March 11, 2006

hapless telco employee

hapless telco employee.jpg
[Ins­pi­red by Om Malik’s post here.]

3 Responses to “hapless telco employee”

  1. I work for a B2B Telco/ISP. Skype is not a threat at all. There are Qua­lity Of Ser­vice pro­blems with it, rela­tive to enterprise-level VoIP ser­vi­ces. The sort of pro­blems that get peo­ple fired.
    In put­ting your telephony over inter­net pipes, you’re making them depen­dent on less relia­ble cir­cuits. You’d bet­ter have a bac­kup cir­cuit with auto­ma­tic fail-over, else your MD is going to fire you when no-one can phone your com­pany, and ever­yone is for­ced to make expen­sive calls on their mobi­les, for the second time in a week.
    Even if you decide to have peo­ple using Skype, who will ensure they have access their files from whe­re­ver they are, or that their cor­po­rate data is bac­ked up secu­rely, or that their com­pu­ters are patched, or any one of a million things? Phone ser­vi­ces are just part of the pic­ture. More com­pa­nies are deman­ding fat­ter inter­net pipes lin­king more loca­tions. They don’t neces­sa­rily take the price dec­rea­ses. Many upgrade their ser­vi­ces, so they’re spen­ding the same amounts but get­ting more for their money. And with falling who­le­sale pri­ces, that upgrade doesn’t neces­sa­rily cost the pro­vi­der any pro­fit.
    You’re also assu­ming that price dec­rea­ses are pas­sed on to cus­to­mers. Not neces­sa­rily. As VoIP gains mar­ket share, and Voice and Data run over the same cor­po­rate net­work, the Voice purchase deci­sion shifts into the IT depart­ment. Many IT deci­sion makers will be open to lea­ving voice rates unchan­ged (i.e above the now-fallen mar­ket price), or loc­king them into com­pe­ti­tive rates that will be uncom­pe­ti­tive by the end of the con­tract, if the pro­vi­der will sub­si­dise other higher-margin ser­vi­ces such as inter­net access, email hos­ting, data bac­kup etc. Do you think IT Mana­gers would pre­fer an easier life and bet­ter IT sup­port ser­vi­ces, or cheap phone calls? In my expe­rience, they’re more than willing to take the cross-subsidy. A cross-subsidy that Skype can’t offer. It may offer mar­gi­nal savings, but they the IT guy has to make a busi­ness case for spen­ding those on the other seriv­ces.
    Skype rates may be low for con­su­mers, but busi­ness cus­to­mers are already used to get­ting free inter­nal calls, and low rates.
    Even if a cus­to­mer signs up at the chea­pest rates in the mar­ket, it’s not the end of the world for the Telco. If the cus­to­mer can be per­sua­ded to sign up for seve­ral years, they may find that whilst their rates may fall, the tele­coms pro­vi­ders own costs (the who­le­sale rates they pay) will often fall fas­ter.
    In the B2B mar­ket, Skype is nowhere. Ski­lled staff reten­tion and rec­ruit­ment is a far, far big­ger pro­blems. 1000 times more sig­ni­fi­cant, at least.
    Even in the consumer-space, BT (which surely has the most to lose of all the UK tel­cos) is sho­wing that up-selling and cross-selling can make up for the falls in reve­nue that come from VoIP (of which Skype will be a minor pla­yer) and being resi­dent in Com­mo­dity hell.
    Skype gets glo­wing cove­rage in Wired / Slash­dot / trendy geek world. But its poster-child pro­file is dis­pro­por­tio­nate to its tiny mar­ket impact.
    On a cyni­cal note, if you want to draw a car­toon about the Tele­coms industry, may I sug­gest you con­si­der Cable & ‘Let’s fire 90% of our cus­to­mers’ Wireless.

  2. Hugh MacLeod says:

    karim, ‘i work for skype’ sounds sexier than ‘i work for the phone com­pany’ ;-)

  3. Mike says:

    Hope more telco emplo­yees sweat bullets.