Hacker News Reader

Comment by AlstZam | Hacker News Reader

Sorry but i have difficulty to understand Starlink business : who are really their potentials customers ? It seems there is only a few possibilities :

- rural area (with sufficient incomes to afford the price)

- urban area with highly expensive/bad quality landline internet (but still with sufficient incomes to afford the price)

With the development of fiber in most urban area (usually fist in high income part) and the small number in the first category, I don't see how deploying tens of thousands of satellites could be profitable. The only option will be to be able to lower the price but it will need a lot of customers... Could you help me understand ?

View on HN

This is a global network. Population of the world is around 8 billion. Even if some countries like China ban Starlink for political reasons, you should be able to find tens of millions of customers among the rest.

There are a lot of places where local providers act like robber barons.

> There are a lot of places where local providers act like robber barons.

I agree, this may be the best effect Starlink can have : create competition.

> Population of the world is around 8 billion

Yes but which part is able to afford 99$/month (+antenna) + bad local provider which refuse to adapt to competition (first at price/offer level before even infrastructure) + no political reason for a global-us based provider ?

"bad local provider which refuse to adapt to competition (first at price/offer level before even infrastructure)"

They may find themselves unable to. Cable (including optic cable) networks are not that easy to build everywhere, including some tightly packed cities. And wireless has its limitations too.

"which part is able to afford 99$/month (+antenna) "

Easy. People will share connections, regardless of what the contract says. And Starlink will likely tolerate it in poorer countries.

The sort of design starlink has means that it is not going to able to provide a reasonably high bandwidth at a high density. Starlink will be able to support a handful of people in a city, but nothing close to good coverage of households.

Here is an overview that is likely quite a bit too conservative, but gives you an idea of the problem regarding somewhat dense areas: https://lilibots.blogspot.com/2020/11/capacity-of-starlink-n...

I suspect the segment that I'm in is pretty huge. I recently got Starlink. I got it mostly because it was alright internet and I really fucking hate Comcast. They're the only landline option that I have in a suburban area, and fiber internet is unlikely to come here any time soon.

I mean sure, I'd rather our legislators actually do their job and pass a law enforcing local loop unbundling, but until that point Starlink is a breath of fresh, competitive air.

Also yachts, cruise ships, container ships, anything on the oceans.

Add airlines to it. Imagine, if every large passenger airplane carries a Starlink terminal... (of course paying the elevated fee for mobiles applications faster than 500mph)

And once it starts to get rolled out to airplanes, which airline can afford not to offer Starlink connections?

Musk said that Starlink is (or will be) in talks with lots of local telecom companies which are required to offer nationwide coverage. They are required by law, to keep their licenses, or to fullfill commitments.Starlink will have lots of B2B customers and partnerships then.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com