Skip to main content

The Arthritic Worm can still turn

The newly merged SprintNextel is the old style Telco that still makes a significant portion of their revenue from voice, the Arthritic Worm has turned on Vonage and two other related VoIP companies by means of a court action.

They have a suit based on seven patents and are moving to block the VoIP provider(s) from using their network. They have also filed for an unspecified amount of damages.

This seems to be a very public attempt to salvage their voice revenues from the churn to VoIP calls. Something similar was aired in Europe about the then new kid on the block Skype. The decision there was that the olny way Skype was going to be stopped was to shutdown the Interent. The perception was that it was already too popular and the public backlash would be too great.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of the case, filed in Kansas, it will be seen as a gauge on the risk from VoIP technologies to the dinosaur voice carriers.

Time will dictate that voice is not special. It is simply a form of data content that travels some sort of network. The carriers that can react and adjust to this reality will be the ones to survive, natural selection will remove those that insist on harking back to the old days of high profits from charging for voice calls.

It is probably a timely move on the Telco's part as domestic VoIP is still not that widely used, despite the press about the technology. The group that will lose the most from a verdict in favour of SprintNextel will the SME Business users. This group tend to be early adopters of such technology as mobile and low cost telephony solutions, as they have the most to gain from cutting costs.

Combine the likes of Vonage with Asterisk and you have a very low cost solution for your telephony needs to run a business. If the SprintNextel network is closed to them, there will always be someone willing to carry the data, it just means that SN won't get the revenue from it.

There is still a lot of room in the market for pure IP providers, however they still require the basic telecom backbone in order to supply network access.

A decision against Vonage could see a new round of network build out for IP access. This won't have to be a national network but will most likely consist of small interconnected networks. So who will win? Ultimately I would say hardware and interconnect setllement providers.

Of course as Google Net starts to take shape and form there are ideally placed once more to pick up the demand.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

PC over IP - The Teradici Effect

Teradici are hoping to blur the lines between PC and Data Centre. Their solution allows a use to view multiple screens and control the blade PC over IP. This is kind of like the dumb terminals with a new edgy deployment. The intention is that all of the computing power is performed offsite in a centralized area, the Data Centre, and this will save on power and maintenance costs as the engineers are co-located with the hardware and therefore don't have to go out to the client site for basic maintenance. The Teradici Company Article found in the Wall Street Journal

In the overlap of technology, marketing and social media the QR Code is critical

Outside of consulting on telecommunications, CIO advisory, and the business adoption of technology I also completed an MBA.  One of the projects was on the potential use cases of two dimensional barcodes. Today the QR Code , one of many types of 2D codes, is seen as being a critical component of any good marketing plan.  As a natural integration between social media and devices I would extend VMob Bob's question " What can a mobile operator learn from Facebook ?" and also ask how can they step and start to make innovations with the extensions to social media that already exist today?

Access as infrastructure, what does this mean for Telco 2.0?

Having recently attended a seminar by Catherine Middleton from Ryerson on Australia's NBN initiative it got me thinking about "access as infrastructure". The Australian Government is investing $B's of public and private capital in a national broadband network that is a fibre to the premise platform, although for distant and remote sites it will most likely be a fixed wireless solution.  The proposition from Dr. Middleton is that ubiquitous access will create a platform for services that separates competition from access, sounds like Telco 2.0. The question I posed was if the idea is a common platform but close to 10% of that access will be at 12Mbps rather than 100Mbps (fixed wireless versus fibre) then surely the lowest common denominator will prevail and services will be designed for 12Mbps.  You would then question the rationale of FTTP or FTTH when you could go fixed wireless.  Over time LTE and similar technologies will see an increase in speed that will of...