Carriers Move to More "Open" App Environments

The parlay initiative (www.parlay.org), which aims to create APIs enabling telecom service providers to work with developers and industry technology suppliers, seems to be bearing fruit. 

TDC A/S, the Danish service provider, is using open application programming interfaces and making those APIs available to third-party application developers.

TDC is using the service delivery platform marketed by Aepona Ltd., which has experience with this sort with Canadian carrier Telus Corp. TDC expects to be up and running by late summer of 2009.

Aepona also provides similar capabilities for France Telecom, KPN Telecom, Sprint Nextel Corp. and TeliaSonera.

The GSM Association is working with Aepona on a new initiative called Open Network Enablers API (OneAPI), as well.

Vodafone Group, Telenor, Telecom Italia and France Telecom's Orange France are part of the OneAPI initiative. 

Iridium Losts Satellite, Globalstar Also Has Issues

It had to happen some time, and now it has. Two satellites, an operating Iridium communications satellite, and a defunct Russian satellite, collided in orbit on Feb. 10, 2009, destroying both objects and creating 500 to 600 new pieces of orbital debris, adding to about 18,000 other orbiting pieces of "space junk" softball-sized or larger that routinely are tracked. 

Iridium, which owns a fleet of 66 low-earth orbit satellites, expects minor outages, and will move an in-orbit spare into position within 30 days. 

Iridium isn't the only satellite communications provider facing at least some issues. Frost & Sullivan compared performance of more than 1,000 calls on Iridium and Globalstar networks, from Northern California and Central Texas.

In initial testing, analysts found that more than 99 percent of calls placed through the

Iridium handset were successfully connected, compared to 51.3 percent of calls from the

Globalstar handset. 

Tests also indicate that 98.1 percent of calls on the Iridium handset and 36.2 percent of calls on the Globalstar handset were successfully connected and completed without being dropped during a three-minute period.

Globalstar admits it has  a problem with duplex communications (not simplex). "As previously announced, many Globalstar satellites are experiencing an anomaly resulting in degraded performance of the amplifiers for the S-band satellite communications antenna," Globalstar says.

"The anomaly is adversely affecting two-way voice and data services," the company says. "Customer service continues to be available, but at certain times at any given location it may take substantially longer to establish calls and the duration of calls may be limited."

Until the new second-generation Globalstar satellite constellation is operational, Globalstar is offering its Optimum Satellite Availability T-tool (OSAT) on its Internet site, which subscribers may use to predict when one or more unaffected satellites will be overhead at any specific geographic location.

Globalstar has launched eight spare satellites for its existing constellation with a view to reducing the gaps in its two-way voice and data services pending commercial availability of its second-generation satellite constellation, scheduled for initial launch in the second half of 2009.

Telecom in Uncertain Times, Multi-Part Video

Click the "related article " link below to get the video, in 7 parts on YouTube.

Today's telecom and cable companies face an increasingly complex and uncertain world in which continual and rapid change is the norm. But different providers face distinctly unique challenges. This panel will evaluate the ways contestants operating in different geographies and customer segments; with distinct business models and products; diverse regulatory and technology environments, evaluate where they are, and where they want to go.

We'll take a look at:

Which challenges contestants believe are most crucial
Which opportunities are most relevant
Which customer behaviors and desires offer the greatest upside
How contestants respond to the competitive environment
Where unique value can be created in their chosen markets
How core competencies can be leveraged to create more growth

Recorded at Voice Peering Forum (c) 2008 Stealth Communications

Huge Shift in Telecom Industry Supply Chains

Continuous Computing, a suppler of protocol-centric hardware, software and systems to telecom industry original equipment manufacturers, is introducing a solutions and services practice in response to demand for more prepackaged platforms from global customers.

The new practice will deliver customized, fully-integrated, application-level solutions to network equipment providers, especially in the wireless space, and including deep packet inspection capabilities.

The move reflects a change in global telecom operations and technology development, which require faster development at lower cost, at a time when virtually all service providers and equipment suppliers have fewer in-house resources to do so, says Brian Wood, Continuous Computing VP.

The new capabilities will accelerate the creation and delivery of carrier-class systems to service providers much faster, in many cases as much as 12 to 24 months faster, says Wood.

The demand for more prepackaged platforms also is part of a broader industry trend to focus on core competencies, while outsourcing lower-level or less-essential functions to business partners.

In part, that is a simple response to the fact that virtually all communications entities now operate with fewer in-house resources. But it also reflects a drive, across the ecosystem to add more value and differentiation.

“At all levels of the value chain, everybody is trying to add more value,” says Wood. “over the last two years we had been at platform level but now we are moving to the systems level.”

“OEMs are moving to software features while operators are moving to the marketing level,” he says.

“Everyone is moving,” Wood says, and the transformational change arguably is greatest for the equipment providers, who have to change the most as headcounts are orders of magnitude lower than in decades past.

There also is an industry-wide narrowing of the gap between enterprise solutions and carrier-grade solutions. Traditionally, enterprise products had a lifespan of two to three years, so costs had to be lower.

Telecom products had lifecycles more in the seven to 10 year range, and were hardened. So development cycles were longer and cost was higher.

These days, the gap is narrowing. Telecom equipment cycles are moving closer to the enterprise lifecycle as everything becomes IP based.

So there is less distinction between enterprise class and carrier class products. Obviously carrier class products require more redundancy, more cooling and other modifications of basic platforms to harden them.

But that is a truly big shift. Differentiation now occurs at the level of software, not hardware or protocols. And enterprise and carrier systems increasingly are produced on a common foundation.

Broadband Mapping: Studying Non-Problems

About $350 million of the version of the broadband stimulus package passed by the Senate will go toward mapping broadband coverage. Some will argue that it doesn't matter what "stimulus" spending goes toward, as long as the money goes to work immediately, is targeted and terminates once the recession is over, and there is sound logic there.

The issue, though, is whether there is a terrible problem requiring that we "study" this matter some more. If one looks at where the United States ranks in telephone penetration, for example, the United States ranks about 16th, as measured by the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation.

One can quarrel with the methodology OCED uses, but for the moment consider simply the well-developed state of landline voice service. Does anybody really think the United States has a problem with wired voice penetration?

And if not, why is a "15th in the world" ranking for broadband access a problem?

A "back-of-the-envelope" forecast by economists at the Phoenix Center suggests that U.S. broadband subscription rates (keep in mind that we are talking about demand for the service, not its availability) will be about 75 percent of the telephone rate in 4.4 years, and broadband will equal the telephone subscription rate in 9.6 years.

There is a difference between "lack of supply" and "lack of demand." The OECD statistics for broadband penetration are a "demand" metric, not a "supply" metric. And yet even on that score the United States demand for broadband already is equivalent to wired voice.

Some things do need to be studied because there are problems of supply. But supply isn't really the issue for broadband. The problem is demand.

In fact, as wired voice demand continues to decline, at least in the consumer market, why would we not see calls for studies of why wired voice penetration is so "low"? The reason we don't hear such calls is because demand is shifting. There is no problem with "supply."

Mapping broadband might be a useful exercise for some. But mapping doesn't change the demand equation, which is the only problem broadband currently faces. One might argue that prices are too high, or speeds too low. But that is a problem only if supply is not being upgraded. And it is hard to argue that is not occurring at a rapid pace. In fact, broadband already has been adopted at rates that surpass nearly all key consumer products of the last 100 years. Only use of the Internet itself is a reasonable candidate for "fastest-adopted" innovation.

There are lots of problems to be solved. Mapping broadband, to pinpoint supply constraints, doesn't strike me as being one of them.

Telco broadband Now Shifts to Video

The telco broadband market experienced a significant downturn in new subscriber additions during 2008, according to iSuppli Corp. Of course, the reason is that the market is mature: most users who want broadband already buy it. As a result, the next several years will be about enticing customers to migrate to higher-speed tiers and enhanced services, principally IPTV.

In part, this will lead to a shift in lead product offering and a slower growth rate than broadband access had achieved. Some major telcos are pushing IPTV services more than Internet access, a product category in which there are entrenched incumbents. In the broadband access market, there were no incumbents to dislodge, so growth was not a zero-sum game. In the IPTV market, growth will come in the form of market share shifts, a tougher proposition. 

“New telco broadband subscriber growth saw a 9.1 percent decline in 2008 following double-digit gains during the prior five years,” says Steve Rago, iSuppli principal analyst. “Hardest hit was North America, with new subscriber additions in 2008 amounting to 3.1 million, down 56.1 percent from 6.5 million in 2007. 

"The world’s developed regions reached broadband saturation during 2008, while developing regions continued to grow," he says.  "Of these regions, Latin America experienced the strongest growth."

New Fiber-To-The-Home connections grew by 90 percent and new high-speed VDSL connections grew by 54 percent compared to 2007, iSuppli says. In the cable world, many European and American operators introduced DOCSIS 3.0, significantly increasing broadband access data rates.

The next round of growth therefore will not come in adding new broadband subscribers but getting them to upgrade to higher-speed and enhanced services. Analysts at iSuppli believe 2008 was a milestone in the growth of very-high-speed access networks, and expect accelerating growth in the category over the next several years.

Telco TV was a major driver of high-speed access upgrades during 2008, iSuppli says. Virtually every telephone company and competitive access supplier deployed or made plans to deploy television services during 2008, the firm says. Overall telco TV subscribers grew by 8.8 million to end 2008 at a total of 18.5 million.

Telco TV during 2008 transitioned from the early-adopter stage to the early majority stage, so sales volume should now start to ramp up significantly for several years. North American telephone companies added a net 3.3 million television subscribers in 2008, the company says.

Every Company is a Media Company

Smart businesses are beginning to produce content that’s less about their product and more about topics that their customers gravitate to, writes Rick Burnes, an inbound marketing manager at HubSpot.

Whole Foods publishes recipes and cooking videos. These companies are producing quality media, just like The New York Times or Discovery Channel.

Why? Every company, no matter what industry, is essentially gathering and distributing information, both to employees and external audiences, and trying to attract attention from prospective customers. 

Traditionally, this has been an "outbound" function using intermediaries such as media, trade shows, email blasts and direct sales, where companies reach out to potential customers.

These days, one sees use of webinars, blogs, Web site content, news feeds, videos and other efforts that invite potential customers to show up.  So every company now produces and distributes content. 

Market Doesn't Like Bank Bailout, Apparently

Judging by the plunge on the markets as Treasury Secretary Geithner spoke...

Verizon FiOS Challenges DirecTV as HDTV Leader

DirecTV continues to offer the most high-definition channels of any pay TV provider, but Verizon is catching up quickly with its FiOS TV service, according to Pike & Fischer. The firm finds that as of January 2009, DirecTV was offering as many as 104 channels in high-definition format. But that only beats Verizon's HD menu by one channel.

Comcast, the largest cable operator in the United States, has one of the smallest selections of high-definition channels, Pike & Fischer says. Comcast in some markets is offering less than 40 HDTV channels, although the company's marketing focuses on its large selection of HD movies, TV shows and other content available on demand.

Most providers examined in the study charge a premium price for HDTV service, usually less than $10 per month. But some, including Cablevision and Time Warner Cable, offer a substantial number of HD channels for free.

Qwest: Enterprise and Wholesale Drive the Business

Some will look at Qwest Communications International Inc. fourth quarter and full-year results and see trouble; others will see improvement. Irrespective of those judgments, it should be noted that for Qwest, business markets and wholesale are the majority of the business. 

Mass markets, which includes both consumer and small business revenue, represented about $1.4 billion worth of fourth-quarter revenue (and some portion of that is small business). 

Wholesale markets contributed $789 million. Business markets represented $1.1 billion.  In other words, Qwest one of these days relatively soon will be earning more money from wholesale and business customers than from consumers, as important as consumer markets may remain.  

Furthermore, revenue in business markets grew year over year, while mass market and wholesale revenue declined, with those declines attributable to voice services. 

In the fourth quarter of 2008, net income was $185 million, or 11 cents per diluted share, compared to $366 million, or 20 cents per diluted share, for the fourth quarter of 2007. Bad, eh?

Not if one considers the adjustments. The results include severance charges of $19 million, or one cent per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2008. More important, though, the earnings per share calculations reflect higher pretax income compared to the fourth quarter of 2007, offset by increased tax expense as the company recorded normal effective tax rates beginning in 2008. 

Income before income taxes in the fourth quarter increased 17 percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2007.

Revenue in the quarter was $3.3 billion, a decline of three percent compared to $3.4 billion

in the fourth quarter of 2007 and a decline of two percent compared to the third quarter of

2008. 

Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $1.18 billion, a four percent increase compared to $1.14 billion in the year-ago period and a nine percent increase compared to $1.08 billion in the third quarter. Adjusted EBITDA margin was 35.6 percent compared to 33.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2007 and 32.1 percent in the third quarter. 

For the full year, net income was $681 million, or 39 cents per diluted share, compared

to $2.9 billion, or $1.52 per diluted share, in 2007. Full-year results reflect the same normal effective tax rate dynamics as the fourth quarter. 

Earnings per share results include net special charges of three cents per diluted share in 2008 and 20 cents per diluted share in 2007. Income before income taxes was up 13 percent after adjusting for onetime

items.

Total revenue for the fourth quarter of $3.3 billion reflects an eight percent year-over-year growth in data, Internet and video revenues, which was offset by a decline of nine percent in voice revenue and a 33 percent decrease in wireless revenues.

As Qwest tells the story, income before income taxes increased 17 percent year over year while EBITDA increased four percent. Enterprise data and IP revenue was up nine percent year-over-year.

Data, Internet and video revenue now 25 percent of mass markets revenue, a key measure of how well Qwest is replacing declining landline voice revenues with new and alternative revenues. Qwest's consumer broadband subscriber base increased nine percent year over year. 

Brighter Prospects for SaaS?

Historically, the transmission belt for new applications and communications technology has been that university researchers would come up with something new, suppliers would sell those innovation into the enterprise market, and then at some point the tools move into the mid-market, then finally into the smaller business entities, finally winding up as consumer tools in the final stage.

These days, there are different avenues. In many cases, innovations come out of universities, then go straight to the consumer market and then fairly quickly into the small business market, with enterprises and mid-market customers becoming aware of the trends only as individual "lead users" start to make use of the tools in their work roles. 

Of late, in fact, it is hard to point to any significant innovations that went enterprise first, with the exception of mobile email, which was driven by enterprise users. Everything else pretty much developed first in a consumer context, including instant messaging, text messaging, any-to-any email, social networking, blogging and wikis. One might get an argument about wikis, but some of us would consider wikis to have been popularized in the consumer space. 

So it is with software as a service, which most observers will say has gotten most traction in the small business and consumer spaces, and only now is being considered in the enterprise and mid-market spaces.

One has to assume the opportunities for such changes are enhanced by the challenges businesses and organizations now face, as potential buyers now are facing new questions about how they ought to be doing things. 

Are Telcos Toast?

There is a sentiment in some quarters that the telecommunications industry is too inflexible, slow moving and unimaginative to transform itself. Those criticisms are well taken. They could be right. But look at matters a different way. If executives know what business they really are in, they won't make the proverbial mistake the railroad industry made: thinking it was in the "railroad" business instead of the "transportation" business. 

In fact, a quick review of technology underpinnings of the communication industry should tell the story. AT&T once meant "American Telephone & Telegraph."

The telegraph, and the business it created was an 1840s invention. The telephone was a 1870s invention. AT&T made the transition. Wireless was invented in the 1890s. And though they were slow to enter the business, large "landline" providers now lead the wireless business. 

Radio broadcasting was invented in the 1920s, television in the 1950s. Telcos and cable companies now are distributors of audio and television programming, on both a "tethered" and "mobile" basis, and this role will grow. The geostationary satellite industry was created in the 1960s. AT&T remains a big player in the satellite communications busines.s 

Computer communications began in the 1970s. Large telcos pretty much failed at their first efforts to enter the "computing" industry. But in different ways, they now are re-entering the computing services market, as integrators, content delivery networks and, someday, players in "cloud computing" infrastructure.

Optical communications began in the 1980s and telcos and cable companies are major end users of optical communications.

The Internet originated in the 1990s and now Internet access is almost a "legacy" product for telcos and cable companies. The next wave of IP-enabled next generation networks has barely begun. But I am hard pressed, looking at history, to worry too much about ability to finesse the latest waves of technology advance. 

Is Content Really King?

There continues to be talk in the communications business about network infrastructure providers as "dumb pipes." That's a bit of an analogy to the "content is king" discussions that the video business periodically revisits. Put simply, there is a tension, in either communications or media businesses, between the value added by network services and applications, and the debate never seems definitively solved.

Consider the case of Time Warner, which is in both the "content creation" and "network delivery" businesses. Some financial analysts say the content assets are overvalued, compared to the cable assets.  Time Warner Cable trades at a discount to Comcast on price-to-earnings multiple, some note. 

To be sure, some analysts worry about increasingly effective competition from Verizon and AT&T. But Time Warner Cable still is adding net subscribers in a recessionary environment. Of course, these debates tend to run in cycles. 

Distribution was the focus of the entertainment industry for much of the past 15 years. The large entertainment conglomerates took advantage of looser ownership regulations and technological advances to acquire more television and radio stations, cable and satellite subscribers, and internet portals. Basically, that's an argument for the importance of distribution. 

Some think there will be a swing in the other direction, as content owners increasingly focus on distribution across all platforms. News Corp. and Time Warner now are now sellers of distribution assets, for example. 

That doesn't necessarily speak directly to the relative importance of distribution compared to content ownership, though. It might be closer to the truth to say that in a climate where capital is scarce, and viewership is changing rapidly, content companies need to stick to their knitting. 

Conversely, some of us make the argument that distribution remains vital, and in any case is a far-bigger business than content. In 2003, for example, Hollywood box office revenues were $11 billion in the United States and $25 billion to $30 billion globally. The global music industry earned $35 billion. Videogaming, consoles and all software represented $40 billion worth of revenue.

In contrast, U.S.telecom revenues pulled in $348 billion.

Content is sticky, content is a fairly large business, content is part of the business the telecom industry now is part of. But that's not the same thing as arguing "pipes" are commodity items with no ability to differentiate. In fact, those pipes remain highly-valuable, very-scarce assets supporting a huge applications business. Voice is declining in value, to be sure. But broadband and mobility apps have arisen to replace those lost revenues. And the new frontier is all sorts of other business models, ecosystem relationships and values. That isn't to say the transformation will be easy, or steady in its progress. 

So make no mistake: transparent optical transport and access are, in some ways, undifferentiated at the moment. But that does not mean the values, features and applications delivered over those pipes are undifferentiated or commodities. 

It may never be possible to determine, once and for all, whether "content" or "distribution" are "the" king of the ecosystem. One thing is clear, though. Distribution is a far bigger business, because it includes the large person-to-person, machine-to-machine and one-to-many and many-to-one communications functions. 

Will Recession Lead to Permanent Behavior Changes?

Nobody yet knows when the current recession will end, or what will happen to various industry segments during the recession. What is even less known is how consumer and business behavior during the recession might carry on in the form of new trends once the recession is but a memory.

Recessions can cause people to think more about the effective use of their assets. In bad times, users are forced to see if there are substitute ways of doing things that save money right now. But if the substitutes are good enough, people might not go back to their former preferred ways of doing things.

At a practical level, business buyers in many cases are taking longer to make decisions, so the time lag from proposal to acceptance is stretching out.

But there still is little, if any, concrete evidence that business or consumer users are abandoning key services ranging from broadband access to wireless to multi-channel video. In fact, the evidence so far indicates they are behaving as they have in the past: keeping services but delaying upgrades and adoption of new enhanced services.

What bears watching are signs some customers are behaving in new ways, such as canceling multi-channel video subscriptions in favor of Internet alternatives. A recent poll by researchers at the Yankee Group suggest that one percent of respondents actually have done so.

Then there is the impact of users dropping landline services in favor of mobility, or using Skype instead of their landlines or mobiles, switching to prepaid from postpaid mobile plans, buying hosted business voice in place of new phone switches or buying some forms of broadband access instead of others.

The point is that tougher economic conditions will lead some consumers to experiment with new behaviors that might become permanent changes.

Broadband Stimulus: Small Details, Big Difference

The revised Senate version of the "stimulus" bill has not yet been passed. Nor has it been reconciled with the House version. But there could be big differences. The revised Senate version funnels money through the National Telecommunications & Information Administration. The House version splits disbursements between NTIA and the Agriculture Department.

The difference? For a company such as Qwest Communications, the Agriculture Department funds would not be available, because of Agriculture Dept. rural loan program rules. The NTIA program does not operate under those rules, making Qwest eligible to apply.

Essentially, Agriculture Dept. rules ascertain eligibility on a statewide basis, while NTIA would fund on a community basis. As Qwest serves both urban and rural communities in each of its states, it has been ineligible for rural broadband loans that it might otherwise qualify for.

So the reconciliation process will be crucial.