Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 270 posts

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#21

Post by smithza »

iptrans wrote: post #15

Riddle me this, would SpaceX not have built out Starlink if they didn't get this subsidy? Since they already put Starlink satellites in orbit without any guarantees of subsidies, was this good use of government funds?

I don't think the logic holds up here. It is conceivable that SpaceX could have entered into the market to disrupt the relatively lo-tech GEO options without FCC subsidy options (I think you agree here). Hughes (a GEO provider) themselves received a subsidy despite their being well established in North America. To ask that about SpaceX is to ask the same question about Hughes.

In the age of COVID-19, any investment in ISP infrastructure is beneficial.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#22

Post by tw04 »

politelemon wrote: post #16
tzm wrote: post #14

I live in the Mission hills of SF Bay and pay $600 / mo for internet via mobile hotspot (LTE). HughesNet is terrible. Nothing else is available. I can't wait for Starlink beta!

> $600 / mo for internet via mobile hotspot (LTE). I'm not familiar with that area but my mind boggles at this amount. What kind of speeds do you get? Are that ISP able to offer a cheaper deal of some sort, eg 12 months? Why is it so much!? Wishing you well, I hope you get Starlink soon in your area, or any alternatives.

I would assume it's so expensive due to data usage. Anything over LTE I've seen has ridiculously low data caps. I think as part of this funding the FCC should have a mandatory requirement of no data caps, or a cap of something more reasonable like 10TB a month that increases 5TB every X number years.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#23

Post by mtgx »

Are there any caveats to these subsidies, like allowing the government to tap all Starlink connections for surveillance, etc?

I mean the U.S. government already has such deals with other ISPs, and now the U.S. military wants to use Starlink, too, so I wouldn't be surprised if the DoD got involved in this FCC deal with SpaceX for more reasons than one.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#24

Post by jjeaff »

xoa wrote: post #10
lgats wrote: post #2

SpaceX has been awarded $885.51 million by the Federal Communications Commission to provide Starlink broadband to 642,925 rural homes and businesses in 35 states. That's $1376.52 in subsidies per customer

The beta terminal cost is $500, and beta service is $100/month (at up to ~150 Mbps or so right now?). So the money would cover the terminal cost to those customers and then full freight 8 months of service at current pricing. Alternatively/in addition, and more similarly to traditional in-ground service, it may also simply help fun actual infrastructure in the form of more/faster deployment of ground stations and sat…

I don't believe the subsidies are meant to subsidize the customer. Rather they are subsidizing the upfront capital cost to build out infra.

In other words, they get all the money, even if no one subscribes.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#25

Post by smithza »

lgats wrote: post #2

SpaceX has been awarded $885.51 million by the Federal Communications Commission to provide Starlink broadband to 642,925 rural homes and businesses in 35 states. That's $1376.52 in subsidies per customer

There is nothing in the article about customers personally benefiting from this. SpaceX could take the money and put it towards ground infr., etc., customers only seeing reduced payments due to NRE/maintenance subsidies. It sounds like SpaceX has quite a bit of autonomy here.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#26

Post by rictic »

iptrans wrote: post #15

Riddle me this, would SpaceX not have built out Starlink if they didn't get this subsidy? Since they already put Starlink satellites in orbit without any guarantees of subsidies, was this good use of government funds?

Two more questions:

Can the subsidy be used to accelerate making the service available to more users sooner, and at higher quality? Most likely yes, because with the design of Starlink, more satellites gives better service.

A related question: Were early subsidies into solar power a big help in climbing the learning curve while solar power had uncompetitive performance/$, or did advancements in related disciplines like chip manufacturing carry most of the weight?

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#27

Post by tF73d78kq8t3R6n »

vsareto wrote: post #19
remarkEon wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. They seem to be the first defense contractor in a long time, maybe ever, with a specific eye on controlling costs. It may not be this way forever, but for now the taxpayers should get the savings where they can.

Maybe they can relax the work/life balance now

That’d cause their costs to skyrocket.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#28

Post by Mountain_Skies »

liquidise wrote: post #7

This headline is only part of the story, looks like ~10 ISP's were awarded sizable subsidies. While i am not a fan of subsidies in general, the ISP space is particularly tricky for free-market forces to ensure competition. The capital requirements are overwhelming in many cases for a traditional startups, leaving the only other option as local/municipal votes, which have been successful in some areas. Long-term, i co…

My recent employer was one of the ISP providing rural telecom service. These subsidies accounted for a hefty percentage of our income and the company was still perpetually on the edge of failure. Most of our competitors were in similar situations, loaded down with breathtakingly large amounts of debt and expensive to maintain decaying infrastructure, much of it purchased from the Baby Bells when they got out of the market. I can't say that the company was particularly well run but am certain that without the government subsidies, the business would collapse and large numbers of rural customers would be without telecom services, which extend beyond just internet access.

Not sure what Starlink's existence is going to do to the company. Offering 25 Mbps aDSL with low reliability isn't going to compete very well if a customer can get 100 Mbsp service for a similar price and higher reliability. On the other hand, this might be justification the company can use to stop servicing the most expensive of the rural accounts to service while focusing on small town gigabit service that can compete with a reasonable expense to service.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#29

Post by 1996 »

jjeaff wrote: post #13
liquidise wrote: post #7

This headline is only part of the story, looks like ~10 ISP's were awarded sizable subsidies. While i am not a fan of subsidies in general, the ISP space is particularly tricky for free-market forces to ensure competition. The capital requirements are overwhelming in many cases for a traditional startups, leaving the only other option as local/municipal votes, which have been successful in some areas. Long-term, i co…

It does seem wise, except I believe that ISPs have already received large subsidies in the past and then never completed their end of the bargain. Without consequence, of course. I hope none of those companies received any more subsidy.

> never completed their end of the bargain. Without consequence, of course

That's exactly why they need more money!! Because, maybe, this time they will?

If not, give them a bit more!!

Government subsidies at their finest! /s

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#30

Post by btilly »

iptrans wrote: post #15

Riddle me this, would SpaceX not have built out Starlink if they didn't get this subsidy? Since they already put Starlink satellites in orbit without any guarantees of subsidies, was this good use of government funds?

SpaceX has had 42,000 satellites approved. They have just under 1000 operational and are about half-way to phase 1. Which will only be able to provide broadband for a limited number of users at latitudes for Canada and some northern US states. (That is why they are doing beta programs, they don't have the capacity for more.)

Money to launch more satellites will give the company the ability to get broadband for more people in more of the rural USA much more quickly. It also helps Starlink through a chicken and egg problem where they can't make money unless they have satellites up, and they can't put satellites up unless they get money.

Post reply on HN