Starlink : Markets and Marketing

[M.E.T.]

But I do agree that many people feel differently, but one thing that is true for both Tesla and Starlink -- they have more demand than they have product. Their stuff sells itself, and one person cancelling an order just opens up a slot for the next, so they have little inducement for hand-holding.

in my opinion, the situation for Starlick is much more alarming. They launched 1,500+ satellites and were able to serve  only 100,000 users in the United States and Canada. And it is obvious that there is no bandwidth for the USA, since there are no problems in Europe and Australia, that is, there are enough  terminals in the warehouse.

These are Gen1 sats. Using the 1500 sat estimate, assume the US and Canada represents ~5% of the planet’s surface area. Ballpark that means perhaps 75-100 of the sats are over the US and Canada at any given time. Let’s go with 100 sats.

That means the total bandwidth available to US and Canadian customers is 100x20Gb, so about 2Tb. Divided by 100k customers that gives about 20Mb/s per customer if they all log on simultaneously. Give it a 5 times over subscription ratio during beta (rather than a more greedy 10 times ratio), to ensure a 100Mb bandwidth per customer, and yes, 100k customers in the US and Canada seems to be about the limit.

The solution:

Launch bigger, more powerful sats with more bandwidth to increase the customers (and therefore the revenue potential) per satellite.

And only THEN increase the constellation size.

So the primary goal should be to get the Gen 2 sats finalised and launched, rather than just pumping out and launching more Gen 1 sats. And that indeed seems to be what they are doing, hence the delay in further launches.

[gongora]

They can't just change the satellites however they want to.  The license is for a particular configuration of beams, antenna power, spot size, elevation, etc.  At the ITU level you're not really applying to license a satellite, you're applying to license a payload. (A satellite can have multiple ITU authorizations for different payloads that belong to different customers)

[RedLineTrain]

Seems premature to assume that the cells that aren't open yet in Canada and the US won't be opened, or that opening them will cannibalize bandwidth from cells that have already been opened.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Over subscription rates for Cable is >=100:1. Possibly even as high as 1000:1 in some areas to greatly lower the price per subscription.

At 100:1 the current number of sats and their capability would support 10 million subscribers jsut for Canada+US. 10 million subscribers at $99/month is $11.88B in revenue per year just from US and Canada.

Add the rest of the world and it could easily reach $20B revenue/year without even overtaxing the sat network. This is what OneWeb is chasing with their smaller sat constellation (at 1/3 the size it would be around $7B/year revenue). There is a lot of potential customers out there. You just have to make it available.

[niwax]

Over subscription rates for Cable is >=100:1. Possibly even as high as 1000:1 in some areas to greatly lower the price per subscription.

At 100:1 the current number of sats and their capability would support 10 million subscribers jsut for Canada+US. 10 million subscribers at $99/month is $11.88B in revenue per year just from US and Canada.

Add the rest of the world and it could easily reach $20B revenue/year without even overtaxing the sat network. This is what OneWeb is chasing with their smaller sat constellation (at 1/3 the size it would be around $7B/year revenue). There is a lot of potential customers out there. You just have to make it available.

One of my favorite stats is that the central DE-CIX hub in Frankfurt only has 800kbps of installed capacity per citizen, and they have never been above 50% utilization. As you go up the network levels, oversubscription just stacks and stacks and usage smooths out much like in insurance.

Another fun stat to illustrate how even massive perceived concentrations of bandwidth aren't that big: Less than 100 million people watch the Super Bowl each year. Even if everyone watched online and in small groups at most, a network would only need to be able to support a stream to 10-20% of the population at once.

[vsatman]

One of my favorite stats is that the central DE-CIX hub in Frankfurt only has 800kbps of installed capacity per citizen, and they have never been above 50% utilization. As you go up the network levels, oversubscription just stacks and stacks and usage smooths out much like in insurance.

Another fun stat to illustrate how even massive perceived concentrations of bandwidth aren't that big: Less than 100 million people watch the Super Bowl each year. Even if everyone watched online and in small groups at most, a network would only need to be able to support a stream to 10-20% of the population at once.

this is a very wrong example. Each major operator has a mirror server of the most popular sites, and which its subscribers use. only 1 stream out of maybe 5 million gets to the traffic exchange node like DE-CIX .

[vsatman]

At 100:1 the current number of sats and their capability would support 10 million subscribers jsut for Canada+US. 10 million subscribers at $99/month is $11.88B in revenue per year just from US and Canada.

Now  1 beam with max 800 Mbit serve 1 cell..  1 Satellite has 8 beam (theoretically 16)..
with 100 sats for USA   this is 1,28 Tbit  for 10 mio user   average per user is 0,128 Mbit ..

Are you sure that $ 99 a month is a fair price for such a service?

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

At 100:1 the current number of sats and their capability would support 10 million subscribers jsut for Canada+US. 10 million subscribers at $99/month is $11.88B in revenue per year just from US and Canada.

Now  1 beam with max 800 Mbit serve 1 cell..  1 Satellite has 8 beam (theoretically 16)..
with 100 sats for USA   this is 1,28 Tbit  for 10 mio user   average per user is 0,128 Mbit ..

Are you sure that $ 99 a month is a fair price for such a service?

$99/m is SpaceX price. I think it is a little too high. But until they can get their costs down: cost per sat lower, throughput per sat higher, cost per sat to launch lower, as well as other costs which come from much higher economies of scale due to more subscribers for things like customer service and other user help costs down. It will be a struggle to have profit margins (cash flow) that is positive in 3 years.

Just launching with Starship and saving $100K to $200K for launch for each sat will improve things tremendously since cost of sat manufacture ($300K)+launch ($500K) is running ~$800K each. A $200K launch cost drop is a 25% reduction in the most major cost sat deployment. And could show up as subscriber price reduction of possibly 20%. And hopefully the bandwidth is increased a little bit too for all subscribers because the throughput per sat for the Gen 2 increased by 2X or more while cost of manufacture and launch still falls 25%. So that in just 2 years the bandwidth offered to subscribers is 250Mbps or grater and price is $75/m or less. Note is that Gb Cable is $75/m in my area of Florida. For 250Mb it is $40/m.

[Mandella]

As long as Starlink can beat 3 Mbit down most of the day it beats my current deal and is sixty bucks cheaper than what I got now, so yeah the marketing is still right for me even if they load up the users.

[envy887]

But I do agree that many people feel differently, but one thing that is true for both Tesla and Starlink -- they have more demand than they have product. Their stuff sells itself, and one person cancelling an order just opens up a slot for the next, so they have little inducement for hand-holding.

in my opinion, the situation for Starlick is much more alarming. They launched 1,500+ satellites and were able to serve  only 100,000 users in the United States and Canada. And it is obvious that there is no bandwidth for the USA, since there are no problems in Europe and Australia, that is, there are enough  terminals in the warehouse.

That's hardly obvious. Say they have enough users with terminals in the US to average 100 Mbps per customer, but in the EU they have users running 300 Mbps. Why would they ship terminals to the US cells and reduce speeds to, say, 50 Mbps there, when they can ship them to the EU and only reduce speeds to 150 Mbps there? Both of those would be within the specs of the beta service, but shipping terminals to the EU would keep the overall customer experience at a much higher level.

Even if they aren't near the actual density limit, they have strong incentives to levelize demand across all geographical areas to provide the best user experience.

And they also want to gain market share and brand awareness in those new markets as regulatory approvals come online. Can't do that by shipping dishes to North America.

[envy887]

At 100:1 the current number of sats and their capability would support 10 million subscribers jsut for Canada+US. 10 million subscribers at $99/month is $11.88B in revenue per year just from US and Canada.

Now  1 beam with max 800 Mbit serve 1 cell..  1 Satellite has 8 beam (theoretically 16)..
with 100 sats for USA   this is 1,28 Tbit  for 10 mio user   average per user is 0,128 Mbit ..

Are you sure that $ 99 a month is a fair price for such a service?

$99/m is SpaceX price. I think it is a little too high. But until they can get their costs down: cost per sat lower, throughput per sat higher, cost per sat to launch lower, as well as other costs which come from much higher economies of scale due to more subscribers for things like customer service and other user help costs down. It will be a struggle to have profit margins (cash flow) that is positive in 3 years.

Just launching with Starship and saving $100K to $200K for launch for each sat will improve things tremendously since cost of sat manufacture ($300K)+launch ($500K) is running ~$800K each. A $200K launch cost drop is a 25% reduction in the most major cost sat deployment. And could show up as subscriber price reduction of possibly 20%. And hopefully the bandwidth is increased a little bit too for all subscribers because the throughput per sat for the Gen 2 increased by 2X or more while cost of manufacture and launch still falls 25%. So that in just 2 years the bandwidth offered to subscribers is 250Mbps or grater and price is $75/m or less. Note is that Gb Cable is $75/m in my area of Florida. For 250Mb it is $40/m.

They can get to 10M US/CA customers at $99/mo IMO. But they will need 15,000 satellites to do it, not 1,500.

[Barley]

That's hardly obvious. Say they have enough users with terminals in the US to average 100 Mbps per customer, but in the EU they have users running 300 Mbps. Why would they ship terminals to the US cells and reduce speeds to, say, 50 Mbps there, when they can ship them to the EU and only reduce speeds to 150 Mbps there? Both of those would be within the specs of the beta service, but shipping terminals to the EU would keep the overall customer experience at a much higher level.

Even if they aren't near the actual density limit, they have strong incentives to levelize demand across all geographical areas to provide the best user experience.

And they also want to gain market share and brand awareness in those new markets as regulatory approvals come online. Can't do that by shipping dishes to North America.

Possibly because it's a beta test.  Some beta tests are run by marketing and you want everything to work perfectly.  Some beta tests are run by engineering and you want things to break.  Most are a bit of both.

I don't know where Starlink falls on the spectrum but it would not be crazy to deliberately load or overload a region to see what happens.

[Robotbeat]

I refunded my deposit last night since I was sick of the lack of communication regarding the wait and I'm not even going to excuse SpaceX/Starlink on that lapse.  It's completely unprofessional.

This is a common complaint with Tesla customers too.  Not much communication and unclear delivery dates.

Both Starlink and Tesla are freaking swamped with the demand.

[Robotbeat]

Lasers will help with the bandwidth issue somewhat as the downlink bandwidth can be spread over the network. Newer dish designs and satellite designs can also help, even within frequency constraints, by improving signal to noise ratio and more closely approaching the regulatory limits. I don't think they're at regulatory frequency limits yet, either.

A thing with phased arrays to keep in mind is that you can basically always improve bitrate for a given bandwidth by improving EITHER end of the phased array and adding more elements.

[Yiosie]

Cross-post: corroborates and explains recent posts here about delivery date delays.

SpaceX: Chip shortage is impacting “our ability to fulfill” Starlink orders [dated Nov. 1]

Starlink exits beta, but "silicon shortages have delayed production."

If you ordered Starlink broadband service and don't receive your "Dishy McFlatface" satellite dish any time soon, the global chip shortage may be one reason why.

"Silicon shortages have delayed production which has impacted our ability to fulfill orders. Please visit your Account page for the most recent estimate on when you can expect your order to be fulfilled," SpaceX said in an FAQ on the Starlink support website. The language was added to the Starlink website on Thursday night, according to a PCMag article.

Starlink has apparently just exited its beta status. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said in September that it would emerge from beta in October, and the word "beta" was deleted from descriptions on the Starlink homepage late last week. The website was also updated to advertise "download speeds between 100Mbps and 200Mbps and latency as low as 20ms in most locations," an improvement over the previously stated "50Mbps to 150Mbps and latency from 20ms to 40ms in most locations."

But the move from beta to general availability doesn't necessarily coincide with widespread availability. PCMag also pointed out that expected shipment times for Starlink have been pushed to late 2022 or early 2023 in additional parts of the US. The Starlink website reports expected service times of "early to mid 2022" in other areas.

[su27k]

Starlink in talks with two Philippine telcos over satellite internet

Elon Musk’s Starlink is in talks with two Philippine telcos to launch its satellite internet services next year in an archipelagic country with slow speeds and poor connectivity.

The two telcos are satellite broadband provider Transpacific Broadband Group International Inc. (TBGI) and fiber-optic broadband operator Converge ICT Solutions Inc., according to Bloomberg.

TBGI hopes to provide local government units, businesses, and households with “advanced satellite internet services to meet their growing requirements for fast and reliable connectivity” from 2022, with its board of directors approving the plan to pursue discussions with Starlink, CNN Philippines reported, citing TBGI’s filing to the local bourse.

[su27k]

SpaceX Representatives Share Plan To Provide Starlink Internet To Rural India Communities

SpaceX looks forward to providing high-speed Starlink satellite internet across India. SpaceX’s India Country Director Sanjay Bhargava and his wife Anita Kapur Bhargava, shared a video presentation via a LinkedIn post that outlines SpaceX’s plan to roll out Starlink broadband service to rural Indian communities next year, starting with a pilot program divided in three phases. “... At Starlink, we want to serve the underserved. We hope to work with fellow broadband providers, solution providers in the aspirational districts to improve and save lives,” Mr. Bhargava stated.

During Starlink roll out ‘Phase 1,’ SpaceX plans to provide 100 Starlink hardware kits for free to rural Indian communities. The kits include a phased-array dish antenna and Wi-Fi router to access the satellite network. 20 Starlink Kits will be delivered to schools in Delhi and 80 for schools in a rural district located close to Delhi. In Phase 2, Starlink representatives will work with local leaders to identify 12 rural districts, three situated in each region - North, South, East & West - across the country. By the end of 2022, the company’s Phase 3 goal is to operate at least 200,000 Starlink devices, 160,000 of those in rural communities across India. This plan would pave the path for India telecommunication authorities to grant SpaceX an commercial internet provider license to expand the service to more customers. The video presentation was also shared on Twitter by Tesla India Club, linked below.

https://twitter.com/TeslaClubIN/status/1454768503156662277

[vsatman]

SpaceX Representatives Share Plan To Provide Starlink Internet To Rural India Communities

SpaceX looks forward to providing high-speed Starlink satellite internet across India. SpaceX’s India Country Director Sanjay Bhargava and his wife Anita Kapur Bhargava, shared a video presentation via a LinkedIn post that outlines SpaceX’s plan to roll out Starlink broadband service to rural Indian communities next year, starting with a pilot program divided in three phases. “... At Starlink, we want to serve the underserved. We hope to work with fellow broadband providers, solution providers in the aspirational districts to improve and save lives,” Mr. Bhargava stated.

The SpaceX plan is very good, but :
India Telecommarket is closed for foreign companies..

British satellite operator Inmarsat Holdings Ltd said it’s the first foreign operator to get India’s approval to sell high-speed broadband to planes and shipping vessels.
Inmarsat will access the market via Indian state-owned telecommunications company Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, after BSNL received a license from India’s Department of Telecommunications, the London-based company said in a statement Wednesday. A representative for the Indian government didn’t immediately respond to a req ..
Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/telecom/telecom-news/india-opens-inflight-data-market-to-u-k-satellite-firm-inmarsat/articleshow/87155434.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

InmarSat is  working  in world  IFC (inFlightConnectivity) market more as 7 years..

[ninjaneer]

I refunded my deposit last night since I was sick of the lack of communication regarding the wait and I'm not even going to excuse SpaceX/Starlink on that lapse.  It's completely unprofessional.

I'm not the only one who complained, but there's an update and apology for the date slip problem this week.  Treat every company in the way you treat Comcast.

They even made a job for communications and posted the listing this week:
https://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=1394c093a18d27cf&tk=1fjn85q88ochs801&from=serp&vjs=3

[Mandella]

Just to add my 2 cents to the "Starlink must be bandwidth maxed at 100000 customers if they are selling globally instead of domestically" discussion -- not likely. The US is not one small region. Starlink has not deployed at all other than a handful of test cases in the southern states, and I don't think when they do my use of bandwidth in the Southeast is going to affect the bandwidth of the Northwest any more than a user in France will.

What I'm concerned about is that the current shell may just be too sparse for comfort (or regular service) down below the 35 degree line. If so, it's going to be more of a long wait for me to get mine.

What I'm hoping is that the global deployment is just to get a foot in the door ahead of competition and future regulation in as many countries as possible, and it's sucking up the limited supply of Dishies right now, and my "mid to late 2021" estimation is still good.