A New England telecom-services provider pushes on the telecom market with one-price lifetime voice-over-IP package
Competition in the market for voice services is prompting telecom providers to find new ways to attract and keep customers. RNKVoIP, a division of RNK Telecom, unveiled on Monday a plan to offer consumers a lifetime of voice-over-IP phone service for a one-time charge of $999. A similar service for businesses costs $99, with an additional charge of 1.9 cents per minute.
The Phone for Life package, initially available in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Rhode Island, comes with a 60-day money-back guarantee. The residential plan includes a VoIP line; a phone; the ability to keep the phone number if the customer moves to a new location; unlimited inbound and outbound calling throughout the United States, Canada, 20 other countries, and 21 additional foreign cities; and a batch of features such as caller ID, voice-mail notification via E-mail, and call forwarding.
The business package includes a VoIP line, a phone, and unlimited inbound calls. To avoid the risk of businesses using the line around the clock, the company imposes a charge for outbound calls of 1.9 cents per minute.
Parent company RNL Telecom is a privately held phone company based in Dedham, Mass., and provides a range of wholesale products to carriers, reseller, and distributors, said Richard Koch, president and CEO, in a statement. Said Koch, "We will continue to change the rules of the telecommunications industry by pioneering high-quality products and services like 'Phone for Life'."
2014 Next-Gen WAN SurveyWhile 68% say demand for WAN bandwidth will increase, just 15% are in the process of bringing new services or more capacity online now. For 26%, cost is the problem. Enter vendors from Aryaka to Cisco to Pertino, all looking to use cloud to transform how IT delivers wide-area connectivity.
The UC Infrastructure TrapWorries about subpar networks tanking unified communications programs could be valid: Thirty-one percent of respondents have rolled capabilities out to less than 10% of users vs. 21% delivering UC to 76% or more. Is low uptake a result of strained infrastructures delivering poor performance?