SpaceX Raises Starlink Prices for Some Subscribers | Hacker News Reader

SpaceX Raises Starlink Prices for Some Subscribers

wsj.com

22 pointsmfiguiere22 comments

When will us in the EU ever be able to significantly compete with the US? You guys have all the cool things and when you don't, you just buy them outright coz your currency is so strong and wide-spread, you can just print as much as you want without worrying about significant inflation.

Meanwhile, we have rules and regulations. Oh, and bicycles.

Forget the US, my friends in India are having a ton of cool new toys to play with - toys which China has had since a decade. Meanwhile, the EU trudges along, just..... regulating tech?

We often joke that India went cool after I left (which is about 8 years back).

Alas, SL for RV is going to be my primary source of internet while sailing around this summer, so I'm stuck with it even at the new $150/mo nonsense. There's no competition in the space.

My longer-term dream is to build a cabin in the middle of nowhere, Alaska, and unfortunately that implies that I'll be paying some near-monopoly entity this sum of money long-term, unless internet access is somehow nationalized (which I presume will never happen in my lifetime here in the US).

Sigh.

It’s insane that the U.S. government are squandering this opportunity to force Starlink to provide internet to those without any other access at say 50$/mo. The government is giving the okay to deploy thousands of satellites and start a monopoly and in return we can’t ask for this basic right?

The fact that corporations are considered 'people' when it comes to political donations is one major reason that policy no longer responds to the will of the people in the US.

Citizens United bkgd: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...

They are not a monopoly. Anyone can do the same. I believe two other companies are also launching Internet satellite services.

They are launching, but right now Starlink is a monopoly.

There’s no other constellation in orbit that comes close in latency or bandwidth capabilities.

Hopefully the upcoming constellations are successful and there’s more competition in this space. It really is world-changing stuff.

OT, but it’s possible the current price hikes aren’t due to full cells, but ground stations at capacity. I’ve seen upgraded and additional ground stations referenced. They serve very large geographic areas compared to a single “cell.”

The word monopoly doesn’t mean “Only one company makes the best product”. It means that a company completely corners a market and uses its position to prevent others from competing.

There are plenty of space launch providers. There are plenty of other constellations (OneWeb, Iridium, etc). In fact, ironically, SpaceX is doing the opposite of what a monopoly would do and selling the competition cheap tickets on their own launch vehicles. It would be the equivalent of Apple letting Samsung sell phones in an Apple Store.

But AFAIK, those other constellations still aren’t targeting consumers(?)

I should have clarified, but from a consumer standpoint, I think there’s still only one real choice at the moment.

cool well go do it then.

Paid for by whom exactly? What opportunity are they "squandering"? SpaceX (along with investors) are footing the bill for building out this service. If you suddenly kneecap them and say they can't provide it for more than $50/month who will pay the bill? If the US government were to try it and pass such a law without payment to SpaceX, SpaceX would sue them in court and easily win. You can't steal value away and not offer compensation.

Before Starlink, buying anything even remotely comparable like VSAT was $10,000-20,000 per month.

The idea that you would punish a company for reducing the cost, and improving the performance of a technology an order of magnitude seems kind of ridiculous to me. If this attitude is really widespread throughout the world it’s no surprise why the US takes such a lead in tech innovation.

Starlink has coverage in Alaska now doesn't it? I'm essentially on the same page as you.

I am a subscriber. And they lowered my price a few months ago. By something like 10%. I don’t remember seeing any WSJ headlines about that.

I am a subscriber. They increased my price a few months ago by 10%. And now they raised it again.

Are you in a densely populated area by any chance? I’m just guessing, but perhaps they’re using price to level the field of distribution?

Not densely populated area per se (south of san jose), but with satellite communication it's very relative term.

I got email from starlink yesterday, they lower price by $20 for those that are in area with excess capacity and raise it by $10 for those in areas with limited capacity. I saw their availability map last week, pretty much entire west coast is on "waitlist". I guess it equivalent to "limited capacity"

Can't read behind the paywall, but it'd make sense if pricing was adjusted by the volume of local traffic. I have a remote property I inherited from my father in the mountains. I'd love to be able to set up a webcam with an internet connection to keep an eye on it. There is literally nothing for miles in any direction (off grid? more like off the map) so it'd make sense that the connection should be pretty cheap as it would not be crowding out others.

If it’s that remote they might actually have to pay YOU. :)

https://archive.is/i1GbX will get you to the article.

What matters more is what downlink ground station you're near. My ground station is almost 7 hours away by car, in a city of >700k people.

In Bellevue WA - they raised my price by $20.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com