Starlink hits 12 million subscribers, plans 100x bandwidth boost with V3 satellites

I'll guess that a big part of the reason that Starlink is down to $55/mo is due to competition. I think it would be interesting to know how much Starlink charges in areas/countries where there is no competition.
Here in Australia where there is competition, the current pricing is as follows:

Starlink 100 Mbps Service : $75 month
Telstra 50 Mbps Service : $125 month
SkyMesh 100 Mbps Service: $99.95 month

It's worth noting that the Telstra service uses Starlink but drops your connection speed, so you're paying more for less.

We have a lot of rural and outback regions here which have little to no copper, fibre or mobile coverage, where satellite services are the only real option for internet service, so Starlink is a great product for these areas.
 
It's great. Has not been down once in over three years at my house. I get TV and unlimited fast internet for $130/month. I'm rural and there are no other viable options. Go SpaceX GO!
 
It's not about the idea. It's great. Like mortage MBSs, blockchain, or AI, or even private equity. They are all tools. The problem is in execution. It's being weaponized, to squize every penny from the market, at the expense of the market. Elon bought Tesla, He probably didn't fathered the SpaceX, just adopted the concept. And Then He turned Them into parody of what They meant for general public. Cybertruck? SpaceX IPO documents, where They claim They are AI technology firm? Please! It's a bubble.
See, here's the Elon Derangement Syndrome in action.

First, he bought tesla VERY early on. The model S, X, Y, and 3 were all under his ownership. The only tesla that was worked on prior to elon was the OG roadster, and even then, much of it was done after he bought the company.

Second, he literally founded Space X. IDK what on earth you are saying with "didn't fathered it", I assume you had a stroke while writing that? Space X is a legit miracle of space flight, still launching mroe rockets then everyone else combined, pushing the idea of reusable rocket boosters, ocean landings on mobile platforms, ece.

Turned them into a parody? Space X is incredibly successful and still leading the pack, Tesla's model Y is one of the best selling EVs (also, one of the top 10 American made cars) and consistently is a US top seller. The Cybertruck is a miss, but every auto maker has done that before, its hardly unique.

Are their problems? Sure. The IPO is suspect, using Space X to bail out the failing AI group most likely, but nothing is being "weaponized" against you. Words have meaning, when you spew out meaningless word salad, all you do is create pointless noise.
Well, anyone can call it that, and anyone can call the opposite opinion, "Elon disciple syndrome".

Starlink may work, but, IMO, its another situation where he simply promised more at a lower price than he could deliver at that price. Elon is far from perfect. Missing at least some of his target audience - those with the lowest incomes.
When you start inventing promises from the past to base your arguments around and claim someone didnt do what they claimed, you have left the plane of reality and entered a delusional state, hence why it is called a "Derangement Syndrome".

In neither the 2015 announcement nor the 2018 launch articles when satellites were going up did Musk ever say that Starlink was aiming for those with the lowest incomes. It's purpose, from day 1, was to bring high speed service with lower latency to underserved areas without high speed internet, dependent on DSL or satellite coverage. He has accomplished this, providing multi hundred Mbps service and significantly better signal and latency then the likes of Viasat or Dish could manage.
 
Too expensive
Starlink is orders of magnitude cheaper than any competing service. At one point I was paying more than $2000 a month for mobile Internet, for about 1/1000 the bandwidth and 50X the latency that Starlink offers. For anyone who needs mobile Internet in places where cell service is unavailable, there's literally no substitute, and for high bandwidth usage, it can even beat conventional 5G in many areas.

And fElon keeps on blowing more and more
Why must you persist in posting libelous falsehoods in every thread?
 
My 2 cents: I lived in the mid-west sticks for 5 years. Wife wanted to homestead. Nice 20 acre lot. Bought a house on the promise of fiber. Well, they (telco) admitted only after I called for install after moving in they went to the wrong address and I couldn’t get anything but 12mbps DSL that hovered around 3 down. I work at home full time…I was in a panic and lived off barely faster Verizon until Starlink came around just after Christmas.

Still in beta rollout, it was impressive speeds: 250/20 and latency in the 20s. So many people that the Telco and Cable wouldn’t lay upgrades to can now have affordable access. Let’s all be thankful that those who couldn’t get better than slow DSL or overly expensive and slow Hughs satellite can get online instead of hate who runs it. A win is a win, regardless of whom it was brought under.
 
Here in Australia where there is competition, the current pricing is as follows:

Starlink 100 Mbps Service : $75 month
Telstra 50 Mbps Service : $125 month
SkyMesh 100 Mbps Service: $99.95 month

It's worth noting that the Telstra service uses Starlink but drops your connection speed, so you're paying more for less.

We have a lot of rural and outback regions here which have little to no copper, fibre or mobile coverage, where satellite services are the only real option for internet service, so Starlink is a great product for these areas.
I'm not an elitist when it comes to anything tech, but 100megs for those prices seem a bit rough. Those satellites are up there weather they're above the US or Australia, so the idea that prices are so different is kind of insulting. I looked it up and it looks like my company is paying somewhere between $70-90/ for 500mbps, but it never reaches those speeds. It still hovers around 400mbps. I would be furious if I was only getting 100megs for those prices. I have 5gig fiber at home for $220/m from Verizon, but I knew that was excessive when I bought it.
 
Those satellites are up there weather [sic] they're above the US or Australia, so the idea that prices are so different is kind of insulting.
Um, Starlink uses entirely different earth stations in Australia than they do the US. More importantly, the Starlink constellation serves fewer people per unit area in low population-density areas like Australia, making the service more expensive to provide. Then of course there's the higher regulatory costs of operating in Australia.

I would be furious if I was only getting 100megs for those prices. I have 5gig fiber at home...
Again, you're comparing fixed-location fiber to mobile service. You might as well compare the price of sending a document via email vs. registered USPS mail.
 
I'm not an elitist when it comes to anything tech, but 100megs for those prices seem a bit rough. Those satellites are up there weather they're above the US or Australia, so the idea that prices are so different is kind of insulting. I looked it up and it looks like my company is paying somewhere between $70-90/ for 500mbps, but it never reaches those speeds. It still hovers around 400mbps. I would be furious if I was only getting 100megs for those prices. I have 5gig fiber at home for $220/m from Verizon, but I knew that was excessive when I bought it.
As Endymio pointed out, we not only have a much lower population density compared to the US (about 10 times lower), but we're also a lot more spread out down here with large gaps between major population centres. This makes it difficult (read expensive) for carriers/networks to obtain full coverage, which is reflected in our pricing. A lot of our communication providers actually share infrastructure, not to mention we have less providers than the US.
 
I just checked Starlink. This is what I found. To set up typical Starlink service, you will incur an initial hardware cost of around $349 for the standard kit, plus a monthly subscription fee starting at $55 (for 80---100Mbps download) for the basic plan. Additional costs may include shipping and optional professional installation if needed.

Xfinity gives me 75 Mbps download speed. In reality I consonantly get 80Mbps download speed. For a grand total of $14.95 per month taxes included. And they give you a modem, no charge monthly or otherwise.

Too many of these companies are just plain greedy!
 
Last edited:
Noone in the US has unlimited paid vacation. Companies got tired of paying out PTO when people quit. You have to be approved for your unlimited PTO, the whole thing is a farce. You also don't have "affordable healthcare", it's hidden in your compensation package. My state requires that my employer tells me what it for my healthcare. For me, my wife and my daughter, they pay $18,000 a year and I have to pay $5,000 every 6 months. I want to know where you're staying that $30,000 a year is affordable
I don’t actually have to be approved for my PTO, my boss doesn’t have to sign off on anything - any time I want to go on vacation, I make sure my current engagements are set up for success and then I leave. Nobody tracks how long you are gone, or how many PTO days you’ve already taken.

As for affordable healthcare, I have a $600 individual deductible for my wife and I each - and after that everything is free, and it costs 6.5% of my gross paycheck each month. Does that suck? Sure. Is it game ending? Absolutely not.

Things aren’t as generalized as you may want to believe.
 
I don’t actually have to be approved for my PTO, my boss doesn’t have to sign off on anything - any time I want to go on vacation, I make sure my current engagements are set up for success and then I leave. Nobody tracks how long you are gone, or how many PTO days you’ve already taken.

As for affordable healthcare, I have a $600 individual deductible for my wife and I each - and after that everything is free, and it costs 6.5% of my gross paycheck each month. Does that suck? Sure. Is it game ending? Absolutely not.

Things aren’t as generalized as you may want to believe.
I mean im happy that there are exceptions, but I've never worked for a company where "unlimited PTO" wasn't as bureaucratic and obstructionary as possible with approval sometimes taking months. As far as the insurance goes, 2 years ago it was $1400 a year for the 3 of us. Our co-pays were also usually just $5 if we had them at all. Now it's $10000 a year, our co pays are $45 and I've even been pre approved for a procedure and then have the insurance threaten to sue me after because it was deemed unnecessary. And while this might not be your reality, these are reality for 10s of millions of people in the greatest, richest country in the world
 
My state requires that my employer tells me what it for my healthcare. For me, my wife and my daughter, they pay $18,000 a year and I have to pay $5,000 every 6 months. I want to know where you're staying that $30,000 a year is affordable
Perhaps its your state, and your state is not the same as every other state. I'm in NY state and my company privately funds our healthcare such that our healthcare is a pool gleaned from employee premiums. I have a two-person high-deductable plan for my wife and myself. My premium is $411/mo.

Maybe you should be complaining to your state representatives instead of P&Ming about it here on TS.

Yes, there's differences, but if I were you, I would not be judging the healthcare costs of others based on my own. There are differences between states and the costs of some states are higher. And it may be the size of your company as well. It sounds like the Healthcare in your state is quite high compared to mine (neglecting other differences like my 2-person HD plan.)
 
It's amazing that because Musk ponied up to Trump in 2024, he is now "a villian" where before he was the king of cool. Politics...destroys societies.
Personally, I've not liked Musk since he appeared on the Tech Bro scene. If you search my posts here on TS, you'll find that I have and have had a negative view of him for a long, long, long time - regardless of his politics, and his recent floundering from progressive honey to extreme-right-wing darling has not improved my opinion of him - in case its not obvious.
 

Perhaps its your state, and your state is not the same as every other state. I'm in NY state and my company privately funds our healthcare such that our healthcare is a pool gleaned from employee premiums. I have a two-person high-deductable plan for my wife and myself. My premium is $411/mo.

Maybe you should be complaining to your state representatives instead of P&Ming about it here on TS.

Yes, there's differences, but if I were you, I would not be judging the healthcare costs of others based on my own. There are differences between states and the costs of some states are higher. And it may be the size of your company as well. It sounds like the Healthcare in your state is quite high compared to mine (neglecting other differences like my 2-person HD plan.)
Im going to try to clarify and keep things vague at the same time. My daughter has chronic medical issues and we use our insurance A LOT. Of the plans available to me, I choose the best with the smallest co-pays. My company puts upto 18000 a year into a health savings account for me to pay for coverage and I have to pay for the rest. This has worked fine for me for almost a decade, and August last year things started changing. The most frustrating thing is one of her medications would have cost $17 for a 30day supply and that's easy. It's from the 70s and the patent is up. The thing is, my insurance no longer covers and the price has rise to close to $700.

I get very passionate about this subject because of my personal experience involving it, there is no reason and out of patent medice that cost $20/m less than a year ago. Further, im paying for the best plan available to me because ER visits are common and a single one would cost more than my biyearly deductible. It has all changed so fast and without warning that I haven't even been able to properly address all the changes. And when I talked to my lawyer about my insurance threatening to sue me, I was informed that this has become incredibly common.
 
I mean im happy that there are exceptions, but I've never worked for a company where "unlimited PTO" wasn't as bureaucratic and obstructionary as possible with approval sometimes taking months. As far as the insurance goes, 2 years ago it was $1400 a year for the 3 of us. Our co-pays were also usually just $5 if we had them at all. Now it's $10000 a year, our co pays are $45 and I've even been pre approved for a procedure and then have the insurance threaten to sue me after because it was deemed unnecessary. And while this might not be your reality, these are reality for 10s of millions of people in the greatest, richest country in the world
I pay $120 a month for healthcare on my employer's plan. My deductible is $1,000 but the company sponsors an HSA account, so the $1,000 quickly fills up in there within a year or two. In Europe I still paid upwards of 350€ a month when I was living there and the services you get are 2nd class. Nah I'm good, I'll keep the US system.
Not sure how you ended up with those premiums (pre-conditions?). Perhaps you're getting ripped off or your employer has a shitty plan.
The vast majority of people doesn't have many health issues, stays healthy and enjoys low premiums. There will always be outliers and the insurance needs to pay for these, but I believe you are describing your situation as being an outlier which doesn't relate to the majority of insured employees.
 
I pay $120 a month for healthcare on my employer's plan. My deductible is $1,000 but the company sponsors an HSA account, so the $1,000 quickly fills up in there within a year or two. In Europe I still paid upwards of 350€ a month when I was living there and the services you get are 2nd class. Nah I'm good, I'll keep the US system.
Not sure how you ended up with those premiums (pre-conditions?). Perhaps you're getting ripped off or your employer has a shitty plan.
The vast majority of people doesn't have many health issues, stays healthy and enjoys low premiums. There will always be outliers and the insurance needs to pay for these, but I believe you are describing your situation as being an outlier which doesn't relate to the majority of insured employees.
We have one company avaliable to us and I work for a very large, multinational company. I do feel like im getting ripped off, but I was still coming out on top for awhile so I just delt with it. But now im paying so much more and getting so much less coverage while also being threatened by the insurance to be sued. The worst part is that when I started this job 8 years, something the recruiter said to me is that they had the best insurance and I'll pay nothing. Then 2 years ago things got shaky and then basically a year ago, the **** hit the fan and the fan was inches from my face.

And I could justify the increase in costs, but the coverage changes what feels like daily. It isn't just the insurance itself, either. It's the hospitals, it's the drug companies. The system has become flawed. It's become so absurdly expensive that I may not be able to afford the legal fees to fight it soon while 2 years ago I was making plans on buying my dream car
 
Starlink is orders of magnitude cheaper than any competing service. At one point I was paying more than $2000 a month for mobile Internet, for about 1/1000 the bandwidth and 50X the latency that Starlink offers. For anyone who needs mobile Internet in places where cell service is unavailable, there's literally no substitute, and for high bandwidth usage, it can even beat conventional 5G in many areas.


Why must you persist in posting libelous falsehoods in every thread?
I'm talking for the common man; if you can drop $2k on internet you are hardly relevant to the common man. LoS shot to the nearest town gets me unlimited 13 MB/s dowload speed for $50 a month with no installation or equipment fee. Lets me play online games and stream movies no issues without being rich.
 
I'm talking for the common man; if you can drop $2k on internet you are hardly relevant to the common man. LoS shot to the nearest town gets me unlimited 13 MB/s dowload speed for $50 a month with no installation or equipment fee.
My point was how cheap Starlink is compared to other services that offer global coverage. Even in your specific case, for an extra $25/month, Starlink gives you 8X the bandwidth and (probably) more reliable service than does a long los radio link in inclement weather.
 
Last edited:
I’m in the US and I have affordable healthcare, unlimited paid vacation, and complete autonomy (work-life balance) at work to work or not work when I want. What am I missing?

Oh that’s right, massive taxes. I’m good.
What job are you in? Is your company hiring more of your position?
 
In before Elonlink, a person with internet addiction could go to a remote location and guarantee himself to cleanse and sober up.
Now, there is nowhere to go, internet is everywhere...

I still think that they should hit hard with a budget plan to chop off a big portion off Comcast's customers. Even if Comcast retaliates and offers similar plans, a lot of people are so sick with it and its predatory practices that they will stay with Elonlink just to punish Comcast.
 
1.7trillion. Let's assume 100 years of owning the stock - how much would They have to squize out from those 12million clients if this IPO is not a scam?
I realize you're not interested in actual facts, but at current growth rates, Starlink will have 60 million subscribers by 2029. Not to mention that SpaceX is making billions off NEO launch services, and just signed a $1B per month deal with Google to provide compute services.
 
If you haven't done the math:

$50 mo x 12million customers x 12 months is: 7.2 billion a year

And for everyone saying "oh but I get FTTH" or something similar, don't forget this service is NOT for you.
This service is for everyone who can't get fiber. 12 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the billion or so potential customers. Not everyone lives in a city you know?!
 
I just checked Starlink. This is what I found. To set up typical Starlink service, you will incur an initial hardware cost of around $349 for the standard kit, plus a monthly subscription fee starting at $55 (for 80---100Mbps download) for the basic plan. Additional costs may include shipping and optional professional installation if needed.

Xfinity gives me 75 Mbps download speed. In reality I consonantly get 80Mbps download speed. For a grand total of $14.95 per month taxes included. And they give you a modem, no charge monthly or otherwise.

Too many of these companies are just plain greedy!
I just signed up with StarLink couple of months ago when I switched from U-Verse (AT&T.) I was paying 99.00/mo for 45MB down and about 12MB upload. I don't live in the sticks, per say, but I do live in an unincorporated area where my only choices were AT&T, Comcast, Verizon Internet 5G (not fiber) and StarLink. I got the home premium plan and pay 99.00 /mo for the next 6 months. Since I signed up for the premium plan there was no charge for the equipment, including a 2nd mesh wireless node for my house, and it included free professional installation. I am now averaging around 400MB give or take for the same price I was paying for 45MB. I don't get good Verizon coverage in my area, and Comcast by me is a joke. Most of my neighbors have Comcast, the speeds are never as advertised, and the service goes down multiple times per week, all issues I don't have to deal with from StarLink. I also did not have to sign a contract with StarLink, and can unsubscribe at any time, I just need to return the router. For me I am very happy with StarLink, and it meets my needs. YMMV. Just my $0.02. I will probably switch to fiber, when and or if it becomes available in my area.
 
Back