T1 and MPLS.com

Saw this article…the main thing to take away from this is that if you are chosing VoIP, remember that your bandwidth connection and service level quality of service is key. Companies like Comcast & AT&T’s DSL products do not offer the reliability you need. NuVox offers dedicated T1 circuits for your business…Because business is on the line! Call Me today for a free quote on a T1 service!

As new technologies floods the market, businesses across the country are turning to Voice over Internet Protocol to expand telecommunication networks.

But with every new product introduction, glitches are commonplace, and business owners have to be aware of some of the technology’s shortcomings.

“VoIP does not have the universal quality of a traditional phone line,” said Tim Searcy, chief executive of the American TeleServices Association. “And you are moving to a heavily software based solution, which means more programmers are involved.”

The Indianapolis organization represents the $500 billion call center industry and advocates members’ interests on Capitol Hill and in statehouses nationwide, providing professional education opportunities and acting as the sector’s information clearinghouse.

Raymond Shaw, president of the Association of TeleServices International, said companies need to be cognizant of bandwidth availability.

If there isn’t a dedicated connection between a business and its VoIP provider, he said transmission delays can occur, causing bad reception or jumbled communication.

VoIP services convert voice into a digital signal that travels over the Internet. If a user is calling a regular phone number, the signal is converted to a regular telephone signal before it reaches its destination. VoIP can allow a user to make a call directly from a computer, a special VoIP phone, or a traditional phone connected to a special adapter. In addition, wireless “hot spots” in locations such as airports, parks and cafes allow users to connect to the Internet and may enable VoIP services wirelessly.

Despite some technical glitches, VoIP subscriptions have skyrocketed in the last year. According to the Washington, D.C. research firm TeleGeography, Internet-based telephone services grew 21 percent in the second quarter to 6.9 million users. Overall, the VoIP market saw a 153 percent increase in subscriptions compared to mid-2005, while industry revenues for the second quarter increased 173 percent to $607 million compared to the $221 million in sales a year ago.

“VoIP is rapidly spreading among multiple enterprise solutions which have multiple locations around the country and the world,” said Matthew D’Uva, president of the Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals in Business. The Alexandria, Va.-based organization is dedicated to improving and advancing the marketplace for consumers within the corporate structure. SOCAP members include consumer affairs and customer care professionals from more than 1500 different companies — many of which are listed in Fortune/Forbes 1000.

“Our members are looking for ways to improve and enhance communication with their customers from all angles, and VoIP is one channel to do that,” D’Uva said.

While installation and service fees vary by state and provider, VoIP services typically costs less than traditional phone services.

VoIP systems can cost anywhere from no charge up to $200 per month but will generally cost $10 to $50 per month depending on the type of services ordered. VoIP can be free when the service routes a from PC to PC, but the price increases based on the number of local and long distance calls made and the features a company implements.

Today, most business VoIP services can provide a firm with a variety of features, ranging from $20 to $200. Business VoIP provider commonly include a T-1 Internet connection and a guarantee for quality of service which increases the costs.

According to the latest research on ConsumerCompare.org, Virginia-based SunRocket Inc. was given the highest rating of six stars. To get the $16.58 monthly rate for unlimited minutes, businesses must prepay for the entire year, which is $199, but can cancel any time and get a refund for unused months. Since SunRocket includes all taxes and surcharges, a firm makes the $199 payment up front and then is able to make unlimited local and long distance calls for the next 12 months.

Most other companies charge taxes and surcharges on top of their listed rates. SunRocket also throws in $3 free international calling per month, a free extra phone number and two free directory assistance calls per month with their unlimited plans. The company also is waiving their $39.95 equipment fee when a firm signs up for the $199 annual plan.

By comparison, ITP, Verizon, Lingo, ViaTalk and Packet8 received three stars, which were the lowest rankings. Vonage, Voip.com and VoIP Your Life fell in the middle of the pack. Perhaps the greatest benefit of VoIP systems is the flexibility of the Internet versus regular phone lines.

“This flexibility with VoIP fosters greater organizational efficiency, higher productivity gains and increased revenue potential,” D’Uva said, but cautioned that VoIP is a relatively new and expanding technology, “so issues of quality, security and even network power still need be addressed as VOIP continues to evolve.”

 NuVox’s new website launch. Check it out at http://www.nuvox.com

The Competitor Segment is Continuing to Grow

In the Beginning

For the first century of its existence, the telecommunications industry was tightly packed and monolithic. At its center was American Telephone & Telegraph, AT&T – more affectionately known as “Ma Bell.” This core was shattered in 1984 by Judge Greene’s gavel and the ensuing injection of competition in long distance markets. AT&T’s break-up, though, was just the warm-up act.

In the late 1980s and early ’90s, competitive forces struck the very core of the U.S. telecommunications industry: the local exchange. Seemingly overnight, local exchange carriers – primarily the “Baby Bells” – were thrust into a marketplace battle few industry observers anticipated. The first competitive entrants were cleverly dubbed “Competitive Local Exchange Carriers,” commonly known now as “CLECs.” By 2000, there were approximately 170 facilities-based CLECs operating in the U.S. with a steady stream of new entrants following.

This initial generation of facilities-based CLECs smashed the last remnants of the thought that the telecommunications market could be insulated from competition’s grasp. These CLECs were vital to setting the stage for the vast array of competitive carriers we see in today’s market. These competitive carriers range from fixed wireless operators to pure-play VoIP providers, all of which follow on the trail blazed by the CLEC sector.

The CLEC Sector At a Glance (2009)
Source:New Paradigm Resources Group Inc.

The Continued Importance of the CLEC Sector

Today’s facilities-based CLECs are significant in the communications industry for three reasons. First and foremost, they have a physical presence — actual network infrastructure — that is fundamental for the provisioning of service to customers. Companies without facilities can also provide service, but such operators are wholly dependent on the network facilities of another provider.

The CLEC sector’s second role is in providing competitive, viable, and meaningful alternatives to incumbent telecommunications carriers. Although no single CLEC competes with any particular ILEC in all of its customer segments, against all of its services, across all of its franchise territory, one or more among the universe of CLECs does or could choose to do so. A healthy CLEC sector ensures that customers of all types have options available to them, and provides downward pressure on both pricing and margins.

Third, in their quest to identify and satisfy underserved customers, CLECs extend upgraded service to areas or specific locations that would otherwise have no recourse if the incumbent deemed it an insufficiently profitable opportunity. While this in no way guarantees that customers can obtain any service they want at a price they are willing to pay, the explosion of fiber deployment and the development of new services as a result of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and earlier deregulation is a testament to the catalyzing effect of CLECs.

Key CLEC Strategies

There is no single CLEC model or flavor. CLECs vary widely, more so than most other sets of telecom carriers, and assessing sector leaders and laggards ultimately depends on one’s perspective. The differences among CLECs are reflected in such things as the mix of technologies used in their networks, their strategic foci, and their customer segmentation.

CLECs’ footprints vary considerably in regards to geographic reach. CLECs with similarly sized footprints share other characteristics in common, such as comparable total revenue growth and target customer segmentation. A CLEC’s geographic reach drives, to a significant extent, the customer classes it can effectively serve. The figure below illustrates the customer focus by CLECs’ geographic scope.

The Coast-to-Coast Strategy

CLECs with a nationwide footprint principally provide advanced telecommunications services to enterprise businesses. Such CLECs became nationwide providers specifically to target this high revenue, high margin customer segment. CLECs falling into this category include Level 3, PAETEC, Time Warner Telecom, and XO Communications. These carriers share several characteristics. Specifically, they own expansive fiber networks, focus primarily on major metropolitan markets, and have total annual revenue in excess of $1 billion.

The Regional Strategy

Whereas nationwide CLECs focus primarily on enterprises, regional competitive carriers tend to focus on small and medium-size businesses, and in some instances even offer residential services. Regional CLECs operate in a handful of states to as many as a dozen or more. While some nationwide CLECs have acquired large carriers to build a national footprint, acquisitions in the regional CLEC segment tend to be much smaller and are often initiated to increase market density or expand in-region reach.

Regional CLECs vary in size much more greatly than those in the nationwide segment. Regional CLECs tend to have total annual revenues between $100 million and $800 million. With $784 million in total revenue for 2008, One Communications is the largest regional CLEC. Other notable regional competitive carriers include Integra Telecom, NuVox and ITC^Deltacom.

The Stay-at-Home Strategy

Locally-focused CLECs are the most numerous of the three CLEC geographic strategies considered here. These carriers tend to be only a fraction of the size of their larger regional and nationwide counterparts. Total annual revenues for carriers in this segment can range up to $50 million, though the majority fall well below the $20 million mark. Locally-focused CLECs include Buckeye TeleSystem, CIMCO and NTS Communications.

While some locally-oriented CLECs focus on only one market, others also build out to nearby communities from one or two core markets. Local CLECs view themselves as integral parts of the communities in which they operate and are more likely to offer residential service than regional providers.

These CLECs often offer fewer complex services than regional and nationwide competitive carriers. As most local CLECs operate in second and third tier markets, where there are often no enterprise businesses, their commercial customer base consists mostly of small businesses. This customer segment does not have the telecom requirements of medium or large businesses. As a result, local CLECs can build sustainable businesses providing only basic telephone service and DSL internet access. Some are deploying their own fiber, however, often with financing from the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) fund.

CEC SPEEDING UP THE EXPERIENCE

NuVox Team, the CEC has great news regarding improving our customer experience when calling in to report a trouble. We have implemented the ability for customers to open a repair case through an automated system instead of holding for a live representative.  The IVR will open the Clarify case, provide the case  number to the caller, and will route the case to a technician to work the issue. It’s the customer’s choice!

Why is this good for our customers? Glad you asked……… Using the new IVR method is opening cases in half the time on average which reduces our customer’s time involved in opening the issue.  And with the IVR there is no wait time for the next available representative!!  Additionally in the case of the infrequent but dreaded network issues this will dramatically improve the time it takes a customer to report their issue.

 We believe this demonstrates that NuVox cares about improving each customer’s experience.

Now Genie has his own personal telephone number!  Try giving him a call (hint: his voicemail will pick up)!

(864) 553-7111 OR 877-800-GENIE (4364)

Our YouTube videos are already ahead of the curve.  “Meet the Genie” is over 3,000 hits after being live for three weeks!  In YouTube standards, we’re off to an excellent start!

Visit the NuVox YouTube Channel here: http://www.youtube.com/user/NuVoxComm 
“Meet the NuVox Office Genie”: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeMX4ng1O5U 

“NuVox Office Genie Video Conference”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ex6pywyGkg

“SIP BeatVox with NuVox Office Genie”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfYxO35gnpk

WASHINGTON — As expected, the Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously Wednesday to require wireline, wireless and some voice-over-Internet phone service providers to shorten their porting intervals.

In 2007, the FCC had tentatively concluded that it should shorten the interval from four days to two, but in the end decided to cut that number in half again, voting to cut the interval to one business day.

The commission 12 years ago had set the four-day porting requirement for switching a subscriber’s number to a new carrier, but decided that was too much time, given changes in technology and the opportunity that four days provided to discourage subscribers from making the switch. The FCC also pointed out that the wireless industry’s own voluntary standard was only about two and a half hours.

Cable operators support the move, since they are increasingly trying to woo customers from phone companies via their bundled offerings.

“We are pleased that the FCC has unanimously supported shortening the period landline providers are required to port customer phone numbers to one business day,” said Comcast in a statement. “This is a pro-consumer and pro-competitive action that Comcast has actively supported.

“Today’s decision is a win for consumers who have already saved billions of dollars a year because of the entry of cable companies into the local phone business. This makes it even easier for consumers to switch providers and take advantage of the growing competitive market.”

Calling it a victory for consumers, National Cable & Telecommunications Association president Kyle McSlarrrow said: “We commend the FCC on today’s decision to adopt a porting interval of one business day. In the current competitive environment, consumers benefit from a shorter porting interval for moving numbers when choosing a new provider.  As consumer advocates, state commissions and elected officials have noted, when consumers can efficiently switch providers, prices are lowered and quality is enhanced.”

The FCC said it would ask the North American Numbering Council to come up with guidelines for shortening the porting interval, then give companies nine months to make the change after those rules are established. Smaller operators will get 15 months, with acting FCC chairman Michael Copps pointing out that some of them may not have automated porting systems.

USTelecom, which represents phone companies, was not as happy with the decision. While saying the group supports the effort to reduce the porting time, USTelecom President Walter McCormick said that it would need to carefully review the decision given the complexity and expense of the process.

“It will be important to understand how the Commission has satisfied its specific statutory obligation to enable providers to recover costs for implementing these regulatory requirements,” he said, adding that USTelecom will work with NANC to make sure consumers don’t lose service because of the shortened intervals.

At the same meeting, the FCC also voted unanimously, to require VoIP phone-service providers to give subscribers notice when they are reducing or discontinuing operations, a requirement that already applies to traditional phone service.

VoxIP Big Bandwidth (BBw), NuVox’s access agnostic high speed VoxIP product, allows customers to have bandwidth in increments of 10, 20, 45, 50, and 100 Mbps.

Since BBw launched in early 2009, it’s sold MRR has reached approximately $235K!

BBw’s “lit” markets are: Atlanta, Birmingham, Greenville, Jacksonville, Miami/Ft. Lauderdale/West Palm Beach, Orlando, and Nashville.

The markets which will be up and running soon are: Charlotte, Greensboro, Kansas City, Knoxville, Louisville, and St. Louis.

Click here to learn more about VoxIP BBw.

In preparation for the upcoming hurricane season, the Network Operations team conducted a power shutdown and tests for the emergency power systems at the Maitland facility this past Saturday. This included testing the emergency standby generator, UPS system, portable generator, and automatic transfer switch.

The team took four months to plan the tests, while it took four hours to execute the plan.  The Network Operations team will be conducting the event on an annual basis. 

The team members (pictured above) involved were Greg Benge, Jim McEwen, Wilfred Monde, Bill DiPalma, Tom Beard, Luke Small, and Tom Mitchell (not pictured).

“Support teams from the CEC, SD, Sales, and the NOC work to support customers and keep our network up and running. We must ensure our Maitland facility will be ready in case of a hurricane or natural disaster,” said Director of Regional Operations Tom Mitchell.

Check out what others are saying about Nuvox.

http://www.broadbandreports.com/comment/1827/70017