Shopping Cart


List All Products
Download Area
Show Cart
Your Cart is currently empty.

Email us or call
(813) 963-5884

Testimonial

“Peter possesses a keen sense and insight for turning telecom services and products into customers and dollars. He is passionate about this industry, his work and the people he serves. Visit his site, read his blog and sign up for his newsletter at marketingideaguy.com and you will discover what makes Peter a sought after marketing consultant.”

Cynthia de Lorenzi, CEO, Patriot Computer Group

CTIA: 50 Facts About Wireless
On Rad's Radar
Thursday, 02 September 2010 19:52
It's kind of a misnomer because CTIA is about wireless but about Cellular. But here are 50 facts about wireless. I think to start with crying on the first one sets the proper tone for an Industry spokesgroup. "U.S. has the highest minutes of use (MOUs) per month per user and the lowest average revenue per minute of service of the 26 OECD countries tracked by Bank of America Merrill Lynch."

Read more... [CTIA: 50 Facts About Wireless]
 
Google is Not Killing Voice
On Rad's Radar
Tuesday, 31 August 2010 04:57

Everywhere you look, people are aghast that Google added free calling to Gmail. Big deal. (Although you should read Jon Arnold's piece on it.) Most people aren't going to strap a microphone and headset to their computer to make PC-to-phone calls.

Isn't Skype the only one that this really affects? If this kind of calling - PC-to-Phone - was common, Skype would be worth billions (and Cisco couldn't afford it).  Net2Phone, Dialpad and others offered some kiind of PC dialing. It's clunky. People want what they are used to.

Another example is MagicJack. How many thousands of those USB devices have been sold via infomercials? And yet the landline decline is still about the same. No tipping point yet.

Vonage tried to be the voice killer, but had too many issues - legal and technical. Now it's back with an app to let you call your Facebook friends. One more click-to-call widget that likely will not have that much impact on voice revenues.

You know who is killing voice revenues? Cable companies. Why?

Cable started with the most expensive piece of triple-play: TV. While TV is profitable, the head-end and gear to deliver it is very expensive -- and so is the content. As we have seen with the fights between BHN/TWC and ESPN, content is wicked expensive with carriage and bundling rules designed to enhance the content owners pockets.

Meanwhile, MSO's realized that Internet Access was easy to provide and way more profitable than TV. Now they realize that voice is the golden goose of profit. Cablecos also realize that this is the cash cow of their competitor, the ILEC. Destroy its cash cow before it can build out a threatening network. (See FiOS history).

On the other side of the duopoly, telcos, specifically ILECs, had to migrate its business from the most profitable to the least profitable while spending billions on network builds and TV gear.

MSO's have really only figured out how to do landline replacement. When they figure out how to deliver Hosted PBX successfully to businesses, ILECs and CLEC's will be reeling from that punch in the market.

ILEC's were not prepared for competition. Most ILEC's have a Bell-Head mentality and cannot wrap their heads around the concept of innovation, flexibility and competition. Also, ILEC's are good at picking hardware/technology. Most haven't had but a couple of vendors for over 50 years (Lucent and Nortel). And that DMS or Class 5 has been sitting there printing money ever since. Today, it's a scramble to figure out Video Delivery Systems and high-speed Internet Access services - while spending money on network build out as well. Not fun, especially as revenue dips.

BTW, what is saving Ma and Pa Bell is cellular and International or both would be seeing bloody red quarters like Pa has.

Anyway, back to Google Voice in Gmail. The reason Google did this is the same model that hotels use: stay on property. Hotels get you for the room, but then add a resort fee, parking, the expensive bottles of water, mini-bar items, gift shop, snack shop, bar and restaurant. As long as you stay on property, they are grabbing as much of your vacation spend as possible.

Google has the same mentality: keep people on their properties as long as possible. Search, Docs, Apps, GTalk, YouTube, Blogger and Gmail. The last property for them to monetize properly is Picasa. Pictures should be as social as YouTube is (at a minimum).

Can't wait for a click-to-call widget for Blogger!

Read more... [Google is Not Killing Voice]
 
I Don't Understand M&A
On Rad's Radar
Monday, 30 August 2010 08:53

HP and Dell are in a bidding war for 3Par. HP (at this writing) is at $30 per share - 3x the original share price for this stock! That's almost $2B!

One thing is that all these companies - in fact, most American companies - lack R&D. That's right: We don't have R&D in America. Except from startups. So if VC money halts, so does all R&D and Innovation in this country. Think about that for a minute. (I'll wait).

The days of PARC and Bell Labs are long gone. Microsoft is a leader in R&D spending.

Apparently, so are the days of common sense. Seriously, for $2B, you couldn't have had an R&D strategy? Really?

So they will pay $2B for $200M in revenue and for the product and patents.

Just so you know, this doesn't increase the number of patents that American companies hold. M&A just changes ownership.  It also will likely mean, wait for it, less jobs.

BTW, ARS tries to explain this crazy acquisition to me, but I still don't see the $2B in value.

Then the buzz this morning is that Cisco is buying Skype because Silver Lake wants out. Didn't Silver Lake just buy Skype last year (Sept., 2009) fro $2B? And Skype just filed for an IPO for $100M. Now Cisco is buying them? Why?

The SEC filing shows that only 7M of the 500M users pay for Skype services. But this year that could still amount to $800M in revenue. But income could be as little $25M per year (based on the $13M in income so far in 2010).

It makes more sense for CenturyTel to roll up Qwest and Embarq into one wireline losing company to me than Cisco buying Skype.

Maybe Skype isn't getting business traction and Cisco isn't getting small business video traction, so get married.  It makes me wonder what happened to Webex. Cisco owns it but can't get traction. Why would spending $2B for Skype help? Are they buying revenue to shore up the financials (to confuse the stock traders)? That's the one I am going with.

You would think that with a $20M push, Webex could get more traction, but what do I know? I don't run a MNC.

The other question is why not buy Oovoo or some other (cheaper) video conferencing play?

As for Dell, follow PAETEC: buy a VAR.

PAETEC bought a couple of VAR's - US Energy Partners and Quagga Corporation - for integrated solutions, its energy play, and to confuse me. It owns USLEC and MacLeod which makes sense - all CLEC roll up with some fiber. Then it buys Allworx, a PBX company. Then PAETEC gets into energy sales. Finally, PAETEC gets into systems integration.

I don't see how half these M&A activities drive the company closed to its focus or its vision.

I'll keep watching to see if it gets any clearer, but I think the two keys are the lack of R&D and the quarterly numbers.  It doesn't create any added value and almost certainly results in more job losses.

 


 

Read more... [I Don't Understand M&A]
 
Sales Effectiveness Review
On Rad's Radar
Friday, 27 August 2010 10:57

According to a study of IT executives by Forrester, only 15% of executives believe that their meetings with salespeople are valuable and live up to their expectations. Reasons given according to the report:

Business leaders (24%) don't believe salespeople are knowledgeable about their specific business.

Only 34% of buying executives said salespeople understand their roles and responsibilities.

Only 38% feel that reps are prepared to answer their questions.

That's not effective sales!

As we move from Bell-Head (TDM) to Net-Head services (IP Comm), this problem will exaserbate. By that, I mean, where will companies find knowledgeable salespeople to sell IP Communications and related products?

I'm a firm believer in hiring based on Attitude because you can't train friendly. But you can train people about your services and sales skills. Enthusem for selling and your services: no, you can't train that either.

If your company sells Managed Services, SIP Trunking, Hosted PBX, DIA and maybe a couple of other things, how does the salesperson know what to sell and to who? Training. (You can get that training at ITEXPO with these free workshops from MegaPath, Phone.com, Ingate - or from RAd-INFO, INc. who can customize training for your company.)

In a similar report from McKinsley Quarterly, "B2B customers say they care most about product and price, but what they really want is a great sales experience. ...Sales reps should know their products or services intimately and how their offering compares with those of their competitors. Customers need information on exactly how a product or service will make a difference to their businesses. And while they may say price is one of their biggest concerns, a satisfying sales experience is ultimately more important."

With all that salespeople have to do today: learn the services, do some of that online social stuff, check email, paperwork, prospecting, lead gen, follow up and then account management, when is their time with that quota weighing you down? It's a difficult balance. It also means that the cost of sales will be increasing for many companies -- at about the time competition increases and price pressure forces lower overall revenue. (See GMail adds Voice as an example of both competitive and pricing pressure).

Athletes have coaches to reach their potential. Salespeople need them to. There is no such thing as a natural born salesperson. Like a lawyer or doctor, there are skills to be learned, honed and re-trained on. That's if you want to be an effective salesperson in this marketplace.

BTW, this goes for Agents as well as Salespeople.

Read more... [Sales Effectiveness Review]
 
How Long Can It Take?
On Rad's Radar
Thursday, 26 August 2010 08:30

If training on contracting and ordering ABN services takes more than 90 minutes (it's just over 90 minutes and still going now), how long will it take an Agent to actually get pricing, contract, and order the circuit? Is the factor 2x training?

Read more... [How Long Can It Take?]
 
My Negative Outlook
On Rad's Radar
Thursday, 26 August 2010 05:08

It has been pointed out that I tend to have a negative outlook. I don't know how fair that statement is but I'll give you my view of the world.

I'm an American. This is the greatest country in the world. The potential here is limitless. And we have a bunch of Creatives and really bright minds. Unfortunately, we also live in a society that favors short-term versus long-term thinking.

I was a Chemist for over 6 years (Glaxo, Bayer, Oil of Olay and BIC). In Pharma, you see huge potential and unfortunately huge disappointment. No, I don't mean when a clinical trial fails and the company loses tens of millions. I mean, the way the FDA works WITH the Industry.  The other huge let down is the way Pharma isn't about Cures but about maintenance of illness. There's less money in cures.

So on the one hand, we have this great country filled with boundless potential. WOOT!

Then we have government and the totally screwed up political system undermined by special interests and lobbyists for those special interests. What was once a Of the People, By the People, For the People has become of, by and for the select few who buy it. They aren't called F-Agencies for nothing.

What's the theme here? I see boundless potential constantly going to waste. I have high expectations that repeatedly go unmet.

Now let's take telecom. Boundless buckets of cash. R&D gets replaced by lobbyists and lawyers who fight for laws and rule changes instead of just living up to the countless promises made to every state PSC in the nation since 1999. In other words, build the broadband networks that ratepayers financed with rate increases granted to ILEC's for the express purpose of broadband build-out.

Think about this: over $7B per year goes into the Universal Service Fund (USF) and is funnelled back to ILEC's and others willy-nilly to pay for landline voice service; Internet Access in libraries and schools; and rural healthcare. RUS hands out grants and loans annually to the tune of $3B. In just 5 years, that's $50B in hand outs. Shouldn't we already have broadband across the land, un-metered and at least 6MB x 1MB by now?

Innovation. We have a dirth of PhD candidates. Who wants to go to graduate school adding tens of thousands of dollars in loans to the tens of thousands in loans already collected for a Bachelor's degree that can't get you the dream job?

Bell Labs has a history of innovation. It used to employ tens of thousands. Last I head, it has less than 1000 PhD's. As Slashdot states, "The great labs of this era--Bell Labs, Xerox PARC, and IBM's labs--were places with massive budgets, where the world's top scientists were invited to pursue "blue sky" research into areas with no immediately apparent commercial applications. The facilities were state-of-the-art, and there was no pressure from management or shareholders to do anything but science for science's sake."

And today we are a precipous. We need ubiquious, reliable broadband to an unencumbered, open Internet. Why? Because we are competing daily for jobs (hence, money) with a global workforce willing to work on a laptop with wi-fi anywhere in the world. And most folks don't get that.

You think just the Fortune 5000 outsource jobs and dollars? Everyone who uses eLance, Guru, Rent-a-coder, et al is likely hiring someone outside the US. Oh, that 4-hour work week guy? He also sends dollars he earns in the US to India. He encourages it. So for our unemployed to make a living someday, they will need new skills, a competitive edge, broadband, and a computer.

We are slowly becoming a service economy of freelancers. We need to wrap our heads around what that is going to mean.

So my outlook may seem pessimistic, negative, cynical, etc. What it really is is disappointment, frustration, and realism. I'm disappointed that I saw the housing bubble but 99% of the people didn't. I'm not the brightest guy in the world. I know way too many people who are far more gifted than me. But I also have high expectations for myself, society, and my country. Expectations that go unmet daily because of stupidity, short sightedness, greed and laziness. In 2000, I said that if we didn't fix certain things - healthcare, Medicare, Social Security to name a few - we would be screwed. Welcome to my brain. I see this stuff coming. I can't fix it alone. I watch it happen. That's frustration.

I do try to balance that seemingly negative outlook with ideas on how to fix it. On what is missing. On what direction may be a way to go. I hope that helps to balance things out. And that's an hour inside my head. (Nice to get that on paper)> Thanks!

Read more... [My Negative Outlook]
 
What's the SCORE?
On Rad's Radar
Wednesday, 25 August 2010 12:15

I sat down with a SCORE counselor today. SCORE is a national organization of business executives that volunteer to help other business people.  We discussed my consulting business for about 90 minutes. He shared some insights with me that I couldn't see from inside it. 

He asked me 2 pointed questions though:

  1. What value am I adding (and to whom)?
  2. Am I really spending my time talking to my potential customers?

Good questions!

What is a potential customer? One that needs my services and can pay for my services.

In agent speak: if he asks for more than 4 proposals and doesn't ever pull the trigger, is he really a prospect or just busy work?


 

Read more... [What's the SCORE?]
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 67