On Rad's Radar? - hosted uc Archives

No Traction in Hosted PBX Market

2012-05-25T12:18:09Z

According to Insight Research, independent hosted PBX providers should be able to take some small business market share from the Duopoly over the next five years.

The small business market size is more than 40 millions lines, says Robert Rosenberg, INSIGHT Research president. That will mean even more hosted PBX seats since lines and seats are not 1 for 1. "Our study suggests that thus far, small businesses haven't quite latched on to this new technology so the revenue today is only in the range of one-half billion dollars, but by 2015 hosted services will be nearly a $1.2 billion market and the adoption rate of the hosted services by small businesses will accelerate," Rosenberg concluded.

If the US Hosted PBX space is just $500M, I think that they have calculated wrong or at least not taken into account the hundreds of smaller providers with less than 5000 seats. Phone.com, Pingtel, Flat Planet Phone Co., FreedomVoice, PBX-Change and many, many more providers that you find at ITEXPO and elsewhere.

All the research I have seen states that Comcast is hands down the winner in the US Hosted PBX space with about 300K seats.

8x8 is now reaching $100M in revenue with ARPU of $244 on its 27,000 business customers.

Smoothstone is now West IP Communications after a $120M bid. Smoothstone is probably at $40M in revenue.

M5 Networks, recently acquired by ShoreTel, is doing $48M in revenue.

Telesphere, a member of the Broadsoft-based Cloud Communications Alliance, is doing about $30M.

Admittedly, most Hosted VoIP companies are doing less than $4M in sales, but if you add up hundreds of them at $4M or even $1M, you get to $500M fast. I already listed over $300M in revenue, so that $500M might be low. Still even if it was $1B in pales in comparison to US wireless revenue of $335B in 2012 or fixed network voice revenue that is about $132B or even the $38B in broadband access revenue. [carrier revolution from TIA study]

A Lesson in Value Proposition

2012-05-24T02:41:02Z

This came across my twitter stream this week:

"Must-read for founders: A VC explains how to build a killer value proposition" on VentureBeat by Michael Skok, a Venture Capitalist at North Bridge Venture Partners. His slideshare page contains a couple of really good decks of information about Go-To-Market and Value Prop - two things that I help companies address in this industry.

That's his Go-to-Market diagram.

A Value Proposition is created by filling in these blanks:

For (target customers)
Who are dissatisfied with (the current alternative)
Our product is a (new product)
That provides (key problem-solving capability)
Unlike (the product alternative)

When he asks (in slide 20) "What is your compelling breakthrough?" I think about Hosted PBX companies. None of them have any special sauce. If 400 of you have a Broadsoft, it comes down to a few variables:

sales execution and marketing acumen;
technology proficiency to get all the pieces of UC to work smoothly;
onboarding success, which means customer service too;
integration services with other tech for the customer;

When I look at Agents, the same applies. You don't really have any special sauce either, so to stand out you need to either be great at sales, marketing, customer service, or product knowledge, but really a combination of these.

For Master Agents, it will come down to culture and tools that they develop.

Skok says something that Seth Godin preaches: "Ideas are worth little to nothing without: People to execute; Culture to select the right people; and Vision to attract the best stakeholders."

Big Mac versus Hamburger

2012-05-07T19:07:38Z

When selling Hosted PBX and other unified communications, it's a lot like giving someone a Big Mac. Extra sauce, more calories, cheese and an extra patty for your customer, but all he wanted when he hit the drive-thru was a hamburger.

What is the Value Prop of VoIP?

2012-04-16T20:51:05Z

"It is happening and no one seems interested in stopping it - that hosted voice services are rapidly becoming a commodity service," Dave Michels

"According to the Telecommunications Industry Association, wireless has become the preferred voice-services option. Wireless revenue in 2012 is forecast at $335 billion, while all other forms of fixed network voice revenue will only total $176 billion ($132 billion for wireline, $38 billion for broadband access and $6 billion in cable/television revenue)," blogs David Byrd of Broadvox.

Those are interesting numbers. And there is more interesting numbers when you look at VoIP.

"Zeus Kerravala estimates penetration [of SIP Trunking] is right around 5% in the United States," reports Razorsight. Just 5%! The blog continues with: "In some cases, it is argued, SIP trunks do not save money." This statement flies in the face of an imperative in our industry. If a SIP Trunk isn't saving money, why not sell and install a TDM PRI that has known stability and quality? This would certainly be the reverse of where the Industry is heading: all IP. But if we are heading all IP in a move to save money - more for the carriers than the customers, I think - and SIP Trunks are not a big cost savings, where does that leave the sales proposition?

According to Insight Research, Hosted PBX is about $500M now. That's not a lot. I figure with 1000 service providers running around yelling "I'll save you money" while cutting pricing to close any deal, that figure would have to be greater than $1B.

Revenue is dipping in everything - GigE ports in a data center, T1's, MPLS, DIA, broadband. The only rates going up are cellular and TV.

Scary stat: "In 2010, operators made on average only $13.21 per user per year from mobile VoIP services."

There are reasons that the Hosted PBX revenue is small: VoIP is sold as cheaper than TDM, so on the conversion from TDM to VoIP the bill declines. Also, there is no way to accurately report the Hosted PBX industry with its 1000+ providers out there with everything from an Asterisk box to a Broadsoft suite. Also, switched voice traffic is migrating to other avenues like chat, IM, SMS, and cellular. That's why Unified Messaging and Hosted UC should be huge - but sadly are not.

One reason is that the sales pitch has been so loud for so long on I Will Save You Money that we have trained the marketplace to buy it that way. Sure, you can blame the Agents and the Direct Sales folks, but at the end of the day -- going back to the pin drop in 1986, we have been working on giving away margin and revenue. Oh and neglecting Value.

"The cable industry, without a doubt, is the main purveyor of VoIP in the United States. An industry strategy is to bundle video, VoIP voice and data. The approach is to offer a good deal on the three services....The bundling strategy has served cable operators well and has been embraced by telephone companies," reports Carl Weinschenk. This bundling has even resulted in a Price War. Again no Value, just commodity price shopping.

The thing about VoIP that most companies don't get is that it is just an app - Google Talk or any chat app that adds voice; gaming consoles that let you chat with your peers; Skype; MagicJack; mobile apps on your cellphone; audio conferencing; and now Hosted PBX. The Value of VoIP is that it can be attached to other apps like email or a computer we call a PBX or on another computer we call an IP Phone. The Value isn't in the dial-tone. The Value is in how it is applied and used.

Hosted PBX (and its complicated cousin, Hosted UC) take VoIP to a different level. Therein lies the problem though. Now it's tougher to sell!

The value of VoIP is in a click-to-call button or a Speak Live app on your website that converts prospects into customers.

The value in VoIP is allowing the medical office scheduling to be completed by the computer and not a human to save time, be efficient and let the office manager do other tasks.

With debt piling up and revenue waning, it's time for the carriers to change the way they sell. It's time to sell on Value. It's also time to realize that Layer 7 of the OSI model - Apps - is where they break-away from the ILEC's.

I've written before about what EarthLink should do, about niche marketing and about bundling. No is listening yet. But I will keep trying to drive this point home.

Another way to look at it:

People would pay more for Voice if we would sell it in a non-traditional way. Stop selling it like a POTS line.

Look at what Jon Arnold writes, "Building off that base, [ShoreTel] understands the voice 2.0 value proposition - it's all about the applications and the experience - not just cheaper, reliable connectivity. With VoIP, dial tone quickly becomes a commodity, and their view is that high value applications are the best way to differentiate against low priced competitors. One example was their Live Answer demo - a simple cloud-based diagnostic tool that shows what percentage of calls is being answered live. This basic piece of information has inherent value not just in the contact center, but for any business where phone inquiries can lead to sales."

Get Off the Agents' Back

2012-04-12T21:48:50Z

These were my thoughts on the 2011 CPZ that I was a panelist on. These are my thoughts as a reaction to the latest CPZ.

Surprisingly, not everyone read my post about how the whole telecom eco-system is shifting. Agents, Masters, Carriers and Cloud Providers are all going to experience a Shift.

Did you ever see Shift Happens?

Considering all these factors - Quota, Debt, declining revenue, pricing pressure, and flat markets - the future does not look bright.

Most of the people who were talking on the CPZ 2012 video about transactional agents are not actually agents and to my knowledge never have been.

Does a subset of Agents shop masters? Probably. On the other hand, I know masters who shop to sub-agents with "I'll give you another point or two to go with me." Part of this is due to the weight of quota on the Master Agency business. Master Agents are under a tremendous pressure to hit quota to keep the support level and sustain the commission revenue at its current level. So don't get mad at the Sub-Agent when Masters are doing it too.

Value and Telecom

The whole Industry talks about VALUE, but can they describe it? No. Our Industry has been a series of me-too, arbitrage bandits selling the same thing: UNE-P, Integrated T1, SIP Trunking, and today it is MPLS. It's all just similar looking and sounding services. How does an Agent or a Prospect tell the difference?

Branding is non-existent in our space, except for the Duopoly of ILEC and MSO. You create value with branding. Other value comes from benefits and differentiation. We are lacking the Differentiation.

Without value, it becomes a commodity. Commodities are price shopped. Tell me the difference between any two Internet T1's or any two SIP Trunks.

Carriers are Unhappy with Agents

Just because Agents don't act like you want them to doesn't mean they are all in the wrong. You built this current eco-system. Now you want the ship to turn on your say so. Easier said than done, pal.

Truthfully, have you done all you can to give Agents the tools they need to sell your product? Not to be repetitive, but have you established your value statement? Do you know who the target market is? Do you know what triggers the sale? Who is the actual buyer? Answer those questions first.

The Industry wants the Channel to go upstream, except they don't. By that I mean, the carriers want revenue. Period. It's all about quota. While they might want an Agent to sell MPLS, they aren't turning away T1 business either. However, they want the Agent to turn away from that business to go upstream. Yeah.

Keep in mind that it might be that the marketplace doesn't want to go upstream either.

Right now, Cable is doing an excellent job of disrupting the market and stealing business with cheap loops.

At a CLEC training, it was stated that cable would own the sub-$500 business. It sounded like they were conceding it. The cablecos will become the de facto ILEC's. I have no idea what the ILECs are going to do. Only the 2 RBOC's have a cellular business. And CLEC's will probably run into too many problems to continue to sell network access.

In that same training, the CLEC stated they wanted Multi-site, multi-access business. Unfortunately, everyone wants that business. Masergy, Smoothstone, EarthLinke, Megapath, Netwolves, Wind, CenturyLink - just to name a few. To hear carriers talk, I guess, MPLS is the new Integrated T1 (in every way). They say there is more margin in it. No there is not. There is more revenue per customer, but they will have to give away margin to (A) hit every site and (B) win the business in a hyper-competitive marketplace.

No one buys the way most service providers sell either. That's why the carriers are always searching for Consultative Sales Professionals. The whole industry sells what they want - and it is followed up by a series of me-too. Just because one CLEC is selling Managed Security does not mean that the marketplace wants it or will buy it or that it will want it delivered that exact way. It also doesn't mean that the next eight CLEC's or service providers need to market that same offering. Do we know what the marketplace is expecting?

How Things Can Shift

One thing that could cause a big shift is if Tech Data becomes a Master Agent. With TDMobility, they already have the platform and are selling cellular in a Master Agent model. Plus by offering mobile device management, TEM and all that hardware, they have caught up to the big Masters. CDW could become a Master Agent if they wanted to - and they might have to in order to sell more hardware.

Dell could become a Cloud Provider. As it stands now, they are an MSP Enabler. And Dell is selling CDN now! It will be interesting to see what Ingram and SYNNEX - both betting on cloud services for their future - do to not have to compete with Dell head-to-head, while also competing with Tech Data.

I don't think that most telcos will make the shift to managed services and cloud successfully. It's labor intensive. It doesn't scale like telecom. They think they can automate everything, but that only works for cookie cutter stuff. Plus they can barely deliver telco services without a headache. I think MSP's will win this war. Any company that can integrate apps (like CRM and invoicing with Exchange and Sharepoint) will be successful. If they partner with VAR's who can handle the on-going maintenance and support that all this technology will require, they win big.

Can the Channel change to become Trusted Advisors? Probably not all of them. Selling Cloud is different than selling telecom. Period.

The Channel basically sells replacement services. Here are some examples: VoIP for POTS: SIP Trunk for PRI; Ethernet for T1. Each transaction is replacing like for like. Even MPLS is just a replacement for Frame Relay, ATM and IP-VPN.

That is why selling Hosted PBX and other cloud services are so challenging: It is not a simple replacement. It's not like for like.

The sales process for selling replacement services is pretty easy. When the sale becomes about business process change or fork-lift upgrades (like Hosted UC or Virtual Desktop), the sales skills are different. The sales cycle is different - and longer. Provisioning takes longer. Ultimately, commission payments are much later.

This is really important to remember.

Selling Cloud and Managed Services will not just be more of a challenge, but it may be less satisfying. Why? Transactional sales types are motivated and driven by quick hits and a lot of ink in a month. Extended sales cycles are less motivating to this type of sales person.

Moreover, as commissions decline with the price decreases, agents have to sell more and more to maintain their revenue goals. Shifting to new products, new sales skills, and a different sales approach will be a huge leap, especially without training, a financial cushion, a deep desire for change, and vendor support.

Agents are not FARMERS! They are Hunters! They do not do Account Management, cross-sell or upsell to the base. Smart agencies will higher a couple of farmers to work the customer base and perform account management.

All of this makes me wonder who will be the Agent of tomorrow, who will be grooming accounts and performing consultative selling of complex solutions to their customers?

What is the Market Expecting?

2012-04-01T17:46:30Z

Tuesday I was in Vegas at the Channel Partners Conference mainly for the TCA events. At the TCA Channel Chief Summit, Tiffani Bova of Gartner and Rauline Ochs of IPED Market Bridge Alliance presented research. The take away for me was in perspective.

No one buys the way most service providers sell. That's why we are always searching for Consultative Sales Professionals. Because the whole industry sells what they want - and it is followed up by a series of me-too.

Just because one CLEC is selling Managed Security does not mean that the marketplace wants it or will buy it or that it will want it delivered that exact way. It also doesn't mean that the next eight CLEC's or service providers need to market that same offering.

The market is consuming technology differently. It enters the business via the consumer. About 70% of devices are owned by the consumer in the business environment. Only about 30% are paid for by the business. That means support for devices either isn't available or is imposed on the IT staff by the employees. That's a confusing (and expensive) way to handle it. Don't you agree?

Most of what Bova and Ochs presented had to do with mobility and Cloud. Mobility is a huge problem for most CLEC's as the model for cellular sales is unprofitable - whether they sign a wholesale, agent or MVNO contract - the margin on cellular is thin to none.

And what is prompting Cloud? Two things: ubiquitous broadband and a mobile workforce.

Ubiquitous is really hyperbole because even with 3G, 4G and wi-fi, you can't get bandwidth everywhere and even when it is available it is shoddy (like at tech conference hotels).

Mobile workforce means a couple of things. One that more businesses have accepted remote workers - whether at home locally, across the country or across the globe. The economic downturn (and all the consolidation) has translated into businesses having less workers but expecting more work. This means working at home, while on the road, etc. Hence, not just email, but the application data has to be available from any authorized, connected device. That is the beauty of Cloud.

Cloud changes the way business is done.

Read that again, because that means it has to be sold that way.

It's easier to sell email, because everyone has email and it is almost a requirement. Selling unified messaging gets more complicated. Unified Communications and Collaboration is just too complex of a sale, of an explanation, of an implementation, of a deployment. That's where the service providers want to go, but they neglect the challenge of the sale. There is a lack of the story, the sales triggers, the value proposition, the WHY, and of course the on-boarding.

One thing Bova pointed out was that VDI (virtual desktop) sales have grown in EMEA (Africa and Mid-East) while have stagnated in North America. One reason: VAR's have too big a quota with HP or Dell to take a 500 desktop refresh to VDI instead of selling 500 desktops. Not just the quota for the discount, but to sustain Gold level service. It's the same with Cisco, Microsoft, etc. VAR's will keep selling what they sell for 2 reasons: First, to maintain the current level of vendor support to continue to service current clients in the manner that is expected (or even contracted). Second, making the changes to shift business to an MSP or all service model is complicated and expensive. Bova suggested firing clients and employees to create the business you will need in 5 years, but that's easy to say from a consulting seat. Not so easy from a business owner perspective.

When EarthLink told its channel partners in Tampa that it only wanted Multi-Site multi-access opportunities, it didn't come right out and say that it would stop selling T1's, but that was the underlying message. (And ELNK did tell me that 1GB and 10GB private line, even ON-net, was not what they wanted to sell.) That's one way to start planning for where you want to be. Say no while being specific about what you are looking to offer.

As a whole I don't think the service providers have any idea what buyers are buying or why. Just because you WANT to sell MPLS with security or Hosted UC&C or whatever, doesn't mean that prospects will actually BUY it (that way).

When does something become a commodity? When the customer buys it directly online.

For non-commodity services, you need a well trained sales force that understands the brand, the value proposition, and the target. As an industry we aren't there yet.

I'm going to leave you with that.

Coming soon two posts: (1) Master Agents are like Pharma Reps. (2) Tech Data versus Master Agents.

I Can Do It Myself

2012-03-06T14:37:09Z

I hear this all the time: "I can do it myself!" Backup solution? No, I'll build one myself. Outsource your email? No, I can run my own email server. White-label VoIP? Nope. I'm going to spin up an Asterisk box and use that.

You think I am kidding, but I'm not.

Yesterday it was: We needed to re-do our Broadsoft portal. After shopping around, we decided to build it ourselves.

It makes me wonder about a couple of things:

Are you a hobby or a business? A hobby is when you like to tinker with technology. A business is something else.

Do you know what your time and effort is worth? It takes a lot of time and effort to build a solution, maintain that hardware and software, and support it. Add in licensing, backup, redundancy and security to that budget number. Factor in that while spending your time and effort on Building Your Own, you could have been doing something else -- some other priority, some other revenue generating activity, or personal time.

There is always a debate about buy versus build. There are many reasons to buy: faster to market, outsourced skill and support, no CAPEX, knowledge base, etc. Yet there are reasons to build: you want more control, special features, proprietary, etc.

In today's world, where most service providers don't market very well or brand themselves (or their servcies), buying is the way to go. Why? It isn't about you or what you want. It's about your customers and what they want. It's a speed to market. It's about capturing wallet. And you can't do all that by yourselves. You just can't.

When I examine VDI, VoIP/Hosted PBX, UC, backup and conferencing, there isn't any special sauce being pitched. To the marketplace, it's one big nosie box about the tech and its features. That's why it doesn't sell fast and that's why you don't have to spend the effort building your own (in my opinion).

Can you put a competitive service together that your customers will be happy with in the most efficient manner?

Don't look at the cost (unless you factor in your time saved), look at results.

A Brief View of Integra Telecom

2012-02-21T18:51:16Z

I interviewed Integra in Austin last year. Like quite a few interviews I do, I just can't find the time to write up the blog. It may seem like I do this blogging thing full time, but my bills still get paid doing consulting to ISP-CLEC-VOIP-MSO companies and being a telecom agent. It makes for a lot of juggling and long hours.

Integra Telecom is a CLEC in 11 Western states, including: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah and Washington - bringing in about $700M in revenue, in part due to the acquisition of Electric Lightwave and Escheleon Telecom. The parts I like are the 5,000-mile long-haul fiber network and the 3,000-mile metro network that feeds about 1,900 buildings. Now with Kevin O'Hara as CEO, Integra is re-branding itself as a "fiber-based, business-grade networking, communications and cloud solutions provider." That's right: from CLEC to Cloud provider.

Integra Telecom is going the UC&C route by "providing network-wide availability of hosted Microsoft Communication Services, which includes Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft Outlook 2010, Microsoft Lync, Microsoft SharePoint, enhanced encryption and other valuable features," according to the pr.

At ITEXPO West in 2011, they "introduced a cloud security services suite of managed, networked-based security products for companies that rely on the Internet for their business and need to protect their network from unauthorized and malicious access and content. The first available product is Cloud Firewall Service, a network-based unified threat prevention service that provides secure inbound and outbound Internet access without the need for on-premise equipment or additional staff," according to the pr. That service keeps them in the hunt with Netwolves, EarthLink and others who have rolled out a managed firewall service. Security is supposed to be the buzz word this year. We'll see.

To me, it's all about On-Net. Whether I am talking about EarthLink or Integra or WIND or XO or TWT or L3, it is all about LIT Buildings! Why? You already spent the capital to put fiber there, so get deep into that building. Then layer on services. Big pipes will need security since everyone is getting hacked.

Did I mention that Integra Telecom is channel friendly? (Though they haven't joined TCA yet.

What About Selling Cloud?

2012-02-21T15:55:02Z

At The CPZ, the rest of the panel were cloud guys (VAR's and Hosted UC). This is a snippet of the conversation where the panel is talking about how transactional telecom sales are dead, long live the Cloud!

People deemed LD dead years ago (like when MCI went BK), too, but there are still a large number of agents and resellers making money on LD and pre-paid calling cards.

Until TDM is retired, agents will still be selling POTS, DSL and T1 - and making a living doing so.

Here's the problem with selling Cloud (other than the fact that cloud providers keep screwing commissions to agents):

The sales process is different! Selling replacement telecom services is not the same as selling managed services (like cloud and IT). How different? The conversation, script, questions and prospecting for IT is distinct. The buyers may not be the same. Sales triggers are dissimilar. It requires sales and product training.

I worked for a Novell VAR from 1996-1999. The sales trigger was when something broke. In telecom, the sales trigger is usually the end of the contract, because the penalties for leaving early are huge. Other sales triggers for telecom: expansion, moving, or a shift in IT (i.e., more bandwidth needed because of VoIP, Citrix or backup).

Dave makes a point about "do you want to be in that cheap stuff or do you want to do good by your customer". Do agents want to be in "the cheap stuff"? No. Our commissions are based on MRR. We would like it to be as high as possible. However, we don't make the prices, the carriers do, so why blame the sales force?

In some cases - like government agencies -- the prospect is looking to reduce the telecom spend due to budget constraints. If I don't do it, someone will.

Back to being mad about the prices falling:

Agents didn't commoditize telecom, CLEC's did. It started with the LD penny wars and has continued every since. In 1999, when Covad, Rhythms and Northpoint all IPO'ed, all 3 selling DSL nationwide against each other without any differentiation was another hit. DSL (broadband) created pricing pressure on the T1 business, which continues to erode to this day. Moreover, the Integrated T1 became a commodity long ago, again due to a lack of CLEC differentiation (branding, innovation, product design and marketing). SIP trunking came along as a "cheaper" alternative to a PRI. See how that goes?

Today, we have $200 Covad T1's and $2 per MB Cogent bandwidth adding to the price compression. So who's fault is it? (I won't even get into the companies that went through BK and really screwed up telecom with that arbitrage mindset or the fact that even as revenue diminishes debt is increasing.)

When you look at the Hosted VoIP space, there isn't a whole lot of differentiation either. There are so many players, it is confusing to the buyers and sellers. It doesn't help that so many of the providers don't know what they want to be or who they want to target. "Wholesale, white-label, retail - whatever! Just sell something!"

In the video, I make a point that no sales person is going to walk away from revenue. Well, most carriers don't walk away from revenue either - even bad revenue (no margin revenue).

Let me give you an example: there is a Hosted UC shop that really only wants UC customers, but doesn't really say that to its Channel. When an Agent brings them "small" hosted PBX deals, it is frowned upon -- but they don't say No (to the revenue).

If the carrier doesn't have a target market - like AboveNet and Smoothstone do - then it is selling against everyone everywhere. That's just stupid. Service Providers need to start thinking like fiber and cablecos: ON-Net is Good. Type II is bad.

As we get into Cloud services, we are talking bloody red ocean - everyone and their brother is a player: web hosts, data centers, MSP, VAR, telcos, cablecos, CLEC, ITSP. Yeah, that will make it easy to sell. How would an agent even do a competitive analysis?

If you want an Agent to sell your stuff, answer these questions:

Who is buying your stuff right now? (Be specific: vertical, NAICS code, buyer title)
Why are they buying it?
Why are they buying it from you?
What's your special sauce? Or where's the beef?
What questions are you asking to get the conversation going?
What was the sales trigger for the buyer? (in other words, what made them want to buy?)

If you can't answer these questions (or want to give me BS answers), this is your problem! Don't blame the Channel.

Telecom Tidbits on Presidents Day

2012-02-20T19:22:10Z

On a LinkedIn group we are discussing SLA (service level agreements) and how they do not represent uptime. If you need uptime, you need redundancy. You need to build a resilient network. Netwolves has a solution called Bonded Broadband. "NetWolves consolidates the best carriers through their Bonded Broadband product by combining four circuits of diverse types from different carriers. It supports DSL, Cable, Fixed Wireless and VSAT (and even a T-1, etc.) simultaneously. It will to operate, though at lower speed, even when it loses one of the underlying circuits. It provides a level of high availability with diversity that is unique and valuable. Bonded Broadband always includes 1 static IP for the virtual circuit."

Conferencing is a different kind of sale. It's good that InterCall has added some scripting into their FAQ. By that I mean, by provided answers to questions that come up in sales meetings, like "The majority of our meetings are audio only, how can Unified Meeting add value to those meetings?" More companies should do that.

Aastra IP phones are not widely supported by Broadsoft based VoIP providers. Aastra gets a lift since Metaswitch based EarthLink selected 6700i SIP phones for EarthLink Complete™ (hosted VoIP service).

Analysts are raving about Rogers Communications in Canada launching One Number by utilizing Counterpath's Bria softphone. Now the customer has one number on any platform - PC, Mac, mobile, etc. Rogers mentions IMS, that long ago over-hyped architecture that was supposed to solve the telecom world's many problems, as the underlying network piece. The other is the Bria software, which presents an almost Google Voice like service. "Rogers, however, isn't simply re-branding the Bria Android and iPhone clients. It's doing something far more sophisticated. It's using the underlying Bria technology to power a web-based portal that can make and receive phone calls and send text messages to any Canadian number as well as video chat with other Rogers One Number users - all at no charge and with no penalty to a customer's voice minute or SMS caps," writes GigaOM. Jon Arnold has a good look at the service on his blog too, including a post about the beta launch.

AT&T partnered with VMware to launch AT&T's "Virtual Private Cloud". I have a blog coming up about telcos and Cloud. Watch for it this week.

New to the American market but not new to the global telecom industry, One Access

They make CPE for CLEC on multi-access platforms.

Looking for a white-label VoIP company? Flat Planet Phone Company is looking for a few select partners that want to own a VoIP business and the healthy (40%) margins that come with it.

I get press releases because PR folks like to make me annoyed daily. What really gets me is how many make outrageous claims like free calls and no more cell charges: "Zipring works with every phone and turns any smartphone into a free or cheap calling phone. It supports all SIP-enabled devices and does not handcuff users to Zipring software. It also turns any iPod Touch into a smart phone."

Carbonite has some cool new ads to sell online backup [from Adweek]

XO Communications Inc. launched a three-year strategic plan in 2012 that involves streamlining its product offering, including eliminating most TDM services.

The FCC has a lot on its plate and wants to close some dockets. FCC's Genachowski Tells Congress He Will Consider Closing Title II Docket, which proposed to reclassify Internet access service as a telecommunications service subject common carrier regulations.

I emailed my list this post from L3 this morning. How Kodak is just like POTS.

Why Did ShoreTel Buy M5?

2012-02-10T15:48:57Z

Recently, M5 Communications was acquired for about $160 million by ShoreTel. The premise PBX vendor had a bad quarter and caved to the pressure of Hosted PBX. Avaya, Interactive Intelligence and MITEL have hosted offerings. At some point, ShoreTel had to jump on that bandwagon - due to the big opportunity (ask any analyst) and the threat that cloud comm places on premise only sellers.

I think some of that money - now $162 M based on the stock - was for Dan and his team to stay on and continue to run the machine. There are a couple of million in accelerators in the LOI (letter of intent), also. Plus what does Shoretel know about running a service or the proprietary softswitch that M5 switched to in 2010? The M5 team had to stay (for a while).

ShoreTel's C-level exes probably saw that the hole in their strategy by not having a CaaS strategy. After that, the decision comes down to build-or-buy. The advantage to buying is that - if done properly - you get revenue, a market proven service offering, and a sales channel. Building from scratch has a big learning curve, capital investment and little revenue.

By scooping up M5, ShoreTel gets a proven business model. At $48 million in revenue, M5 was one of the giants in the Hosted PBX space with a proven sales record that had grown 30% in the last year. Their indirect and direct sales teams were effectively selling the service. Not many VoIP providers are organically growing revenue. In 2010, M5 was doing about $32M in revenue when it acquired Gekkotech, a Chicago based VoIP provider that was utilizing M5's softswitch platform and bringing in about $8M.

M5 left the Broadsoft platform in 2010. This move increased the profit margin by eliminating the licensing fees to Broadsoft. This might have been another factor that made M5 attractive - margin. For the second quarter of fiscal year 2012, ShoreTel revenue was $58.0 million with a net loss of $1 million. Hardware alone is a difficult business to be in, ask Amazon or Dell.

Under the terms of the deal, M5 shareholders will receive approximately $84 million in cash and 9.5 million shares of ShoreTel stock, for a total of about $146 million on stock value at close of sale. Moreover, M5 shareholders have incentives that could realize up to $13.7 million, according to the company's press release.

M5 will be run as a separate division with CEO Dan Hoffman still managing things. This is a smart strategy; the same one that TelePacific took when it acquired Telekenex. The culture of CaaS is different than hardware / premise PBX. There is some rivalry there. Why break either corporate culture?

This transaction is just another example of how the legacy telecom world will have to jump into the new cloud world - mostly through buying since it will be cheaper and faster that building it from scratch.

Why can't the rest of the cloud comm space get this deal? One reason is that investors don't look at companies with less than $10M in revenue. You don't have a proven model at $4-5M. It's a different deal at that size. At over $20M, investors know that you can sell and you can scale. It's proven. Another reason was the average revenue per customer at almost $2000. As Q-Advisors told the crowd at Cloud Comm Expo in Austin in 2011, that number has to be north of a thousand to be attractive. Those are pretty good reasons for the 3x revenue number.

Educating the Channel with Certifications

2012-02-07T22:19:20Z

One of the panels last week at ITEXPO was titled Educating the Channel with Certifications. When you consider that as a founding board member and current VP of the Technology Channel Association, education is a primary objective, this topic was relevant. The panelists were Louis Haynor, CSO at Alteva, and Jim Riley of Apptix. I didn't know that Apptix was an agent of Alteva and had been through their certification program. Surprise! (The other surprise was the video cameras that Alteva had brought in to record the panel. No, I didn't sign a release. I am waiting on royalties.)

Alteva's cert program is really a sales program that consists of product training and the Sandler method of sales. Haynor did point out that agents need to know about the product but more importantly to sell Hosted UC, you have to re-think how you sell services. The certification helps with that. It is not a one-time program; it is continuing education.

The TCA has a certification called the Certified Telecom Professional. It is a baseline education program with a 100-question exam on a two hour timer. It is a challenge, daunting enough that many telecom veterans have anxiety about not passing it.

Haynor spoke about charging - $350 - for the training because otherwise it doesn't have value. It made me think that at $199 for the CTP, it is time to raise the price.

Riley spoke about the value of the cert being that there is economic impact on the Channel, the Carrier and the Customer. While there was agreement that education is vital to cloud and managed services adoption in the marketplace, I couldn't get any concrete examples out of the panel. It's a principle we can agree upon, but apparently can't quantify.

Since on-boarding is integral to a positive customer experience, I asked if that was touched on in the cert. It isn't because Alteva has a team for that. However, properly setting customer expectations is part of the on-boarding process. Many agents and VAR's want to be the conduit to the customer and want to be the one providing the timelines to the customer to manage and coordinate the deployment and on-boarding of the workforce. It seems to me that this should be a part of the training. Haynor said that at this stage, agents are more like referral partners or lead generation. Alteva sales people will close the deal. Smoothstone and other carriers have a similar take. I would suggest that if I paid $350 for training and spent the two days taking it that at the end I should be able to prospect, complete the sale and be involved with the on-boarding.

It is transferrable knowledge though. Alteva is Broadsoft based, so with that training, agents should be able to sell any Broadsoft Hosted PBX service via the Sandler sales process.

Making Hosted UC Simple

2012-02-02T20:45:17Z

Simple Signal sketches out Hosted UC on a napkin at ITEXPO. I guess it is that simple.

M5 Bought by Shoretel

2012-02-02T19:10:16Z

So news at ITEXPO is that Shoretel bought M5 Networks last night for $145M, which 3x revenue. Hope shines anew in the Cloud Comm Alliance.

UPDATE:

According to the WSJ, the value of the deal is up to $162M, including $84M in cash and the rest in stock. M5 has about 2000 customers and revenue at about $58M.

M5 Networks migrated off the Broadsoft M6 platform to its own softswitch in 2010. It is a good sign for the Industry that a premise PBX maker sees the light and buys a Hosted PBX provider.

The Trouble with UC Sales

2012-01-23T22:01:45Z

In a recent study, titled IDC MarketScape: Worldwide Unified Communications Voice Infrastructure 2011-2012 Vendor Analysis, IDC analyst Rich Costell wrote that "Customers still struggle to justify the deployment of UC and calculate its overall ROI." The conclusion: "educating potential customers is critical" to UC sales.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein.

The transition to selling UC will need to be done with first educating the sales channels. I still hear cost savings as the first reason to sell VoIP.

Also, no two UC packages are similar. In fact, the whole term Unified Communications is garbage can term for everything. In the call center space, it seems to be better defined.

Unified Communications, for the most part, begins with a VoIP service and goes on to include text, SMS, chat, email, video, and conferencing. Then we add social media and collaboration. In some cases, we had integration with CRM and other software applications. This is a huge can of varying stuff - in a marketplace that barely has unified messaging, a single inbox for email and voicemail.

This kind of varying component mixture is more like stew and adds to the confusion to both the customers and the sales teams.

"Since there is no 'one size fits all' solution for UC adoption, customers have not only the advantage of having a variety of platforms to source their functionality but also the challenge of figuring out which solution is most appropriate for them," according to Rich Costello, senior research analyst, Unified Communications/Enterprise Communications Infrastructure.

When the product contains a large array of services selling it is daunting.

Where do you begin?
Where do you stop?
What will deployment look like?
Will the employees actually be able to utilize the benefits?
Who's going to manage this?
Will it integrate with Program X?
How will the integration work?
What policies will we need in place to structure all that communication across so many architectures (social, etc.)?
How much is IT involved?
Is there a business case for this move?

It goes without saying that the sales process for this is very different from selling telecom services. Education and training of the prospects and the sales teams will be vital for success.

Next week at ITEXPO, I will be moderator for a panel that will touch on this: Educating the Channel with Industry Standard Certifications on Wed., Feb. 1, 2012 at 2:30 PM.