HVN,
You say,
>>The original big guys (Teleport and MFS) grew up in what I'd call the "luxury phase" - i.e., when the big guys (ATT, MCI, Sprint) weren't/couldn't pay them too much attention.<<
It's all a matter of perspective, to be sure, but I'd disagree with this assertion. It's too general, for starters.
At the time that TCG made its first inroads, just after it hatched from the egg of Merrill Lynch Telecommunications (a lot of folks forget that TCG was first a ML operating company that tied the stock exchanges to its HQ and later to SIAC, downtown, while riding the IRT Subway tracks using step-indexed multimode fiber)), T and MCIC jumped all over them as a means of beating the locals. The startup permitted direct access, and all that that implies, which became an enabler of more and better services that the IXCs could finally provide to their enterprise users at a more affordable bottom line.
>> The RBOCs - well, if they were awake, they would have noticed them (but that's a differnet story!). <<
This really depends on what time frame you are referring to. Bell Atlantic (actually then the remnants of what was NJ Bell), for example, in 1985 did a fiber swap deal with TCG (prior to the arrival of MFS and the others who followed) and they probably thought that this was one way of containing them, or at least giving the appearance of being standup about the new competition. But that was a short-lived philosophy, until later on, when it became inevitable that all the carriers would have to, sooner or later, hand off, and in many instances, share, routes with one another. Today we have full-fledged "co-carriering" arrangements between ILECs and CLECs.
Looking at this from another slant, however, I can tell stories about how TCG first got their fiber into Bell Central offices, right down to the yellow band of tape that was used as a demarcation point, on the black f-o cable sheath in the manhole outside of 811 10th Avenue in NYCity. That was the test case that proved to be the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.
The Bells weren't ignoring the CLECs, on the contrary, they spent a lot of time and legal moolah defending against them on every turn for the first ten years of their existence. Which is not to suggest that they've stopped, only that the rules have now changed.
>> And in this age of major shortage of customer care reps and high levels of investments required for customer care systems, they will run over these smaller players.<<
Your point about customer care is of particular interest to me, since I've seen some reversals in thinking from within the same carriers, from one year to the next.
Take T, for example. It was stated by them earlier this year that they would be looking to unload their less-than-desireable (unprofitable) LD customers to a lower grade of service (that's right,VoIP, as in their recent trial markets of Boston, Atlanta and SFO) and forego the hassles of direct contact with them both for billing and service ordering, and very likely for information and repairs as well, by instituting web-based I/O capabilities for these price sensitive users. Prepaid calling, and web based lookups would save T a huge bundle of cash, they said, by reducing back office and postage /mailing operations. Where do they draw the line, though?
Would low-volune residential users be forced to pay a premium to receive adequate customer care if they don't elect to use VoIP and they don't meet some minimum threshold of minutes? And this becomes particularly interesting now that T has residential TCOMA plans... will this strategy go bye bye entirely? So much for strategies du jour.
>>Also, I'll disagree with your statement about the newer players going after new markets. What new markets are you referring to here?<<
Fair enough, many new players don't go after new markets. I'm finding this out increasingly by talking with the owners of CLECs lately. But the latter tend to be of the PSTN genre, retired switch mavens and POTS experts who will not likely ever concede that there is a future in anything beyond the rusty switch. They even pooh pooh ATM.
There are many new players getting into new markets, however. Like the wireless guys with their sky fiber alternatives, their P-MP ATM rollouts, and some of the IP-based SPs who will be offering hybrid voice over the Internet services along with multimedia capabilities.
I found the remainder of your analyses interesting and quite valid. I offered the foregoing as a continuation of the discussion, although I believe that there are no absolutes, and making overly generalized statements can always find a challenge. There is just too much diversity today to make general statements about just about anything.
Enjoyed the exchange, and Best Regards, Frank Coluccio |
