Random VoiceCon Observations

Here's a set of fairly random observations from VoiceCon, ranging from "slow" return on IP telephony to "no return," as well as the usual cautions about buyer resistance. Joe Abate, Mounrt Kisco Medical Group director of IS says " I don’t think we’ve seen any productivity gains at all after deploying IP telephony. Ouch!

Conrad Cross, City of Orlando CIO, says he "expects the return on investment on the city's TDM-to-IP migration to take four to five years. Three years or less is what most buyers probably would want to see. Small businesses won't even be willing to wait that long, I'd guess.

But Gary Grissum, BNSF Railway VP Telecom, estimates that 40 percent of his company's workforce will retire in next few years, and unified communications might be a way to attract a new generation of workers. That's a big deal. Some of us have argued we need to see a change of buyer influences (younger, in other words) before we can really assess how far technology buyers are willing to shift their preferences.

Overheard a VAR mention that the problem with selling unified communications to smaller businesses is that they don't see the benefits, forget about the price. I'd say that has emerged over the last year or so as a key impediment. Buyers in the small business segment discount all "soft" gains such as productivity, less wasted time and unified message boxes. Really, you have to show them how they save money--hard dollars--right away.

Kevin Gavin at ShoreTel points out that the tough economy is focusing IP PBX buyers on return on investement, even more than typically is the case. Duh! Customers demand very-clear ROI before buying.

Wells Fargo to Replace 50% of Desk Phones

Karen Bailey, Wells Fargo director of voice services, says her firm plans to replace 50 percent of employee desk phones with soft clients and mobile phones.

Disney Willing to Challenge Video Ecosystem

Walt Disney Co. CEO Robert Iger is not so sure it is wise to tie consumption of online content to the purchase of a multi-channel video (specifically cable TV) subscription, though cable operators tend, for obvious reasons, to favor the idea.

Cable operators obviously dislike the idea that the content they sell in subscription packages might be found online, at no incremental cost. They like better the idea of being able to charge a bit extra to their subscribers to enable online viewing. Disney doesn't agree.

"Preventing people from watching any shows online, unless they subscribe to some multi-channel service could be viewed as both anti-consumer, and anti-technology, and would be something we would find difficult to embrace," Iger says.

Of course, Disney also was early to move its content to iTunes and to stream content over the Internet, and is seen as "more open" to the idea of allowing its content to be viewed in new ways.

Nor does Iger share the view that people who stream video frequently are substituting that behavior for multi-channel video. They are more apt to watch television, buy HDTV sets and subscribe to digital and premium services, Iger maintains.

That doesn't mean Disney is casually willing to jeopardize its multi-channel video distributor partners. It does mean the company is more open to side-loading, downloading and streaming.

Sprint Upgrades Cable Digital Voice

Sprint has added new features such as Caller ID to the TV, Caller ID to the PC, and new voicemail features that include a home voicemail alert sent to a customer's mobile phone, and voicemail to email, for its cable operator customers. Sprint provides wholesale cable VoIP services to 14 leading cable companies and supports more than 4.5 million cable VoIP/digital phone subscribers, covering more than 31 million cable households-passed.

Perhaps the development to note is that the innovations are "both practical and fun." "Fun" and "playfulness" and "personalization" are among elements that have made the mobile end user experience so popular. Wired phone service has always been useful, but not as much "fun."

The new features are ways cable operators will try to change the wired voice experience, beyond simply offering tradtional value at a lower price.

AT&T Tests New Bundle: Netbook, Wireless and Wired Broadband for $59.95 a Month

AT&T is testing its new netbook-plus-wireless broadband bundle in its Atlanta and Philadelphia markets, offering a ultra-portable netbook with built-in AT&T 3G wireless capabilities when bought with a $59.95 per month "Internet at Home and On the Go" broadband service that includes both at-home digital subscriber line service plus wireless broadband.

Mini laptops available in selected AT&T stores in Atlanta and Philadelphia include the Acer Aspire One, Dell Inspiron Mini 9 and Mini 12, and LG Xenia. Promotional prices range from $49.99 to $249.99 with the purchase of an "AT&T Internet at Home and On the Go" plan, which includes an AT&T DataConnect plan and AT&T Fast Access DSL, starting at $59.95 per month. Without those AT&T services, these mini laptops range in price from $449.99 to $599.99.

AT&T is offering two mobile DataConnect plans in the trial, including a 200 MByte plan for $40 per month and a 5 GByte plan for $60 per month.

For users who wnat more standard notebooks, the trial also will feature the Lenovo X200 for $749.99 with "Internet at Home and On the Go." The laptop is available for $849.99 if a user buys only the two-year DataConnect plan.

The embrace of traditional mobile phone subsidy models is part of the story. The bundling of wireless and wired broadband might ultimately be just as big a part of the story. Consider that the $60 a month plan includes both wireless broadband and DSL as well.

Though the DSL likely will not include the faster speeds many users now require, you might think of the offer as something like a "free DSL" program, as wireless broadband access now costs about $60 a month for 5 Gbytes of usage. The new AT&T includes the heavily-discounted PC plus wireless and DSL broadband for just $59.95 a month.

http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26676

Verizon to Activate 25 to 30 LTE Markets in 2010

Verizon Communications CEO Ivan Seidenberg says his firm will begin deployment of its fourth-generation Long Term Evolution network "later this year with a few commercially-ready markets and will roll it out to 25 or 30 markets in 2010."

But the infrastructure only is "just one piece of the puzzle," he says. "It's the combination of devices, applications and network capabilities that will really cause this market to take off," Seidenberg says. "No single company will be able to envision, let alone provide, every aspect of this whole 4G ecosystem on its own."

That is a primary reason why the 4G business model will be different from what we have seen with 2G networks, with 3G being someplace in between. Where 2G was largely a vertically-integrated business, 3G has been more open, at least to the extent that broadband access to the Internet itself is an "open" environment.

The 4G model inevitably will be more of an "ecosystem" approach, in part because many applications are seen as "machine to machine," and in part because device and application openness will be much more central ways of creating new applications.

http://sev.prnewswire.com/telecommunications/20090401/NY9285501042009-1.html

Big Telcos Bluffing about Broadband Stimulus?

Some people think the "big telcos" are bluffing about refusing to apply for funds to be awarded under either of the programs authorized for "broadband stimulus" programs as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

There are concerns about strings attached to the grants, to be sure. But there are other, more practical issues that suggest many "big telcos" will be unable to apply, or will find the "strings" too onerous.

"Big" companies serving "urban" areas, or even rural areas within states where they also serve classic small and rural communities, are generally barred from getting Rural Utilities Service funds, and RUS is in charge of some of the funds. So "big companies" cannot apply for RUS funds.

Big companies might be able to apply for NTIA funds, if they get waivers. But the clear logic and language of the statute makes clear a preference for non-profits and government-related agencies as "eligible" applicants. That's why the language about "waivers" exists. "Big telcos" are seen as exceptions to the rules about eligible applicants.

You can make your own educated guesses about the likelihood of applications from "big companies" being funded, under those circumstances. "Big companies" aren't seen as the logical applicants, even if the final rules might allow them to bid. At this point, waivers seem to be necessary, in any event.

Aside from strings that also bother some U.S. governors about accepting funds authorized by other parts of ARRA, it is possible bigger telcos might just take a pass for those reasons alone. The statute is written in ways that make clear an intention to fund non-profits and projects that primarily create jobs (it is part of the "stimulus" bill, recall), and only secondarily create infrastructure.

There are lots of reasons for carriers to think they will not be allowed to apply for some of the funds, and are not the most-favored applicants for most of the funds.

http://blog.wired.com/business/2009/04/big-telcos-bluf.html