Search Results for: health

A colleague steered me to the Branham 300 list of Canada’s top technology companies.

The problem with lists is that they are almost immediately outdated. But I think there are more fundamental problems with this list. I’m happy to overlook whatever glitch or typo led to RDM Corp being listed as number 97 and number 101. But there are more fundamental problems that seem to infest this particular listing.

I can understand how it must be difficult to gather financial information about private companies. But there are a lot of private firms that make the list, and a fairly abbreviated list of companies that are excluded from the listing in a note on the front page. This is hardly an inventory of software firms of any measurable substance. Keep in mind that company number 250 has revenues of less than $2.5M.

In addition, there are a number of public companies that are mysteriously absent from the list. Companies that are listed on the TSE, the London Exchange, the Venture exchange. Some independent phone companies appear to be missing, despite SEDAR information that confirms internet revenues that would put them into the top 250. [It is unclear why Branham chooses to ignore wireline voice revenues, despite including, for example, Nortel’s and Aastra’s equipment sales that support voice services].

Why take the time to point out these problems? Because policy makers may try to draw conclusions based on these flawed studies. The Branham Group claims “The listing has become pre-eminent the world over as the authoritative indicator of the health of the Information Technology industry in Canada.” An article on the Branham website presents some conclusions of its own that must be challenged based on missing company information.

Since it was so easy for me to find obvious problems in the list, it makes me wonder what else may be missing, if we were to take some time digging. Maybe the right conclusion is that there is tremendous activity in ICT going on in Canada, so much activity among the medium and smaller firms that we can’t produce an accurate listing.

A flawed inventory can be a problem for initiatives such as ICT Toronto. If they start with a list such as Branham’s, that understates the current level of activity, then it will be difficult to accurately measure the efficacy of their new initiatives. We would not want bad data to take the credit in 3-5 years for new ICT activity, when all they may have actually achieved is a better census.

I see Om Malik has picked up on a theme I raised last week – that access independent VoIP may just not be there in terms of acting as a replacement for the general public. Sure, it’s cheaper and gives virtual numbers, but, as Om summarized, users lose reliability, sound quality and emergency access.

I’ll note that these complaints do not apply to the digital voice products coming from the cable companies or the phone companies, such as Bell’s Digital Voice. But those services are access dependent – you buy the voice application from the same carrier as your access wiring – and lose the nomadic capability. That is how the carrier controls the quality, manages the reliability and gives accurate 911 address information. What these products lack is just some of the ‘cool’ factor and so far, there is no great price advantage.

At least in Canada, we seem to prefer an orderly market, allowing the cable companies to enter the voice business with healthy margins, but sacrificing some of the vigourous price competition that consumers might otherwise enjoy.

A year after the CRTC set in place its rules for VoIP, we’ll be looking at all aspects of the competitive marketplace – both access independent and dependent voice products – at The 2006 Canadian Telecom Summit on June 12-14.

With the investor euphoria surrounding the IPO of Tim Hortons, I couldn’t help but write some thoughts about such a great Canadian institution. After all, what other firm holds such a tender place in our collective nationalistic hearts that the Royal Canadian Mint would launch its Remembrance Day commemorative quarter exclusively through Tim Hortons.

But Professor Goldberg, this blog is about Telecom Trends. How is Tim Hortons relevant?

Good question – and yes, this will be on the final exam. Tim Hortons is an example of how a Canadian icon can be acquired by a multi-national firm and yet retain its special character and keep its roots. This view, of encouraging foreign investment in Canadian telecommunications, is shared by the Telecom Policy Review panel in its report.

Tim Hortons impresses me with its success in a fiercely competitive market, a market that has seen entry from major global competitors, transforming its product line and implementing technology change. Sounds like the telecom business.

There are lessons to be learned from Tim’s place. Why did Tim Hortons succeed while Krispy Kreme battles accounting issues and Atkins diets? Beating Country Style and commanding their turf while letting Starbucks and others go after a different segment.

They have created new products, liked Steeped Tea last year, hot smoothies, yogurt and berries and other ‘healthy’ choices while continuing to dominate the market for coffee and donuts. On my drive home from the cottage, a drive-through clerk at one of their competitors asked if my dog would like a Timbit. Their brands have become generic terms among Canadians.

Succeeding in a commodity business – I think more of us in the telecom industry should take a look at how at least one company has done this. I’ve always got time for Tim Hortons.