-VPN a revitalization.
]]>The biggest problem by far is the Comcast-TWC merger. It will replace 2 large MSOs (Comcast + TWC) with 2 much larger service providers (Comcast & Charter). Comcast is already huge - $17B in the last Quarter! Smaller than AT&T's consolidated revenues of $33.0 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2014. And VZ is at $31.6 billion for total operating revenues in third-quarter 2014. Yet both former RBOCs sell globally and cellular while also offering wireline telecom services.
Comcast is still the largest ISP and the largest TV provider, but only sells business services in about 75% of the USA. That's still a lot of eyeballs.
Comcast formed Business Services in 2006 with its launch of Internet + voice services for small businesses with less than 20 employees, who generated annual revenue of $265 million in its first year! In 2010 Comcast Business Services surpassed $1B in annual revenues. In 2012, 26% of total revenue for Comcast was SMB and 15% of revenue was Metro Ethernet. At about $2 Billion in CLEC revenue, it is larger than most pure CLECs. That size rivals even the ILEC/CLEC's like TDS, Windstream.
Windstream total revenues and sales were $1.46 billion in the third quarter, a decline of 2.9 percent from the same period a year ago. Enterprise and small business service revenues were $752 million. This is smaller than Comcast Business. Do you see why there might be pressure?
At a recent conference, Windstream's CEO said that he was wasn't worried about the cable merger. Really? Cable is beating up DSL and T1; you can win with EoC and fiber. But cable has way more buildings lit -- and way more access to capital for build-outs - - as well as a larger sales force.
"An early business services pioneer, Time Warner Cable's network assets include 58,000 unique fiber lit buildings, 100,000 near net and 860,000 HFC on net buildings to address business customers' needs." [fierce]
Did you read the part that said 15% of Comcast revenue is Metro Ethernet? Do you think they are selling that to small business?
CLECs HAVE to do 4 things:
Positioning - what are they good at delivering and where; Sales Machine - get proficient at selling solutions; UX - large part of the customer (user) experience happens before the first bill - it's call the on-boarding: the provisioning, implementation, training - repeatable processes that focus on the customer experience. Lastly, I would say Culture - if you treat your employees like customers it will show to partners and customers.
Lots of flux in the sector. We'll see what happens.
]]>This comes at a good time, because a recent conference call about latency on a Layer 2 private line had me biting my cheek. With the industry average SLA being 44 ms of latency on a private line, anything in the single digits is considered excellent connectivity.
Every device - switch or router - adds a little latency. Regen stations add a micro amount of latency. And then there is the finite speed that light can travel.
When the metrics get drawn into the equation - latency or speed - setting customer expectations properly is vital to a happy customer. (I didn't do enough discovery on this to realize that single digit latency was needed - so I really didn't set customer expectations properly.)
Back to re-design on the network to see about getting the latency to 1 ms, because Seth is right, the customer is right.
]]>They may spend on U-Verse like they did in Connecticut before selling off SNET.
Even ASE is a replacement for the old Metro Ethernet service based on Cisco 7609s. Truly, with CIR and no over-subscription, ASE looks an awful lot like frame relay, which AT&T retired two years ago.
It's like the two big Cellcos pushing video on mobile devices at the same time that they lobby for 500 MHz of spectrum to actually provide it. It's schizoid policy.
As Hunter Newby mentioned, "There is no nationwide LTE network. It's a fallacy."
The marketing doesn't stand up to the policy and the reality. That's not really good branding at all.
Also, the attorneys mentioned that AT&T floated the idea at the FCC in an ex-parte filing that they would be willing to sell the copper plant around the central office for the CLEcs to still offer T1 and EoC. What would that cost? Well, since SNET sold for $2B that would seem to be the most current valuation.
As Congress gets feedback for the revamped Telecom Act of 2015, I urge you to weigh in on how you feel about the TDM-to-IP transition. Public safety, AARP, consumer groups, state PSCs and of course Public Knowledge are all on the sides of the CLECs.
]]>Because the most important thing today is access to the network. (Granted, the network in most cases is The Internet.) The network matters more today than ever before.
No one really cares about the network - until it doesn't work. What they really care about is the packets on that network. Customers care about what the network lets them do.
We wouldn't have cloud services today if we didn't have ubiquitous access to the network through wireline broadband, fixed wireless, 4G, 3G, 2.5G, LTE, WiMax coupled with laptops, tablets and smartphones. In some cases, people are buying the smartphones for what they can do with this connected device.
The value of the network is in the connection.
Next time you are talking about the network, ask what they are doing with it.
]]>Alpheus today announced that it has acquired Net Star Telecommunications Inc. Net Star was Houston's 3rd largest ISP in 2006, according to the Biz Journal and the company website. No financial details were available.
]]>"One of the questions I am often asked by ISPs considering starting CLEC operations is whether access to unbundled network elements ("UNEs" or "the copper in the ground") will continue in the future. My response has always been something like, "Of course, the Telecom Act guarantees it. Congress would have to revise the Act for any changes to impact UNE availability." Those of you that know me know that I don't get involved in hyperbole, and I'm basically too optimistic to accept any sky is falling-type theories. Now though, there's something brewing in D.C. that genuinely worries me. Turns out AT&T has a plan to wipe out the Telecom Act of 1996, or at least, the parts regulating interconnection.
"I think the next great telecom policy battle is at hand-- nothing less than an attempt by AT&T and others to dismantle the Telecom Act, destroy CLECs, and essentially codify the ILEC/Cableco wireline duopoly. Smaller CLECs need to get organized and respond.
"Debate has begun on all fronts about the future of telecom regulation and I believe we are at the precipice of major change. Over the last couple years, AT&T and Verizon have been quietly lobbying for the FCC to consider rules to transition to an all-IP network, or in ILEC-speak "facilitate a sunset of the POTS network." Verizon is even using a natural disaster to justify removing copper (and therefore interconnection rights) from its network: Other ILECs have been murmuring that the Telecom Act is now 15 years old and needs to be updated.
"On November 8th, AT&T filed the first real proposal with the FCC to "modernize telecom regulation for an IP world." The petition is here [pdf].
"The AT&T petition is a direct shot across the bow of the FCC and CLECs, essentially daring the FCC to act. The petition is breathtaking in its audacity. Here are its main points and suggestions":
"Various stakeholders have responded. The National Regulatory Research Institute, a group representing state public utility commissions, issued a paper on the TDM to IP network transition (here).
"The trade associations have begun to weigh in on AT&T's proposal. CompTel and individual CLECs have lobbied for pro-competitive policies and filed proposals concerning the IP network transition, preserving access to copper loops in fiber-fed ILEC networks, and requiring direct IP to IP network interconnection.
"The cable trade association, NCTA, filed a response to the AT&T petition arguing that the FCC should take its time developing a record. After all, they've actually got a pretty good deal under the current rules. The NTCA, which represents smaller ILECs, filed its own petition on November 19th seeking regulatory relief.
"I am concerned that there is no organized coalition of smaller facilities-based CLECs to defend its interests and propose alternative ideas. I fear COMPTEL will push the interests of its large CLEC members over those of smaller CLECs. I do not think that necessarily the interests of Level 3, Windstream, etc., that do not purchase many copper loops, will adequately align with those of truly local competitors in suburban or rural markets reliant on central office connectivity at regulated rates. I'm especially worried because, well, those "local competitors" describes virtually my entire client base and the businesses of many people that I consider friends." [RAD's note: Mine too, btw]
"As a preliminary matter on strategy, I believe that it is fruitless to solely fight against a policy without offering clear alternative proposals. I also think that by refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of some opponents' suggestions detracts from the power of our unique ideas. I have several alternative, pro-competitive policy suggestions that would truly represent a modernization of the current system; seek to even the current playing field; and give the ILECs relief from some of the legacy regulatory requirements that are arguably outdated. For now though, it is better that these ideas remain off-list until consensus positions can be developed by a group.
"I have spoken to several of my facilities-based CLEC clients that are interested in forming an organized opposition to these attempts to gut the Telecom Act both at the FCC and to lobby Congress for a true modernization of the Act. I will be hosting a conference call for interested companies on Wednesday, December 12th at 2pm EST. The call is restricted to optimists--those that do not subscribe to the defeatist notion that the ILECs must always get their way. I have some very specific ideas and policy proposals, but am not pre-disposed to any particular strategy. I think it's time for like-minded companies to join forces to protect their interests and I'd be honored to represent them. Please contact me off-list at kris at lokt.net for call-in details."
[RAD Commentary] The RBOCs lost a court battle each recently.
VZW lost in Appeals court its fight to forbear cellular data roaming. It challenged the FCC's authority on this matter and lost.
Meanwhile, ATT lost a data throttling case in small claims court.
Copper clipping will affect Agents because EoC is a big deal - but requires copper plant!!!
XO, TelePacific, MegaPath and other CLECs would lose territories that they could offer EoC and flavors of DSL. ADTRAN, Zhone and Overture Networks make the geat gear that goes in the CO for CLEC's to provide EoC. These companies would be affected as well. Can you see the ripple effect?
How about affordable mid-band Internet Access for the SMB space? That is what EoC is - and it will go away.
]]>In a small way, fiber companies and MSOs have a similar strategy, but it revolves around fiber build-out and three year payback models. If the customer can be profitable to the carrier in three years, then the company will construct a fiber route to his premise. If not, either pay for the construction or find someone else.
Being choosy and able to say No is significant. Right now, cablecos wants a signed LOA before quoting out a prospect's site. If the prospect doesn't like the letter of agreement (that closely resembles a servcie order), no quote from Cox. The prospect is flummoxed. There is a reason that companies have policies and one of them is to be profitable.
Recently, I spoke with a Hosted PBX company exec about the difference between a CLEC sales approach and the HPBX company approach. The CLEC was working on lower margin while grabbing market share. The CLEC has access to the capital to win deals on lower margin. The HPBX company wants to maintain margin, but doesn't like losing deals. Either you chase market share or you chase profitability.
In some ways it is a public versus private debate. Public companies don't have the same objectives or metrics that a private company does. Public companies have more access to capital, but are slaves to the transparency and need to maintain a share price. This mindset is anathema to many private companies struggling for growth amid cash flow and capital issues.
I am a big proponent of selective selling for a couple of reasons. It is more profitable to be selective. The take-away close - the idea that someone can't have your service - works in more often than not. It is easier to create a value statement or USP for a target audience. It is also cheaper to market to a target audience as opposed to the general marketplace. Learn from the insurance industry - be picky about who you target and sell to.
Over the years, I have advised clients about Lit Building strategy. Still, many service providers do not have a procedure, process, strategy or plan to sell deep into a building that already contains a customer. Gone are the days of sales territories. However, as CLEC's begin to sell EoC and multi-location deals, they will learn that they will have to say no. They will say No to single location deals (if they are true to their multi-location strategy.) They will have to be picky about what customers they chase with 30, 50 and 100 megabit EoC offerings, since there are factors like distance and copper pair counts that affect the ability to deliver service. Sales departments will need to get more selective to be profitable.
]]>I learned a few things at the EarthLink training today in Tampa. EarthLink has 175K business customers and about 3 Million consumers, most of them dial-up customers, providing $20M in free cash flow per month. So of the $1.3B in annual revenue, about $500M is dial-up. ELNK has 4 data centers - Columbia, SC; Rochester, NY; Marlborough, MA; and 55 Marietta.)
The first (or 70+ slides) shows that Pipe is the foundation for Managed Security and other services. However, despite having 28,000 miles of fiber, they don't want to sell transport on it. Even On-Net gets the response that "This is not our sweet spot".
What is the Sweet Spot? As I wrote here, Multi-Location Multi-Access type across LEC's or cablecos.
The partner portal is in development. The customer portal, called myLink, seems cool they way that you can drill done on customer locations in Google Earth and open a trouble ticket.
Agents in the room, called T1 Slingers, asked about DSL, since EarthLink resells ADSL out of 10K end offices through 12 providers. As a resell service, a 1FB is required. And since neither RBOC is really supporting their copper plant and especially not DSL, it leaves the business DSL customer hanging for days when there is an outage. [See my post about Is DSL Done?] 3G/4G wireless backup is my answer for that. There are cool routers that even do it automatically.
The other question centered around T1. "You just are not going to make a living slinging T1's at $400 any more." PRI's are available east of the Mississippi still, which actually IS an advantage for ELNK. TDM PRI's are still the preferred reliable way to deliver voice to a PBX, especially with alarms, faxes, and elevators.
It was an hour on MPLS. I still find it amazing that almost 9 years after my first MPLS class, we are still presenting the Fundamentals of MPLS. For Agents, it will be about layering on services to the MPLS network. The sticky stuff is value added services.
Retail needs a voice line, some Internet, credit card processing, payroll and data backup. That should actually be a bundle that someone offers. ELNK has the old New Edge AX platform that connects payroll and cc processing to the MPLS Network. Add on a VoIP line and some data backup and there's a bundle. Want to make it stickier? Add network DVR to the service so that those IP surveillance cameras can be viewed from anywhere (and can't be erased locally). Bingo! (Do you have an opening in Product Management? My resume is here.)
The team mentioned POS, Inventory, HR and Loyalty programs. Do you have those on the AX platform? Those would make some excellent sticky add-ons.
"So we have an Internet T1 service that connects you securely to one of 4 data centers, Mr. Prospect. Do you currently have a payroll service? Are you looking to upgrade your POS? Are you worried about security on your credit card data (PCI compliance)?"
That's where the conversation has to go. Even though the customers just want the access - as cheap as possible - Agents will have to steer the conversation to: applications on top of that access (AOTTA).
So back to MPLS with Type II access. Ethernet is delivered over a Type II DS3 from the LEC. T1 is delivered over the ILEC copper pair. DSL is a resell of the ILEC product offering. Then for outliers to attach to the MPLS network, there is an IPSec GRE tunnel with BYOB (bring your own broadband). Blended Access.
EarthLink is a Sprint MVNO, but it is more for 3G access where there isn't DSL to attached to the MPLS. Also, for the MPLS customers that want to have one bill that included cellular.
Something else I learned: ELNK bought STS because Rolla knew the Mark Amarant, CEO of STS, and STS had a reputation for best practices in on-boarding customers in the Hosted PBX realm. That's smart, because Hosted PBX (like VDI, another product that ELNK is rolling out), requires a detailed on-boarding process from pre-sales through post-sale, including mapping extensions to desktops, extension attributes, handset type, employee training and some on-site installation. EarthLink is not selling Hosted PBX as a stand-alone. You have to buy access from ELNK.
So in summary word of the day: "Blended Access".
Key association: Multi-location multi-access MPLS.