Triple-play or quad-play service success seemingly can turn on a number of factors. Every service provider starts with one service core to their tradition and reputation, but probably has less experience with the additional elements. With the wireless part of the multi-play package, it's always been presumed that telcos that own wireless subsidiaries have a competitive edge over cable TV companies that don't have wireless groups, or have just started in the wireless market.

But operationally, the wireline and wireless groups within the major telcos have not always gotten along. I remember attending a wireless trade show about 15 years ago and thinking that the way wireless executives acted and thought of themselves as a scrappy little enclave on the cutting edge was so much different than what I saw at the much bigger telecom trade show I had been to just two months earlier.

Wireless companies and units thought of their groups and themselves as gamblers, while wireline folks thought of wireless service and the people who ran it as something of a money pit run by spendthrifts. That may have been 15 years ago, but as telcos look to integrate these services today, I think more of that attitude lingers than we would care to believe. And it's an attitude that cable TV companies obviously don't have to overcome.

If telcos can get past the challenges of operational legacies and internal attitude adjustments, there's still a great equalizer at the network level -- IP. Telcos don't have much more experience than cable TV companies in deploying IP network elements like softswitches and media gateways, and neither has real experience running commercial services over IMS.

Ultimately, whoever gains the wireless edge as multi-play competition proceeds will depend less on tradition and more on imagination. Whichever party can innovate successfully, giving customers new wireless services and cross-breeding wireless capabilities with wireline applications, will quickly gain that edge.

E-mail me at doshea@telephonyonline.com.