To: Francis Gaskins who wrote (13 ) 4/13/1998 8:40:00 AM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54
Francis, Thanks for the replies and for bearing with me while I played out my devil's advocacy role earlier. I'm aware of the smoke filled back rooms. In retrospect, I could have phrased my question better. My post had to do with uncovering potential BOC motivations and /or antagonisms re: their own intentions in the VoIP sector. The writing is on the wall in this regard, and all of the carriers, including the ILECs, now have growing factions who recognize that they must stop nay saying and pooh poohing IP modes of voice telephony. They will at some point have to take the plunge themselves if they are to survive, and add VoIP to their service mix. The questions are when, in what form, and under what organizational framework - the regulated business component or under the banners of separate unregulated subsidiaries? Am I smoking funny stuff? Hardly. The "regulated voice telecommunications" domain that governs access charges and the USF in connection with voice telephony is emerging as a separate model for VoIP than the issues connected with consumer dialup Internet access. They will carry different unit-level revenue (and most likely, fee) implications. VoIP is far different in scope and in the potential impact that it could have on the provider mix in terms of revenue streams than are the ISP dialup internet access charges which the ISPs have benefited from (exemptions) for the past 15 or so years, when viewed on a per call or per session basis. This is exemplified by the FCC itself, which will remain politically correct with regard to the latter, while taking a more aggressive stance towards the former. Regards, Frank Coluccio