Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Qwest Feeling Competitive Heat
06 Aug, 2008Qwest released 2Q08 numbers today and the results aren’t thrilling. Like most local telcos, Qwest is losing access lines and broadband growth is slowing significantly. Unlike it’s “baby bell” brethren, Qwest does not have its own wireless assets to rescue the day. Here’s a snapshot at some of the numbers:
- Lost 235K (2.8%) total switched access lines from 1Q08 and 799K (8.8%) from 2Q07
- Only gained 31K new broadband customers from 1Q08, or 1.14% and 327K over 2Q07, or 13.6%
- Total revenue of $3.8 billion for 2Q08 is down 2.3% from 2Q07, and among mass markets, business, and wholesale, the business segment is the only one that achieved growth (4.6%) over 2Q07
The results aren’t too uncommon from Verizon and AT&T results, with the exception of the missing aforementioned growth engine of wireless. Qwest made some strategic decision recently, where they are pursuing resale strategies for both wireless and video. It’s too early to determine whether those moves are the right ones. We’ll have to watch this play out over multiple quarters and years to come to see if reselling (rather than building one’s own means) the two growth engines of wireless and video makes long term sense. We may find out that Qwest has the last laugh because they're able to extract decent enough commission revenue to justify not investing the billions necessary to offer those services themselves. Maybe it makes sense to get a buck or two per DirecTV and Verizon Wireless resale customer per month than to build up billions in debt building your own capacity in the hopes that your ROI will eventually pay off. But of course, maybe it doesn’t. Maybe Qwest will find themselves watching on the sidelines, unable to act, as their competitors leverage their more robust networks for more value, revenue, and margin, and cherry pick Qwest’s best customers. We should all thank Qwest, because their alternative approach gives our industry some variety relative to long term strategies. Stay tuned.
Post new comment
About Telecompetitor
- Comcast Brings Wideband to the Northwest
- IBM Revives BPL From the Dead
- Muni-Wireless Not Dead Yet
- Is Three Screen Convergence a Pipe Dream?
- Verizon Joins CDN Movement
- iPhone 3G Coming to WalMart
- Verizon Business Teams With Nortel for Managed Telepresence Service
- AT&T is Hooking Up Virtual Rockers with Guitar Hero World Tour
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Webinars
Packet Optical Networks – Enabling Your Future
Dec 16, 2008
Upcoming Events
NTCA Wireless Symposium
Jan 7-9, 2009 - Austin, TX
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google

Options
Personally, I think Qwest is right. I might be old school, but if I can get margin now through resale versus betting the bank in the hopes that I might get a decent return years from now, I'll go for the resale today. It gives me time and options to adjust if resale is the wrong decision. But if betting the bank is the wrong decision, my hands are tied and I have less/no opportunity to adjust and refocus. This game is about options and resale gives me options.