3 ms·

Yeah and there's already a lot of providers of satellite internet. But, Starlink has not published their pricing, so it's unclear how much of the market will th

Yeah and there's already a lot of providers of satellite internet. But, Starlink has not published their pricing, so it's unclear how much of the market will they capture.

gpm 7y ago
Sure, there are competitors. Starlink (or any other proposed LEO constellation) offers a fundamentally better product as a result of low latency (ballpark 640ms vs 20ms). Which they get as a result of being in low earth orbit instead of geosynchronous orbit. Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower, meaning the ability to out compete on price. I don't see the existing constellations remaining competitive for long.
- H8crilA 7y ago
  > Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower Interesting, how do you know that?
  - portyllo 7y ago
    It's not true. LEO systems are far more CAPEX intensive than GEO, and neither Starlink, Oneweb, Telesat, or Kuiper will be cheaper than Viasat-3 and will not be able to compete in terms of cost per Gbps.
    - H8crilA 7y ago
      Do you have any good sources on that? Not that I doubt you, but would like to read more on the subject.
      - shaklee3 7y ago
        See the cost of phased array, which Leo needs to work. They're significantly more expensive than standard parabolic dishes, and there's no evidence SpaceX has changed that.
        ericd 7y ago
        Based on Elon's standard playbook, I'm guessing he's going to try to bring down unit economics with much larger scale in phased array manufacturing than we've seen in the past. If he didn't think he could do this, I don't think they'd be launching Starlink. That said, I know almost nothing about phased arrays, so I don't know if it's expensive due to some fundamental reason, or if it's partly because it's been a niche/low volume device before now.
        shaklee3 7y ago
        Right, Elon needs that to come down to work. The satellite part is very cool and all, but the ground station cost is where the uncertainty is.
      - portyllo 7y ago
        Well, look at Oneweb as an example. They have raised 3+ billions, still need more funding and their total system throughout is not that much larger than Viasat-3's,which has a cost of ~1 billion (?). I don't think that Starlink is gonna be significantly (maybe a factor of 0.5x) cheaper in terms of cost per Mbps.
  - gpm 7y ago
    It's an opinion based on: - Number of satellites launched at once - Stated bandwidth numbers of satellites - Lack of concern over intentionally deorbitting satellites for testing and sending experimental prototypes to space with an apparently expected not negligible failure rate. - Stated cost of the phased array groundstations (in the hundreds)
- shaklee3 7y ago
  This is completely incorrect. There is no evidence whatsoever that starlink costs are "almost certainly far lower".

Yeah and there's already a lot of providers of satellite internet. But, Starlink has not published their pricing, so it's unclear how much of the market will they capture.

gpm 7y ago

Sure, there are competitors. Starlink (or any other proposed LEO constellation) offers a fundamentally better product as a result of low latency (ballpark 640ms vs 20ms). Which they get as a result of being in low earth orbit instead of geosynchronous orbit. Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower, meaning the ability to out compete on price. I don't see the existing constellations remaining competitive for long.

H8crilA 7y ago
> Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower Interesting, how do you know that?
- portyllo 7y ago
  It's not true. LEO systems are far more CAPEX intensive than GEO, and neither Starlink, Oneweb, Telesat, or Kuiper will be cheaper than Viasat-3 and will not be able to compete in terms of cost per Gbps.
  - H8crilA 7y ago
    Do you have any good sources on that? Not that I doubt you, but would like to read more on the subject.
    - shaklee3 7y ago
      See the cost of phased array, which Leo needs to work. They're significantly more expensive than standard parabolic dishes, and there's no evidence SpaceX has changed that.
      - ericd 7y ago
        Based on Elon's standard playbook, I'm guessing he's going to try to bring down unit economics with much larger scale in phased array manufacturing than we've seen in the past. If he didn't think he could do this, I don't think they'd be launching Starlink. That said, I know almost nothing about phased arrays, so I don't know if it's expensive due to some fundamental reason, or if it's partly because it's been a niche/low volume device before now.
        shaklee3 7y ago
        Right, Elon needs that to come down to work. The satellite part is very cool and all, but the ground station cost is where the uncertainty is.
    - portyllo 7y ago
      Well, look at Oneweb as an example. They have raised 3+ billions, still need more funding and their total system throughout is not that much larger than Viasat-3's,which has a cost of ~1 billion (?). I don't think that Starlink is gonna be significantly (maybe a factor of 0.5x) cheaper in terms of cost per Mbps.
- gpm 7y ago
  It's an opinion based on: - Number of satellites launched at once - Stated bandwidth numbers of satellites - Lack of concern over intentionally deorbitting satellites for testing and sending experimental prototypes to space with an apparently expected not negligible failure rate. - Stated cost of the phased array groundstations (in the hundreds)
shaklee3 7y ago
This is completely incorrect. There is no evidence whatsoever that starlink costs are "almost certainly far lower".