[HN Gopher] SpaceX projected 20M Starlink users by 2022-it ended...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       SpaceX projected 20M Starlink users by 2022-it ended up with 1M
        
       Author : lxm
       Score  : 24 points
       Date   : 2023-09-19 20:49 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | wilg wrote:
       | It does seem like there is an upper bound on Starlink's success
       | given that terrestrial gigabit fiber exists in major markets.
       | Maybe they have a plan for this?
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | Yes, their plan is to serve the hundreds and hundreds of
         | millions of people around the globe who don't have access to
         | terrestrial gigabit fiber.
        
           | wilg wrote:
           | I think they will be successful, but it seems like
           | terrestrial internet will always have a significant bandwidth
           | (though not latency) advantage over Starlink.
        
             | pharmakom wrote:
             | I thought starlink has poor and inconsistent latency?
        
             | grecy wrote:
             | > _but it seems like terrestrial internet will always have
             | a significant bandwidth (though not latency) advantage over
             | Starlink._
             | 
             | Starlink was never designed to compete with terrestrial
             | internet in any way.
             | 
             | If you have access to good high speed internet already then
             | Starlink is not for you.
        
               | wilg wrote:
               | ok
        
           | ancientworldnow wrote:
           | Most of that population can't afford Starlink prices.
        
             | wmf wrote:
             | Long term I wonder if they'll encourage sharing terminals.
             | Like a Starlink terminal that's a cellular base station.
        
             | realusername wrote:
             | That's also why I'm suspicious of the long term
             | profitability of the whole thing. Most developed countries
             | where the customers are richer also have some pretty good
             | infrastructure and the rest likely couldn't afford the
             | expensive service.
             | 
             | You are then left with all the exceptions to those general
             | rules and I'm not sure that's enough to cover the very
             | expensive cost of the platform.
        
       | borissk wrote:
       | Starlink will no doubt turn into a money printing machine very
       | soon. The war in Ukraine has proven it has a ton of value as a
       | military communication system.
       | 
       | Too bad it ruined the sky for the 15K professional astronomers
       | out there and a big part of the millions of amateurs as well.
        
         | codeTired wrote:
         | The war in Ukraine has proven that starlink or a private
         | company shouldn't be trusted when it comes to military
         | operations.
        
         | camhart wrote:
         | Did the dark paint have no effect?
        
           | zizee wrote:
           | They recently started launching highly reflective satellites,
           | which counterintuitively reduces the amount of light
           | scattered in earth's direction.
        
           | borissk wrote:
           | The dark paint was a stupid idea, that never realized.
        
             | hnburnsy wrote:
             | >The company developed a highly reflective dielectric
             | mirror film and a low-reflectivity black paint, which are
             | applied to several parts of the spacecraft body. The
             | mirror-like surface reflects sunlight into space instead of
             | scattering it toward observers on the ground. In addition,
             | the solar panels can be oriented so that observers do not
             | see their sunlit sides.
             | 
             | https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/the-newest-and-
             | la...
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | > _Too bad it ruined the sky for the 15K professional
         | astronomers out there and a big part of the millions of
         | amateurs as well._
         | 
         | Checkout the latest updates on the new sats, the problem has
         | been fixed.
         | 
         | https://www.pcmag.com/news/no-more-astronomy-photobombs-spac...
        
           | ancientworldnow wrote:
           | The article doesn't say that it's been fixed, merely there's
           | a new attempt to lessen the issue that is being tested with
           | the latest batch (which were still easily visible by eye via
           | earth bound observers).
        
         | ramesh31 wrote:
         | Kessler syndrome is inevitable once low-cost access to space is
         | unlocked. At least we'll get to browse cat memes from an
         | airplane out of it.
        
           | cwillu wrote:
           | This has nothing to do with kessler syndrome; these
           | satellites will all necessarily deorbit a relatively short
           | period after their fuel supplies are exhausted and they're no
           | longer able to correct for the orbital degradation caused by
           | the atmosphere.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | Somewhat tangential: Can you imaging having to come up with
             | a price point involving the planned destruction of
             | millions, if not billions of dollars of assets every few
             | years?
        
         | coolbreezetft22 wrote:
         | Not sure about this - seems like Elon's personal meddling has
         | shown that Starlink is not reliable for military purposes.
         | Military would have to have complete ownership/control
        
           | wilg wrote:
           | They are building a US-military controlled one called
           | Starshield.
        
             | ianburrell wrote:
             | The US doesn't have any current plans for military version
             | of Starlink. They have a pretty extensive satellite system.
             | Starshield is SpaceX project to use Starlink technology for
             | military.
             | 
             | The US Space Development Agency, focused on missile
             | defense, is working with SpaceX on tracking and
             | communications constellations. But the communications is
             | using laser links for in-space communications. Military
             | Starlink is possible but not proposed yet.
        
           | bobsmooth wrote:
           | What you think Elon did with regards to Ukraine is almost
           | certainly incorrect.
        
           | zizee wrote:
           | What "meddling" are you talking about?
        
             | pengaru wrote:
             | https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/elon-musk-
             | bi...
             | 
             | Walter Isaacson, the book's author, gave a long-form
             | interview recently on The Lex Fridman podcast. In case
             | you'd like to form your own opinion about the book's
             | legitimacy, its writing/Musk-supported research is
             | substantially discussed:
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGOV5R7M1Js
        
             | crawsome wrote:
             | https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/08/elon-
             | musk...
             | 
             | >A senior Ukrainian official has accused Elon Musk of
             | "committing evil" after a new biography revealed details
             | about how the business magnate ordered his Starlink
             | satellite communications network to be turned off near the
             | Crimean coast last year to hobble a Ukrainian drone attack
             | on Russian warships.
        
       | zizee wrote:
       | So, in a presentation from 2015, SpaceX predicted 20M users by
       | 2022, and they missed the mark. This was a presentation to
       | investors, to drum up support for their plans. Subscriber numbers
       | are still increasing. This seems like a case of being a bit late
       | on a optimistic prediction about a massive 7 year undertaking.
        
         | biomcgary wrote:
         | I've never heard of a serious investor that takes these numbers
         | without a teaspoon of salt. I think the total addressable
         | market is generally a bigger concern. At this point, it looks
         | like Starlink is likely to own the whole market (of high-ish
         | bandwidth, low-ish latency internet in remote-ish places). No
         | one else is even close for the necessary launch cadence to
         | maintain a very LEO satellite fleet.
         | 
         | Posted to HN using a Starlink connection.
        
         | itsoktocry wrote:
         | They missed by 95%, can't say that's a great call, can you?
         | 
         | > _This was a presentation to investors, to drum up support for
         | their plans_
         | 
         | Isn't that the issue, though?
        
           | throwaway-blaze wrote:
           | This is why startups are only allowed to raise from
           | "accredited investors" and not the general public. The fact
           | that whatever technology they claimed to have at the time
           | worked and wasn't a true fraud when pitched is really all
           | that matters. Anything forward looking is a projection the
           | investors can choose to believe or not.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _missed by 95%, can 't say that's a great call, can you?_
           | 
           | Yes. They're within an order of magnitude. On the north side
           | of zero. That's a good prediction, particularly given the
           | 20mm user figure seems realistic.
        
             | FireBeyond wrote:
             | You cannot say with a straight face that predicting 20
             | million users, getting only 1 million, is "a good
             | prediction".
        
             | kibibu wrote:
             | Within an order of magnitude would be 2M users. This is not
             | within an order of magnitude.
        
       | yardie wrote:
       | I'm sure it will get to 20M paying customers, eventually. But
       | most of the inhabited planet is well served by terrestrial
       | 4G/LTE. And the places that don't have terrestrial mobile service
       | are also largely unpopulated. It's great for ships, but that's
       | still in the 100k range. The Russia/Ukraine war has proved its
       | effectiveness. But that is still just 1000s of terminals.
       | 
       | In every instance where Starlink could be more usable than
       | terrestrial we're talking a few million at most.
        
         | lukev wrote:
         | Also, Musk yanking the plug on an active operation does not
         | bode well for that sort of use case.
        
       | wmf wrote:
       | Previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37505168
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-19 23:02 UTC)