Give us your DSL, your cable modems, and SOHOs that yearn to be free...

Last column, we asked readers for ideas about how to approach VoIP for a distributed global company highly reliant on DSL and cable modems.  The response has been overwhelming and quite interesting, so we’d like to update the progress, correct some misconceptions, and ponder the impact for carriers - all in 750 words or less.  Seems like some sort of SAT Advanced Placement test.

First and foremost, let us clarify some information related in our last column regarding ICG - initially provided to us by ICG, but which appears to be not quite as first represented.  So yes, on June 12th (the day we were placing our order), ICG decided to suspend orders in several new markets that they launched in January 2004 including the cities of Boston, Chicago, New York, Seattle and Washington D.C. Ultimately, ICG will close these markets because they do not foresee profitability in these cities for some time. The few existing customers in these cities are being transitioned to other providers. But ICG is not withdrawing VoicePipe nationally - it continues to serve 26 markets across the U.S. and in these core cities. “It is business as usual as we continue to serve these customers and take new orders,” says Susan Koehler, Director Communications for ICG.

Susan was kind enough to forward their marketing positioning for the product, which is focused on small and midsized businesses, SMB. ICG targets the market segment of 10-500 seats because a key component of VoicePipe is the quality of service associated with an ICG-provided T-1 for bandwidth dedicated to both voice and data.  Most SOHO businesses - ours included - do not want to spend the money associated with a dedicated T-1, because they usually have, or can get, a less-expensive DSL or cable modem broadband connection.  Bingo, right on, noticed that.

To continue reading, register here and become an Insider. You'll get free access to premium content from CIO, Computerworld, CSO, InfoWorld, and Network World. See more Insider content or sign in.

Last column, we asked readers for ideas about how to approach VoIP for a distributed global company highly reliant on DSL and cable modems.  The response has been overwhelming and quite interesting, so we’d like to update the progress, correct some misconceptions, and ponder the impact for carriers - all in 750 words or less.  Seems like some sort of SAT Advanced Placement test.

First and foremost, let us clarify some information related in our last column regarding ICG - initially provided to us by ICG, but which appears to be not quite as first represented.  So yes, on June 12th (the day we were placing our order), ICG decided to suspend orders in several new markets that they launched in January 2004 including the cities of Boston, Chicago, New York, Seattle and Washington D.C. Ultimately, ICG will close these markets because they do not foresee profitability in these cities for some time. The few existing customers in these cities are being transitioned to other providers. But ICG is not withdrawing VoicePipe nationally - it continues to serve 26 markets across the U.S. and in these core cities. “It is business as usual as we continue to serve these customers and take new orders,” says Susan Koehler, Director Communications for ICG.

Susan was kind enough to forward their marketing positioning for the product, which is focused on small and midsized businesses, SMB. ICG targets the market segment of 10-500 seats because a key component of VoicePipe is the quality of service associated with an ICG-provided T-1 for bandwidth dedicated to both voice and data.  Most SOHO businesses - ours included - do not want to spend the money associated with a dedicated T-1, because they usually have, or can get, a less-expensive DSL or cable modem broadband connection.  Bingo, right on, noticed that.

We think ICG is right, but also wrong, at the same time. Or put another way, given the monopoly being granted to the Telcos by their branch office in Washington (read: FCC), how do companies like ICG differentiate themselves? Based on the positioning above, it’s through superior quality and customer service. And the only way to get that quality assurance is by ‘owning’ the customer through the direct T-1 connections.

ICG does not feel it can compete with the customers without that chokehold over quality, and it doesn’t feel it can provide that quality using DSL or cable modem service. They’re probably right since they can’t get access to the links directly.

Since DSL and cable modems represent the lion’s share of growth in the U.S. for broadband, ICG is left to serve a shrinking segment of the market – those who will shift to a T-1 for all their locations - and a large number of users won’t have ICG as an option because of their reliance on DSL and cable modems. I know our firm, for one, is relying on the DSL and cable modem access links for, as ICG implies, cheap and easy access to bandwidth and it’s worked superbly thus far.

And therein lies the rub over the current Washington environment that is pro-Bell.  Competitors have no choice but to withdraw from the market (This is why Dan Moffat at DSL-reliant New Edge Networks has spent so much time in D.C. lobbying for his firm’s cause, as surely have executives from Covad, ICG and other impacted service providers.) Within the Bell regions, their resale prices for DSL are so high as to discourage competitors who want to build a national net reselling local loops. But the Bell companies still are largely regional entities, with Qwest the only thing close to a national offering.