Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Case 6 1 US Telecoms

Case 6 1 US Telecoms

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Gnothi Sauton Naygarp on Aug 01, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/29/2013

pdf

text

original

 
T
HE
U.S. T
ELECOMMUNICATIONS
I
NDUSTRY
(B):1996-1999T
EACHING
N
OTE
S
UMMARY
This B case describes key developments in the telecom industry since the passage of theTelecommunications Act of 1996. This was a period of considerable merger activity in theindustry, with increasingly intense competion, continued convergence between voice and datanetworks, and a number to technological innovations. In the wake of the TelecommunicationsAct, long-distance service providers were attempting to enter local markets, while local carrierssought to provide long distance and other services.In terms of the strategic dynamics framework, this case illustrates the impact of runaway changeon industry players. It also shows how in the face of this runaway change, industry players haveto realign their actions to suit the necessary changes in strategy that result.
T
HEMES
1.The impact of regulatory change.2.The impact of technological change.3.The opportunities and threats associated with convergence.
S
UGGESTED
A
SSIGNMENT
Q
UESTIONS
1.How has the Telecommunications Act of 1996 affected telecoms?2.During the period of 1996-1999, what are the key developments that have reshaped the localservice industry? Why did these happen? What are the implications?3.During 1996-1999, what are the key developments that have reshaped the long distanceindustry segment? Why did these happen? What are the implications?4.How has the Internet affected the telecom industry? What are the implications for providersof local or long distance services?
G
RADUATE
S
CHOOL
 
OF
B
USINESS
S
TANFORD
U
NIVERSITY
C
ASE
#SM-5B
 D
ATE
M
AY
3, 2000
 
 Ariel Capital Management - Teaching Note p.
25.By 2005, what is the telecom industry likely to look like?
 
 Ariel Capital Management - Teaching Note p.
3
S
UPPORTING
A
NALYSIS
 
AND
D
ISCUSSION
Q
UESTIONS
1.How has the Telecommunications Act of 1996 affected telecoms?Passage of the Telecommunications Act (on February 8, 1996) set up three major battlefrontswithin the industry. First, it opened the $108.3 billion (1998 revenues)
1
 market for local phoneservice to its first serious competition. AT&T, the nation’s largest telecommunications company,was now permitted to get back into the local phone business, which it had been forced to leave 12years earlier.Second, the Act allowed the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) to enter the long-distance business, both within and outside of their service region. They could offer in-region long-distanceonly after demonstrating that they had opened their local markets to competition, but they werefree immediately to offer out-of-region long distance, without any precondition.Third, the Act shifted cable companies into a new strategic position. Cable companies have wiresinto customers’ homes—the coveted “last mile.” Though the idea of cable telephony had beenaround for years, cable operators had been prohibited from offering phone service. TheTelecommunications Act gave new life to the prospect of cable-based telecommunications.However, instead of trying to compete in each others’ regions, the presumed outcome to theTelecommunications Act of 1996, RBOCs consolidated. The Act sparked a wave of mergersamong the RBOCS.2.During the period of 1996-1999, what are the key developments that have reshaped thelocal service industry? Why did these happen? What are the implications?During the timeframe of this case, ILECs underwent consolidation. As of May 1998, the RBOCsconsisted of:
Ameritech (served the upper Midwestern United States, proposed for combining withSBC Communications)
Bell Atlantic (served the northeastern United States; has taken over NYNEX)
Bell South (served the southeastern United States)
SBC Communications (formerly Southwestern Bell; served the southwestern UnitedStates; also owns Pacific Bell)
US WEST Communications (served the western United States)
2
 Throughout the timeframe of the case, the RBOCs continued to control the physical assets of thelast mile to customers. Meanwhile, CLECs offered fully switched services, primarily to businessusers, but managed only small penetration (approximately $1.7B).
1
 
 Preliminary Statistics of Common Carriers, 1998 Edition
, Federal Communications Commission, 5/99
2
www.whatis.com

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->