5 ms·

> He then reviewed my billing history and account details, confirmed that my service address had never actually changed, and determined that nothing had been mo

> He then reviewed my billing history and account details, confirmed that my service address had never actually changed, and determined that nothing had been moved. As a result, he issued a full refund.

BoorishBears 3mo ago
Yeah but it still sounds like $1,500 demand fee was not a mistake, charging OP was the mistake. People first mentioned these fees at like $100... now you can go to Costco, grab a Starlink, and they'll randomly ask for $1,500 to actually start service. Congestion is a thing when each node needs to go to space, but it also feels like they're cashing in on years of "just move to a cabin in the woods and work off Starlink"... once you've done that they have you by the balls even worse than a typical ISP.
- wat10000 3mo ago
  Isn't this fee specifically before they have you by the balls?
  - BoorishBears 3mo ago
    Not unless you had a potential $1500 fee top of mind before you moved... Wanna guess if Starlink is advertising how insane these fees have gotten?
    - wat10000 3mo ago
      Let me guess... if you put the address into their handy text box, they tell you exactly what the demand surcharge is going to be for that location? I tried it, and would you look at that, I was right. I guess if you buy an entire house without checking to see what it costs to get internet service at that location, then you might be in a tough spot. Hard to blame it on anyone else though.
      - bigbadfeline 3mo ago
        > I guess if you buy an entire house without checking We aren't talking about people buying hoses now, these fees weren't there before, so it becomes a typical bait and switch. "Congestion charge" means the starlink network lacks sufficient capacity to accommodate the areas that need it the most and where it was advertised the most. https://tech.yahoo.com/transportation/articles/elon-musk-charging-starlink-customers-170100747.html https://tech.yahoo.com/transportation/articles/elon-musk-cha... Jul 5, 2026The congestion charge was quietly added back in 2024, starting out as a one-time $100 fee, depending on location. By June 2025, that number grew to up to $1,000 in parts of the country, as PCMag reported at the time. As of last month, surcharges can hit $1,500.
        wat10000 3mo ago
        They're not applying these retroactively. (They did so in the reddit link above, but that was a mistake that they fixed.) The only way you'd have this problem is if you check before you buy, see that it's not there, buy the place, then move in and find out that a surcharge was added in the meantime. That would suck, but I suppose it's a risk you run if you don't lock in your deal ahead of time, and you choose to move somewhere with only one good provider.
        r3trohack3r 3mo ago
        > Under Carr's leadership, Musk's rocket company has effectively been given carte blanche in its efforts to roll out its orbital Starlink broadband service to more Americans This article is profoundly disturbing. The audacity to think the government has _allowed_ people to voluntarily purchase Internet service from a provider capable of servicing their geography. As if this is an assumption to be broken! I’m sure glad my government has given me permission to purchase goods and services!
        vel0city 3mo ago
        What's the alternative? That anyone should just be able to be free to launch whatever into space or build whatever towers and have it blast whatever RF emissions it wants whenever and however? Sounds like a quick way to make the bands entirely unusable. I'll go ahead and start a wireless home internet service. I'll just set my transmitters to 1575MHz, that'll be fine, its nice and quiet.
- naturalmovement 3mo ago
  If you're privileged enough to work a six-figure tech job while engaging in a homesteader larp in a "cabin in the woods", you can probably afford the fee. So can "off-grid" YouTuber grifters. It's like everyone feels entitled to something they didn't know existed a few years ago.
  - Cyberdogs7 3mo ago
    So we should let companies do what ever anti-consumer practices they want, because you don't like the group they are doing it to? Should a car company be allowed to charge you an extra fee every time you have a passenger?
    - naturalmovement 3mo ago
      If you need a specialized amphibious vehicle to get to your shack in the woods, it's not anti-consumer if it costs you more than a Mitsubishi Mirage.
      - 0cf8612b2e1e 3mo ago
        The world is more than rich tech bros living in the woods. Normal income people also wanted to use this service without being bankrupted. Rural homes do have roads that can be reached on a rusty pickup.
      - ben_w 3mo ago
        A few days ago people were telling me the Starlink was brilliant because it gave small African villages with no mains electricity an internet connection to share. This kind of behaviour does rather dampen the value proposition for such people.
        naturalmovement 3mo ago
        Do you think tech bros who voluntarily choose to live in the woods should pay the same subsidized price as a rural African schoolhouse? Equity and all that.
vel0city 3mo ago
So not his service address, but a slightly different latitude/longitude would have received that.
- wat10000 3mo ago
  His address would have received it too, if he was starting new service. It's only for new customers, they're not hitting existing customers with the charge. The error was that putting in the address made it look like he had moved, which counts as new service.

BoorishBears 3mo ago

Yeah but it still sounds like $1,500 demand fee was not a mistake, charging OP was the mistake. People first mentioned these fees at like $100... now you can go to Costco, grab a Starlink, and they'll randomly ask for $1,500 to actually start service. Congestion is a thing when each node needs to go to space, but it also feels like they're cashing in on years of "just move to a cabin in the woods and work off Starlink"... once you've done that they have you by the balls even worse than a typical ISP.

wat10000 3mo ago
Isn't this fee specifically before they have you by the balls?
- BoorishBears 3mo ago
  Not unless you had a potential $1500 fee top of mind before you moved... Wanna guess if Starlink is advertising how insane these fees have gotten?
  - wat10000 3mo ago
    Let me guess... if you put the address into their handy text box, they tell you exactly what the demand surcharge is going to be for that location? I tried it, and would you look at that, I was right. I guess if you buy an entire house without checking to see what it costs to get internet service at that location, then you might be in a tough spot. Hard to blame it on anyone else though.
    - bigbadfeline 3mo ago
      > I guess if you buy an entire house without checking We aren't talking about people buying hoses now, these fees weren't there before, so it becomes a typical bait and switch. "Congestion charge" means the starlink network lacks sufficient capacity to accommodate the areas that need it the most and where it was advertised the most. https://tech.yahoo.com/transportation/articles/elon-musk-charging-starlink-customers-170100747.html https://tech.yahoo.com/transportation/articles/elon-musk-cha... Jul 5, 2026The congestion charge was quietly added back in 2024, starting out as a one-time $100 fee, depending on location. By June 2025, that number grew to up to $1,000 in parts of the country, as PCMag reported at the time. As of last month, surcharges can hit $1,500.
      - wat10000 3mo ago
        They're not applying these retroactively. (They did so in the reddit link above, but that was a mistake that they fixed.) The only way you'd have this problem is if you check before you buy, see that it's not there, buy the place, then move in and find out that a surcharge was added in the meantime. That would suck, but I suppose it's a risk you run if you don't lock in your deal ahead of time, and you choose to move somewhere with only one good provider.
      - r3trohack3r 3mo ago
        > Under Carr's leadership, Musk's rocket company has effectively been given carte blanche in its efforts to roll out its orbital Starlink broadband service to more Americans This article is profoundly disturbing. The audacity to think the government has _allowed_ people to voluntarily purchase Internet service from a provider capable of servicing their geography. As if this is an assumption to be broken! I’m sure glad my government has given me permission to purchase goods and services!
        vel0city 3mo ago
        What's the alternative? That anyone should just be able to be free to launch whatever into space or build whatever towers and have it blast whatever RF emissions it wants whenever and however? Sounds like a quick way to make the bands entirely unusable. I'll go ahead and start a wireless home internet service. I'll just set my transmitters to 1575MHz, that'll be fine, its nice and quiet.
naturalmovement 3mo ago
If you're privileged enough to work a six-figure tech job while engaging in a homesteader larp in a "cabin in the woods", you can probably afford the fee. So can "off-grid" YouTuber grifters. It's like everyone feels entitled to something they didn't know existed a few years ago.
- Cyberdogs7 3mo ago
  So we should let companies do what ever anti-consumer practices they want, because you don't like the group they are doing it to? Should a car company be allowed to charge you an extra fee every time you have a passenger?
  - naturalmovement 3mo ago
    If you need a specialized amphibious vehicle to get to your shack in the woods, it's not anti-consumer if it costs you more than a Mitsubishi Mirage.
    - 0cf8612b2e1e 3mo ago
      The world is more than rich tech bros living in the woods. Normal income people also wanted to use this service without being bankrupted. Rural homes do have roads that can be reached on a rusty pickup.
    - ben_w 3mo ago
      A few days ago people were telling me the Starlink was brilliant because it gave small African villages with no mains electricity an internet connection to share. This kind of behaviour does rather dampen the value proposition for such people.
      - naturalmovement 3mo ago
        Do you think tech bros who voluntarily choose to live in the woods should pay the same subsidized price as a rural African schoolhouse? Equity and all that.

vel0city 3mo ago

So not his service address, but a slightly different latitude/longitude would have received that.

wat10000 3mo ago
His address would have received it too, if he was starting new service. It's only for new customers, they're not hitting existing customers with the charge. The error was that putting in the address made it look like he had moved, which counts as new service.