Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Cavalier Telephone Offers Google Apps
04 Mar, 2008
Cavalier Telephone, a Richmond, VA based CLEC, announced the availability of Google Apps to its high speed Internet subscribers. The Google application suite will be offered through a Cavalier web domain and will provide Gmail e-mail services, Google Calendar for shared scheduling, Google Product Search for shopping, Google Picasa for photos, and the Google Start Page feature which will allow subscribers to create a customizable home page. Cavalier claims to be the first company in the communications industry to launch these services.
Cavalier Aims to be Fifth Option in Baltimore, MD
07 Oct, 2007
Several reports have Cavalier, a Virginia based CLEC, applying for a cable franchise in Baltimore County, MD. Baltimore County is both a Comcast and Verizon FiOS served market. Adding the two DBS providers to the mix makes Cavalier a potential fifth video option. Cavalier intends to use leased copper pairs from Verizon, at least initially.
Should Cavalier enter this market, they would be bucking a trend. Very few CLECs have been known to enter such competitive markets as Baltimore with both cable and telecom behemoths already offering a triple play bundle. It’s usually the other way around – Verizon has entered several markets where a cable and smaller CLEC or cable overbuilder are already present. But Verizon has a market cap of $131 billion. Safe to say they have somewhat deeper pockets. Cavalier’s no stranger to competing with Verizon – they do so in many of their mid-Atlantic markets, including Richmond, VA where they also compete with Comcast and FiOS (Cavalier launched IPTV before the arrival of FiOS in Richmond). Maybe they’ve learned something – perhaps a weakness or two to exploit.
For more on their Baltimore plans, see this Baltimore Sun post.
About Telecompetitor
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
