There isn't much evidence apart from Musk's statements that they were getting the service for free.
Third parties were definitely paying for terminals and services.
Third parties were definitely paying for terminals and services.
For example, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/08/us-quietl... highlights that the US has paid millions for Starlink terminals 'contrary to SpaceX's claims', while burying that SpaceX had donated 3670 terminals with free service for 3 months, compared to 1500 terminals purchased by USAID.
Then we have the first half of CNN's manipulative reporting (https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/elon-musk-spacex-sta...), where, after setting the tone to bias readers against SpaceX by citing outages and 'having to request Starlink services to be turned on in liberated areas' (conveniently skipping over the explanation that that's necessary to avoid Russia using the terminals), they sneak in a few lines about how 70% of the service costs were being borne by SpaceX.
Both also reference an "85% of terminals partially paid for by entities like the US and Poland", but that doesn't fit with the numbers, since the 3670 donated is greater than 15% of the 20k total terminals which had been sent by then, implying that 'partially paid' includes things like transportation costs, masking the true numbers regarding the costs of the terminals themselves (which obviously wouldn't be necessary if the number wasn't unfavorable to the narrative they were attempting to push).
> ... 70% of the service costs were being borne by SpaceX.
That's Musk's completely made up number for the price of the service ($4500/month). By that logic he could have said it was $10000/month and therefore been "donating" even more. That price 1. isn't the cost of providing the service; 2. isn't the retail price of the service, 3. isn't a reasonable mark up on the retail price.
Especially since if they're reporting to the Pentagon and intend to get them to pay by reason of unreasonable financial burden for SpaceX, they would want to make it look like it's costing them more, which would not be the case if we go with your unsupported suggestion that they're charging extremely high rates to government compared to how they're pricing their donations.
I did support it by linking to a CNN article which cites what government officials say they were paying (hundreds of millions of dollars per year) as well as Musk's own claims about the service price.
Look this is very simple: Musk receives a certain amount of money from providing service and terminals in Ukraine (hundreds of millions of dollars a year). You claim that this is substantially less than what it costs to provide those terminals and services (even in a war-zone) which is absurd.
Elon got cold feet when the Russians started threading Starlink with targeting with ASAT weapons, and when the Ukrainians (despite agreements) used starlink to remotely guide UAVs in Russia. Now that the UAVs are hitting Russia without starlink, and the Russians have backed off of threading to wipe out all American Satellites (which almost certainly lead to a nuclear confrontation since it would also blind detection systems), its less of a issue.
If you look at actual reporting the revenue Musk is receiving from Ukraine service is enormous, hundreds of millions a year.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/elon-musk-spacex-sta...
SpaceX sent a letter to the Pentagon saying it can no longer continue to fund the Starlink service as it has. The letter also requested that the Pentagon take over funding for Ukraine’s government and military use of Starlink, which SpaceX claims would cost more than $120 million for the rest of the year and could cost close to $400 million for the next 12 months
That was an official, non public letter to the DOD. It said SpaceX had been funding Ukraine’s use of Starlink. Do you think they could lie to the Pentagon about who paid for the service? The Russia’s invasion is the best advertising for Starlink for military use. Nobody in their right mind want to piss off their primary and potentially most lucrative customer.
You keep saying SpaceX charged 10x of the normal price. That’s BS. You definitely don’t know how much it costs to serve those terminals.
> If you look at actual reporting the revenue Musk is receiving from Ukraine service is enormous, hundreds of millions a year.
The actual reporting that you cited did not say that. The war has only been over a year, and if the letter above was sent in September 2022 SpaceX couldn’t possibly get paid until at least November, likely much later if the news about the contract only comes out now. It has the potential of bringing hundreds of millions annual revenue, which the contract in question makes it more of a reality.
So the CEO of the company?
1 example will do.
Claiming he held his baby in arms as it died. His ex-wife said it was her.
You also have the technically-true but so misleading as to be a lie:
He said workers could have Juneteenth off at the time before it was an official holiday. What he left out was that you had to take one of your personal days and get permission from your supervisor. Just like any other time off.
He said that workers didn't have to come in to work if they were afraid of Covid on Joe Rogan. What he failed to say was that they would fired.
And can you never call a product a lie for any amount of lateness? If it takes 100 years that wasn't a lie? The fancy solar shingles demoed before the Solar City acquisition don't exist and won't in any time frame anybody cares about, if ever.