Solved difference between IP PBX and IP Centrex
-
@scottalanmiller said:
In the US, and in most of the world, your phone company, ISP, Centrex providers, PBX providers, power company, etc. are all independent of each other so there is a lot more flexibility.
yeah it is true, but small countries like qatar tend to gather many services in one unit, so that the country have control over everything,
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
In the US, and in most of the world, your phone company, ISP, Centrex providers, PBX providers, power company, etc. are all independent of each other so there is a lot more flexibility.
yeah it is true, but small countries like qatar tend to gather many services in one unit, so that the country have control over everything,
It's really just an extension of the government. Although little countries in Central America do not do that. The people would not stand for that down here. Freedom is a big deal here where they've actually fought outright with the US to be able to be free.
-
how do you see the charge, cheap or expensive ?? (sorry i didn't convert the exchange correctly in my previous post, it is 15 $ monthly per extension + one time payment for the installation 164 $)
the voice gateway is in our premise but owned by the telephone company -
@IT-ADMIN said:
how do you see the charge, cheap or expensive ?? (sorry i didn't convert the exchange correctly in my previous post, it is 15 $ monthly per extension + one time payment for the installation 164 $)
the voice gateway is in our premise but owned by the telephone companyWe charge by capacity so it is completely different than with a Centrex system. We don't change by users or extensions since it is a true private PBX.
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
how do you see the charge, cheap or expensive ?? (sorry i didn't convert the exchange correctly in my previous post, it is 15 $ monthly per extension + one time payment for the installation 164 $)
That price is pretty average from what I have seen similar services in the US.
@scottalanmiller said:
We charge by capacity so it is completely different than with a Centrex system. We don't change by users or extensions since it is a true private PBX.
This is why I recommend this model for most people with more than a few phones. The exact number always depends on the true cost breakdown after phone bill analysis.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
how do you see the charge, cheap or expensive ?? (sorry i didn't convert the exchange correctly in my previous post, it is 15 $ monthly per extension + one time payment for the installation 164 $)
the voice gateway is in our premise but owned by the telephone companyWe charge by capacity so it is completely different than with a Centrex system. We don't change by users or extensions since it is a true private PBX.
What do you mean by capacity?
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
What do you mean by capacity?
If you buy any normal server you get "capacity." The amount of "whatever you can do with the CPU, memory and disks" that you have. It's depending on your workload how much you are able to do with it.
Same here. You get a private PBX. You can have thousands of extensions that never talk since they use no capacity. You can have X users on g.711a but fewer on g.726 as it uses more CPU, assuming that you are CPU bound. You can add features as you want, but don't run out of memory or whatever.
Capacity in the most common IT server sense of the word.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
how do you see the charge, cheap or expensive ?? (sorry i didn't convert the exchange correctly in my previous post, it is 15 $ monthly per extension + one time payment for the installation 164 $)
the voice gateway is in our premise but owned by the telephone companyWe charge by capacity so it is completely different than with a Centrex system. We don't change by users or extensions since it is a true private PBX.
So explain how you bill this?
-
@Dashrender said:
So explain how you bill this?
Super easy... it's a flat rate for a capacity level. Only one level is common as we never see customers go over it. Customers who want a live active/active failover system pay for two. Same as every server everywhere bills for capacity. Just opex, not capex. So same model as any cloud IaaS service, just monthly not hourly.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
So explain how you bill this?
Super easy... it's a flat rate for a capacity level. Only one level is common as we never see customers go over it. Customers who want a live active/active failover system pay for two. Same as every server everywhere bills for capacity. Just opex, not capex. So same model as any cloud IaaS service, just monthly not hourly.
Frankly I was hoping to see some numbers.
Something like...
for 1-10 lines we charge X per line
for 10-50 lines we charge y per line
etc.
DIDs are z more per month, etc. -
That wouldn't be capacity based if there was a breakdown like that. For all intents and purposes it is a set price because the base package handles so much. If you were a large business with 1,000 lines or something I could see that needing to change. But we have big, nationally known brands on the system and some don't even bother to migrate up to larger packages when they are available because they get plenty of capacity as it is (our biggest customer is actually on a system with only 25% of the memory of our current base offering!!)
So while, in theory, there are tiers, it's all purely theoretical. It's just "how many PBXs do you want?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
So explain how you bill this?
Super easy... it's a flat rate for a capacity level. Only one level is common as we never see customers go over it. Customers who want a live active/active failover system pay for two. Same as every server everywhere bills for capacity. Just opex, not capex. So same model as any cloud IaaS service, just monthly not hourly.
Frankly I was hoping to see some numbers.
Something like...
for 1-10 lines we charge X per line
for 10-50 lines we charge y per line
etc.
DIDs are z more per month, etc.The whole "Per line" is the wrong term. That is the legacy thinking that is so wrong with people when looking at VoIP costs.
Per the hosted model @scottalanmiller is talking about specifically. It is a charge for the PBX only. Nothing else. Your trunks are your own responsibility to pay for. This is the entire point of a hosted PBX. You pay them for ONLY the PBX. Not everything else. Of course @ntg would be happy to be the team configuring things for you too (so would @Bundy-Associates btw). But you pay for your own usage.
-
And has it is hosted PBX, not Centrex, the trunks are not included, it is "bring your own trunks." So you can have existing lines that you just point over to it, you can get new ones, you can have one, multiple or even none if you only want an internal messaging platform.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
And has it is hosted PBX, not Centrex, the trunks are not included, it is "bring your own trunks." So you can have existing lines that you just point over to it, you can get new ones, you can have one, multiple or even none if you only want an internal messaging platform.
aww, this was the part I wasn't understanding. You're only selling the PBX service, not the trunks themselves.. Gotcha! Now I understand the flat fee setup.
-
That way you can find the right trunk service for you. VoicePulse, voip.ms, Verizon, whoever. You can mix and match, get multiple providers, go for something cheap.
-
but i don't see the benefit behind paying only for the PBX service, everybody now can have his own PBX on premise, the key feature is how to connect to the PSTN network, and what make sense for me is to pay in order to get connected to the PSTN
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
but i don't see the benefit behind paying only for the PBX service, everybody now can have his own PBX on premise, the key feature is how to connect to the PSTN network, and what make sense for me is to pay in order to get connected to the PSTN
You wouldn't be able to make your local system as reliable as Rackspace, Amazon, or Azure has made their's. Not to mention that even if you lose internet access locally your PBX will still be able to route calls, you could forward calls to users cell phones or even pick up the handset and move it someplace else that has internet access. Even if no one is able to do either of those things your voicemail would still be accessible.
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
but i don't see the benefit behind paying only for the PBX service, everybody now can have his own PBX on premise, the key feature is how to connect to the PSTN network, and what make sense for me is to pay in order to get connected to the PSTN
Many places outside of Qatar this is not the best way to get reliable service. Your problem is government imposed monopoly.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
but i don't see the benefit behind paying only for the PBX service, everybody now can have his own PBX on premise, the key feature is how to connect to the PSTN network, and what make sense for me is to pay in order to get connected to the PSTN
Many places outside of Qatar this is not the best way to get reliable service. Your problem is government imposed monopoly.
Ah, I keep forgetting the Qatar angle. Sorry my previous comment really doesn't fit in this situation.
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
but i don't see the benefit behind paying only for the PBX service, everybody now can have his own PBX on premise, the key feature is how to connect to the PSTN network, and what make sense for me is to pay in order to get connected to the PSTN
Like any enterprise server, having on premises is a niche need, not a "standard use case." I'm not saying that it should always be hosted in a datacenter, but getting your servers into enterprise datacenters (colo, cloud computing, whatever) is the majority use case for reliably computing (just meaning 51%+.) If your PBX is critical, why would you have it on premises unless you were in a special case where you primarily need calls in house rather than out of house?
PBXs are actually one of the first workloads that you send off to the datacenter because their usefulness when the PSTN disconnects is effectively zero (with only the rarest exceptions.)
