T1 Internet Service Prices and Rates Quotes in Harwood

The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service

Thursday December 29, 2011, 01:05 am ET

CEDAR HILLS, Utah, Dec. 29 /Patrick Oborn/ -- For many small to medium size businesses, higher productivity with relation to their broadband and voice services is just around the corner. Thanks in part to the recent price reduction trend in the industry, carriers have deemed it necessary to consolidate in order to offer more services at a lower cost than their rivals. Overlapping networks have been consolidated into leaner, more feature-rich versions of their previous selves, dramatically lowering the price small businesses pay for the popular dynamic integrated T-carrier (T-1) lines that combine local voice and high-speed Internet service into one connection.

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

Washington is a place that we found was a hot spot for small business owners making the move over to dynamic T-1 lines. One business owner that we interviewed gave glowing reviews of his move to TelePacific's "OnePac" dynamic product. Keith Gray explained "I used to have a regular integrated T1 with 10 voice lines and 14 data channels. When no one was using the phone in my office, we were limited to just 896 KB of bandwidth. After searching on the Internet for better options, I found that I could reduce my price from $850/month to $500/month, and at the same time have 14 voice lines and 1.5 mbps of broadband. I didn't take long for me to pull the trigger and make the change."

The question remains, if this new technology is so progressive, why did it take over five years to gain broad appeal to SMB's across the country? One industry analyst from the Telecommunications Research Institute observed that many customers who consume commercial-grade phone service became very untrusting of telecom providers after the Internet bubble burst in 2000 and the MCI bankruptcy proceedings full of allegations of fraud and embezzlement. After all, no customer wants to come to work one day just to find out that their connection to the outside world has been shut down due to financially unstable service providers not being able to run a profitable or ethical business. Now, due to a series of acquisitions and mergers, the "survivors" are offering great products at rates that SMB's can't continue to ignore. The CLEC's and Bells are quickly gaining traction with the very important demographic.

With the help of super-CLECs like XO Communications, PAETEC, Nuvox, One Communications, Cavalier Telephone, and TelePacific, small business owners everywhere now have access to non-Bell service that is on par or better than those being offered by the former Bells. Integrated T1s that do more and cost less have transformed into a solid beach head for the newcomers. Hopefully the CLECs can continue to push the boundaries of innovation and economics. The only thing that can keep them from the promise land is the gatekeeper of competition: the Federal Communications Commission, and the huge Bells (AT&T and Verizon - that's you) who make it a point to spend more money lobbying in Washington DC than Exxon Mobile.