6 ms·

It does seem a little odd when SpaceX have Starlink, surely these two are each other’s main competition.

by iSloth 5y ago

BitwiseFool 5y ago
I wonder if OneWeb has no other choice. I'm sure executives at SpaceX realize that Starlink would be the superior product and they don't stand to lose that many potential customers to OneWeb. I bet they figure they can make more money from the launch costs than potential impact of competition from OneWeb. I also wonder if this will end up helping OneWeb. I can't imagine using Soyuz 2.1 rockets is cheaper than paying for reusable Falcon 9's.
- gameswithgo 5y ago
  If OneWeb wins, SpaceX makes a ton of money launching for them, and doesn't have to bother running an internet company.
  - bee_rider 5y ago
    I wonder to what degree satellite internet is winner-takes-all. They are competing for customers but, at least last I checked, they weren't putting a ton of bandwidth into orbit (compared to existing land based stuff). Maybe they'll both end up just selling as much as they can produce.
    - wongarsu 5y ago
      It's probably less winner-takes-all than ground based internet. At scale, putting infrastructure into space is a much lower barrier to entry than putting a fiber line into every household. The limiting factor will be spectrum allocations. You only have so much bandwidth per area, giving an advantage to those that either have more directional antennas or more spectrum available.
      - hedora 5y ago
        Fiber to the home doesn't have any technical barriers, but localized corruption creates massive barriers to entry. (It's much easier to do fiber to the home in rural areas than in US metros) Satellite internet has the opposite problem. If it ends up winning it will be a testament to dysfunctional governments around the world.
  - wongarsu 5y ago
    And if OneWeb fails, SpaceX still made good money launching them. And if OneWeb is kind of successful and a duopoly between StarLink and OneWeb develops, SpaceX makes money from both companies. Selling shovels is a great strategy, even if you own a gold mine.
- manquer 5y ago
  The only other affordable choice could have been ISRO with PSLV , there was some merits to this as oneweb is owned partly by Bharti an Indian telecom major. However that was always a long shot, Russia collaborates deeply on the Indian space and missile programs. The cryogenic 4th stage is still a Russian engine on GSLV, ISRO won’t likely risk that partnership as America has always refused any tech because of dual concerns, and ISRO also is not very expandable on launch capacity so it would not be easy even if they wanted to.
  - thinkcontext 5y ago
    They might have been able to get a launch or 2 out of ISRO but they don't have the capacity to build rockets that fast.
  - panick21_ 5y ago
    Looking at the launch rates of Indian rockets, its pretty easy to realize that they have no way to simply launch more. They build rockets for specific project and have very low launch rates. They can't simply build 6 extra rockets in a few years.
    - manquer 5y ago
      I agree they cannot expand that much that fast, which was my second point. They wouldn't be very keen either way, as ISRO's primary objective is their research missions while there is some drive to have commercial operations it is not that important to them. However it was also possible that Bharti (and U.K. government ) could have pulled enough strings to get ISRO to agree, so won't have been that surprised if they had partnered.
cfcosta 5y ago
Starlink is a money cow, but having your competitor rely on you for the most expensive part of the job sounds like a great proposition for SpaceX. For OneWeb, they just don't have other options anymore.
- joering2 5y ago
  Starlink is a money cow ?
  - cowmix 5y ago
    Will be (or that's the hope).
- adfgadfgaery 5y ago
  I think you misspelled "money pit". It is currently burning money and will continue doing so for the foreseeable future. According to SpaceX's internal communications, the current approach is unsustainable. It requires future launch vehicles to make sense financially. https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-responds-leaked-email-warns-spacex-faces-bankruptcy-starship-raptor-1654767 https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-responds-leaked-email-war... I don't think satellite internet is promising even once the constellation is up there, but that's another matter. P.S. The expression is "cash cow".
  - hedora 5y ago
    But, but, it will scale globally to millions of users! That's more than I can count, and almost enough to saturate one medium sized metro area! If local ISP's can eke out a living on that sort of revenue stream, I don't see why a global satellite network and launch infrastructure can't. /s
  - Robotbeat 5y ago
    Satellite Internet is already a multi-billion dollar industry before you have inexpensive and low latency service provided by launch vehicles (and satellites) a tenth to a hundredth the cost. But sure, buy into Musk pretending it’s desperate to try to motivate his workforce. The SpaceX Steamroller continues apace.
ldargin 5y ago
It's not odd. They'll get paid for it. The money is still green.
manquer 5y ago
Not that odd, oneweb sells b2b only , spaceX does mostly b2c and some b2b. Also spaceX launched iridium next gen satellites as well. OneWeb (and iridium) will just operate in their own markets . Iridium for example could work in different devices than starlink as they are not LEO and do not need the complex phased array setup starlink needs
- nradov 5y ago
  Iridium constellation is in LEO. The ground terminals are able to use simpler antennas mainly because the data rate is much lower.
  - manquer 5y ago
    Yes, that was incorrect, they are at 780KM orbit, I was thinking Inmarsat who use GEO. Phased Array does help in improving signal strength(and bandwidth) by focusing on the orbital plane only, however I thought since Iridium uses L-Band(1-2GHz) and SpaceX uses Ku-Band(12-14Ghz), there is additional dish size required anyway and also rain fade issues meant higher strength is required in Ku to operate well.
headmelted 5y ago
Not really. Starlink is their main competition, not SpaceX. This just seems practical and in everyone’s best interest. SpaceX get another recurring paying customer, OneWeb get their sats up. This is more common than you’d think when companies are large enough to have products in so many different categories. As an example: Amazon runs Prime Video, but also hosts the infrastructure for Netflix, which to my knowledge Netflix has always been happy with despite relying on a direct competitor for their service.
yodelshady 5y ago
Samsung will happily sell Apple parts. If you have a competitive advantage in launching, why limit your exploitation of that? Worst case, you find out that your satellite engineers were coasting off that advantage. Best case, you make money proving they aren't. Plus you're now antitrust-proof, if that's ever a thing again.
pkaye 5y ago
Musk's long term goal is taking humans to Mars and everything else is a stepping stone to getting there.

It does seem a little odd when SpaceX have Starlink, surely these two are each other’s main competition.

by iSloth 5y ago

It does seem a little odd when SpaceX have Starlink, surely these two are each other’s main competition.

I wonder if OneWeb has no other choice. I'm sure executives at SpaceX realize that Starlink would be the superior product and they don't stand to lose that many potential customers to OneWeb. I bet they figure they can make more money from the launch costs than potential impact of competition from OneWeb. I also wonder if this will end up helping OneWeb. I can't imagine using Soyuz 2.1 rockets is cheaper than paying for reusable Falcon 9's.

gameswithgo 5y ago
If OneWeb wins, SpaceX makes a ton of money launching for them, and doesn't have to bother running an internet company.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  I wonder to what degree satellite internet is winner-takes-all. They are competing for customers but, at least last I checked, they weren't putting a ton of bandwidth into orbit (compared to existing land based stuff). Maybe they'll both end up just selling as much as they can produce.
  - wongarsu 5y ago
    It's probably less winner-takes-all than ground based internet. At scale, putting infrastructure into space is a much lower barrier to entry than putting a fiber line into every household. The limiting factor will be spectrum allocations. You only have so much bandwidth per area, giving an advantage to those that either have more directional antennas or more spectrum available.
    - hedora 5y ago
      Fiber to the home doesn't have any technical barriers, but localized corruption creates massive barriers to entry. (It's much easier to do fiber to the home in rural areas than in US metros) Satellite internet has the opposite problem. If it ends up winning it will be a testament to dysfunctional governments around the world.
- wongarsu 5y ago
  And if OneWeb fails, SpaceX still made good money launching them. And if OneWeb is kind of successful and a duopoly between StarLink and OneWeb develops, SpaceX makes money from both companies. Selling shovels is a great strategy, even if you own a gold mine.
manquer 5y ago
The only other affordable choice could have been ISRO with PSLV , there was some merits to this as oneweb is owned partly by Bharti an Indian telecom major. However that was always a long shot, Russia collaborates deeply on the Indian space and missile programs. The cryogenic 4th stage is still a Russian engine on GSLV, ISRO won’t likely risk that partnership as America has always refused any tech because of dual concerns, and ISRO also is not very expandable on launch capacity so it would not be easy even if they wanted to.
- thinkcontext 5y ago
  They might have been able to get a launch or 2 out of ISRO but they don't have the capacity to build rockets that fast.
- panick21_ 5y ago
  Looking at the launch rates of Indian rockets, its pretty easy to realize that they have no way to simply launch more. They build rockets for specific project and have very low launch rates. They can't simply build 6 extra rockets in a few years.
  - manquer 5y ago
    I agree they cannot expand that much that fast, which was my second point. They wouldn't be very keen either way, as ISRO's primary objective is their research missions while there is some drive to have commercial operations it is not that important to them. However it was also possible that Bharti (and U.K. government ) could have pulled enough strings to get ISRO to agree, so won't have been that surprised if they had partnered.

cfcosta 5y ago

Starlink is a money cow, but having your competitor rely on you for the most expensive part of the job sounds like a great proposition for SpaceX. For OneWeb, they just don't have other options anymore.

joering2 5y ago
Starlink is a money cow ?
- cowmix 5y ago
  Will be (or that's the hope).
adfgadfgaery 5y ago
I think you misspelled "money pit". It is currently burning money and will continue doing so for the foreseeable future. According to SpaceX's internal communications, the current approach is unsustainable. It requires future launch vehicles to make sense financially. https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-responds-leaked-email-warns-spacex-faces-bankruptcy-starship-raptor-1654767 https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-responds-leaked-email-war... I don't think satellite internet is promising even once the constellation is up there, but that's another matter. P.S. The expression is "cash cow".
- hedora 5y ago
  But, but, it will scale globally to millions of users! That's more than I can count, and almost enough to saturate one medium sized metro area! If local ISP's can eke out a living on that sort of revenue stream, I don't see why a global satellite network and launch infrastructure can't. /s
- Robotbeat 5y ago
  Satellite Internet is already a multi-billion dollar industry before you have inexpensive and low latency service provided by launch vehicles (and satellites) a tenth to a hundredth the cost. But sure, buy into Musk pretending it’s desperate to try to motivate his workforce. The SpaceX Steamroller continues apace.

ldargin 5y ago

It's not odd. They'll get paid for it. The money is still green.

manquer 5y ago

Not that odd, oneweb sells b2b only , spaceX does mostly b2c and some b2b. Also spaceX launched iridium next gen satellites as well. OneWeb (and iridium) will just operate in their own markets . Iridium for example could work in different devices than starlink as they are not LEO and do not need the complex phased array setup starlink needs

nradov 5y ago
Iridium constellation is in LEO. The ground terminals are able to use simpler antennas mainly because the data rate is much lower.
- manquer 5y ago
  Yes, that was incorrect, they are at 780KM orbit, I was thinking Inmarsat who use GEO. Phased Array does help in improving signal strength(and bandwidth) by focusing on the orbital plane only, however I thought since Iridium uses L-Band(1-2GHz) and SpaceX uses Ku-Band(12-14Ghz), there is additional dish size required anyway and also rain fade issues meant higher strength is required in Ku to operate well.

headmelted 5y ago

Not really. Starlink is their main competition, not SpaceX. This just seems practical and in everyone’s best interest. SpaceX get another recurring paying customer, OneWeb get their sats up. This is more common than you’d think when companies are large enough to have products in so many different categories. As an example: Amazon runs Prime Video, but also hosts the infrastructure for Netflix, which to my knowledge Netflix has always been happy with despite relying on a direct competitor for their service.

yodelshady 5y ago

Samsung will happily sell Apple parts. If you have a competitive advantage in launching, why limit your exploitation of that? Worst case, you find out that your satellite engineers were coasting off that advantage. Best case, you make money proving they aren't. Plus you're now antitrust-proof, if that's ever a thing again.

pkaye 5y ago

Musk's long term goal is taking humans to Mars and everything else is a stepping stone to getting there.