I share your general optimism on sky-based broadband, but I have to admit that I do not follow your argument about rent-seekers.

All physical space, even space in the sky, is in limited supply. So why does the rent-seeking nature of cell towers make sky-based broadband inevitable?

I can see why sky-based broadband affords a huge competitive advantage, allowing Google to beam 1gbps for $5/mo to the 15 million people who live in Northern California.

But why does that make it more likely to come to pass? Are balloon/drone flight plans inevitably easier to file than zoning permits for cell towers? Won't altitude eventually be auctioned off by the FCC? I fear that part of what makes sky-based broadband attractive is the perhaps naïve notion that government will always control the skies in the relatively light-handed way in which it currently controls the skies.