Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK, but that was far from the only reason. From the actual decision: > While Starlink faults the Bureau for relying on the most recent available data at the time of its decision to evaluate is existing network performance, Starlink does not explain what other data source the Bureau should have used in lieu of using the most recently available data. When the Bureau's decision was made, the most recent available eviden…
Is there any truth to the statement from two of the five FCC commissioners that SpaceX was not required to meet those benchmarks until 2025, and this is a political action?
That said, how the dissenters characterize it is nowhere near how it works. They’d like you to believe that you won a bid, and from then on, it’s “OK, talk to you at the deadline, enjoy our money!”
Instead, it seems to me that it’s a continuous process where you must present plans along the way, and progress is measured, as it should be because we’re dealing with billions in public funds.
The idea that this is exclusively targeted at Musk is also just nonsense. This article[1] states that Terrestrial telco LTD Broadband also lost their allotment of subsidies, and a cursory glance at the documents on the FCC website shows that many other companies lost theirs either due to withdrawing or having “defaulted” (i.e., not followed through on the promises/requirements).
But none of that is compatible with the victim narrative of Musk et al., of course Musk was the biggest in the subsidies; the other companies won smaller projects.
0: https://www.fcc.gov/auction/904
1: https://spacenews.com/fcc-upholds-denial-of-starlinks-900-mi...