Mixing
How does SpaceX plan to make money with StarLink Broadband?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
To me, it seems obvious that ground based optical fibres will be cheaper than a space based system by an order of magnitude. So unless say, everyone starts sea-steading and a space based broadband is the only choice, there is no way a space broadband system can really compete with standard ones on earth.
spacex communication-satellite satellite-constellation
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
To me, it seems obvious that ground based optical fibres will be cheaper than a space based system by an order of magnitude. So unless say, everyone starts sea-steading and a space based broadband is the only choice, there is no way a space broadband system can really compete with standard ones on earth.
spacex communication-satellite satellite-constellation
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
To me, it seems obvious that ground based optical fibres will be cheaper than a space based system by an order of magnitude. So unless say, everyone starts sea-steading and a space based broadband is the only choice, there is no way a space broadband system can really compete with standard ones on earth.
spacex communication-satellite satellite-constellation
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
To me, it seems obvious that ground based optical fibres will be cheaper than a space based system by an order of magnitude. So unless say, everyone starts sea-steading and a space based broadband is the only choice, there is no way a space broadband system can really compete with standard ones on earth.
spacex communication-satellite satellite-constellation
spacex communication-satellite satellite-constellation
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
asked 4 hours ago
user2277550
335112
335112
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
I don't think anyone can give you a detailed answer on how they will make money, because their business plans are their own, and proprietary.
But the premise of the question seems essentially flawed -
There are huge areas of the world that do not enjoy reasonable (or any) broadband access. There are also existing markets for mobile broadband (passenger aircraft, trains, RVs, trucking, ships). There are scenarios requiring broadband access at remote locations where running fiber is not economical or practical (cell towers in rural areas, remote industrial operations like mining, scientific research stations).
Now Elon has also hinted that he believes their bandwidth and costs will allow them to compete with point to point fiber - linking datacenters for example. This is where it might be a bit harder to compete, but it's certainly plausible, especially for certain edge cases where geography and existing fiber runs means a terrestrial line would travel further than a LEO multi-satellite link would. They can, in essence, create virtual point to point links between any two points on Earth far faster than fiber could be run, and much more direct than using existing fibers usually would be.
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
I don't think anyone can give you a detailed answer on how they will make money, because their business plans are their own, and proprietary.
But the premise of the question seems essentially flawed -
There are huge areas of the world that do not enjoy reasonable (or any) broadband access. There are also existing markets for mobile broadband (passenger aircraft, trains, RVs, trucking, ships). There are scenarios requiring broadband access at remote locations where running fiber is not economical or practical (cell towers in rural areas, remote industrial operations like mining, scientific research stations).
Now Elon has also hinted that he believes their bandwidth and costs will allow them to compete with point to point fiber - linking datacenters for example. This is where it might be a bit harder to compete, but it's certainly plausible, especially for certain edge cases where geography and existing fiber runs means a terrestrial line would travel further than a LEO multi-satellite link would. They can, in essence, create virtual point to point links between any two points on Earth far faster than fiber could be run, and much more direct than using existing fibers usually would be.
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
I don't think anyone can give you a detailed answer on how they will make money, because their business plans are their own, and proprietary.
But the premise of the question seems essentially flawed -
There are huge areas of the world that do not enjoy reasonable (or any) broadband access. There are also existing markets for mobile broadband (passenger aircraft, trains, RVs, trucking, ships). There are scenarios requiring broadband access at remote locations where running fiber is not economical or practical (cell towers in rural areas, remote industrial operations like mining, scientific research stations).
Now Elon has also hinted that he believes their bandwidth and costs will allow them to compete with point to point fiber - linking datacenters for example. This is where it might be a bit harder to compete, but it's certainly plausible, especially for certain edge cases where geography and existing fiber runs means a terrestrial line would travel further than a LEO multi-satellite link would. They can, in essence, create virtual point to point links between any two points on Earth far faster than fiber could be run, and much more direct than using existing fibers usually would be.
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
I don't think anyone can give you a detailed answer on how they will make money, because their business plans are their own, and proprietary.
But the premise of the question seems essentially flawed -
There are huge areas of the world that do not enjoy reasonable (or any) broadband access. There are also existing markets for mobile broadband (passenger aircraft, trains, RVs, trucking, ships). There are scenarios requiring broadband access at remote locations where running fiber is not economical or practical (cell towers in rural areas, remote industrial operations like mining, scientific research stations).
Now Elon has also hinted that he believes their bandwidth and costs will allow them to compete with point to point fiber - linking datacenters for example. This is where it might be a bit harder to compete, but it's certainly plausible, especially for certain edge cases where geography and existing fiber runs means a terrestrial line would travel further than a LEO multi-satellite link would. They can, in essence, create virtual point to point links between any two points on Earth far faster than fiber could be run, and much more direct than using existing fibers usually would be.
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
I don't think anyone can give you a detailed answer on how they will make money, because their business plans are their own, and proprietary.
But the premise of the question seems essentially flawed -
There are huge areas of the world that do not enjoy reasonable (or any) broadband access. There are also existing markets for mobile broadband (passenger aircraft, trains, RVs, trucking, ships). There are scenarios requiring broadband access at remote locations where running fiber is not economical or practical (cell towers in rural areas, remote industrial operations like mining, scientific research stations).
Now Elon has also hinted that he believes their bandwidth and costs will allow them to compete with point to point fiber - linking datacenters for example. This is where it might be a bit harder to compete, but it's certainly plausible, especially for certain edge cases where geography and existing fiber runs means a terrestrial line would travel further than a LEO multi-satellite link would. They can, in essence, create virtual point to point links between any two points on Earth far faster than fiber could be run, and much more direct than using existing fibers usually would be.
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
answered 4 hours ago
Saiboogu
3,2221626
3,2221626
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
1
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
The idea of linking data-centers over satellite is pure moonshine. The latency issues that you talk about have largely been completely overcome IMHO. And he is not even talking about some specific application, like say, ocean mining, and getting internet connectivity for such mining operations. He is talking about launching a general infrastructure. Doesn't seem to square up at all.
– user2277550
4 hours ago
2
2
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
@user2277550: I doubt it would be cheaper and faster to install fibers to remove areas like Antartica. There may be a lot of legal issues to solve, for example (who own the land the fibers have to run through). Maintaining a fleet of planes is indeed something that may be feasible in the not-so-distant future with solar-powered planes, but right now we don't have that. Satellites by contrast are a proven technology we know how to handle today. Also, the market for fast communication with ships alone may be interesting.
– DarkDust
3 hours ago
1
1
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
@user2277550 The latest trans-atlantic cable cost 300 million dollar - 30 StarLink are a single launch of a reusable rocket plus mass-produced satellites. That's likely about 100 million. Latency is not much of a problem - the extra of 800 km up and down don't matter much for connections around the globe.
– asdfex
3 hours ago
2
2
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
@DarkDust You can't judge StarLink on existing satellite internet latencies. StarLink satellites will live in LEO with estimated latency ~25ms.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
1
1
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
@user2277550 I'm unclear how you feel running optical fiber to antenna spread over the ocean is cheaper and simpler than a large satellite constellation. Fiber runs on the sea floor are expensive enough (@asdfex gave an example of one that costs more than three Falcon flights), and placing antenna on the surface of the ocean with buoys and connecting to undersea cables with enough coverage to mimic what StarLink can do would be an absolutely absurd technical challenge and expense.
– Saiboogu
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31651%2fhow-does-spacex-plan-to-make-money-with-starlink-broadband%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
