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

51–60 of 270 posts

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

#51

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #28
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 m…

I'd love to get 25Mb DSL but you can't get that in the US where you're lucky to have anything above 4Mb. Not all of us need 100Mb+ internet access.

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

#52

Post by ars »

grecy wrote: post #44

For fun, highest to lowest: Etheric: $3,857/home CentryLink: $3,396/home Frontier: $2,916/home Windstream: $2,715/home LTD Broadband: $2,500/home Connect Everyone: $2,484/home Resound: $2,443/home AMG: $2,082/home GeoLinks: $1,831/home Rural Electric: $1,779/home SpaceX: $1,377/home Comcast: $1,151/home Even just 5 years ago who would have guessed satellite internet would be the cheapest... EDIT: Sorry for the orderi…

In your table Comcast ($1,151) is cheaper than SpaceX ($1,377).

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

#53

Post by pkaye »

elihu wrote: post #42

I read a theory once that one of the reasons why so many Boomers were able to buy land or houses cheaply that later appreciated substantially in value was the interstate highway system built during WWII. Suddenly, a lot of real estate was in easy driving range of employers, and so there was a period of over-supply of highly desirable real estate. I wonder if Starlink (and changes in work expectations due to the pande…

What percent of workers do work that can be done remotely?

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

#54

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

grecy wrote: post #44

For fun, highest to lowest: Etheric: $3,857/home CentryLink: $3,396/home Frontier: $2,916/home Windstream: $2,715/home LTD Broadband: $2,500/home Connect Everyone: $2,484/home Resound: $2,443/home AMG: $2,082/home GeoLinks: $1,831/home Rural Electric: $1,779/home SpaceX: $1,377/home Comcast: $1,151/home Even just 5 years ago who would have guessed satellite internet would be the cheapest... EDIT: Sorry for the orderi…

Subsidies for Frontier are pretty galling. I have an urban home in their original core market and they wouldn't bother fixing a phone line that went from 4Mb to 2Mb after switching to a new pair when the original went bad. They are pocketing everything and disinvesting in their wires.

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

#55

Post by zaroth »

mrkstu wrote: post #46
martinald wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very doubtful starlink will work close to major metro areas. They may ration service to a few people in big cities but i'm doubtful they will offer it at all to be honest.

Why in the world wouldn't they offer it everywhere at whatever their max terminal per square mile is?

I assume they will eventually dynamically price based on density, to ensure it's available to whoever needs it and not where other equivalent or faster options are available for less money.

By definition I think the places that need Starlink the most won't hit density limits. But I think a lot of people will buy Starlink just because it's Starlink -- anything so their dollars aren't going to Comcast.

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

#56

Post by hobofan »

sneak wrote: post #12
juanbyrge wrote: post #9

If there is any corporate entity I'd happy giving public funding, it would be SpaceX. Their end goal is to settle Mars and potentially other bodies in the solar system. Compared with the absurd amounts of money wasted on defense contractors, I am perfectly happy with funding SpaceX in every way possible.

SpaceX is also a defense contractor. https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/10/05/nro-reveals-plans-for-...

Is there any launch provider that is not a defense contractor?

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

#57

Post by oedoedxef »

pkaye wrote: post #53
elihu wrote: post #42

I read a theory once that one of the reasons why so many Boomers were able to buy land or houses cheaply that later appreciated substantially in value was the interstate highway system built during WWII. Suddenly, a lot of real estate was in easy driving range of employers, and so there was a period of over-supply of highly desirable real estate. I wonder if Starlink (and changes in work expectations due to the pande…

What percent of workers do work that can be done remotely?

Currently, or 5 years from now? Anyone working in the "services" industry, which is most of the United States, can work from home. And if the laws ever change for restaurants and auto-repair shops, I suspect you might see that being done from home as well.

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

#60

Post by iptrans »

simonh wrote: post #34
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?

The objective of the government is not just to ensure that one or even two companies have infrastructure reaching most or all rural areas, but to ensure enough players in this field to establish a genuinely competitive market for pervasive rural internet access. The FCC has decided that without this subsidy there would not be enough companies offering enough access to enough areas to meet their mandate. Given this go…

I think you have misunderstood the purpose of RDOF grants.

The RDOF grants are not there to establish competition. RDOF grants exist purely for some company to provide broadband service where there is none.

If anything it's funding a local monopoly.

Post reply on HN