Comment by iloveitaly
1 month ago
Really interesting that Starlink continues to improve the service when they have an absolute monopoly on fast, portable satellite internet.
1 month ago
Really interesting that Starlink continues to improve the service when they have an absolute monopoly on fast, portable satellite internet.
I assume they want to attract as many customers has possible while they have that monopoly - eventually they're going to need to compete with Amazon (Leo) and China (Qianfan, although I assume it'll be banned in the US). The cost of the phased-array terminals probably means there will be some stickiness.
Also as has been noted, in some markets they do compete on price: https://restofworld.org/2025/starlink-cheaper-internet-afric...
That's the magic of the free market. Even with no direct rival yet, Starlink innovates like crazy because the threat of competition is always there and consumers demand excellence. Unlike state-granted monopolies, those parasitic structures stagnate and plunder the people.
Is this why Google Search has been getting better and better every year?
Not fair - Google Search is under constant and escalating attack. If we replaced current Google Search with the 2000s implementation it would be immediately dominated by spam and SEO hacks. Simple PageRank doesn't work anymore.
2 replies →
It was, until Matt Cutts left.
You actually bolster his point by using search as an example: search has been completely eaten alive by a better alternative (ai chat).
It's probably getting better and better every year for the customers, ie the advertisers.
It's why Kagi and DuckDuckGo exist.
"Enshittification" would suggest otherwise.
I'm sure dark patterns count as innovation for them.
They are interested in other markets where they don't have a monopoly though. Most of the time my cell phone has fast 5g internet, and my cell phone company is trying to sell me on their 5g internet (I have fibre so I don't see the point). For many potential starlink customers there is competition. If you on the ocean they are the only option. If you travel on land they can be the only option in places but you can probably live with no service in those few places.
Satellite internet's main selling point is for use in remote locations.
I would guess that for many of their customers, they are still competing with non-satellite internet.
Absolutely monopoly? You mean other than Kuiper, right?
https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/what-i...
How many customers does Kuiper have at present?
that entire page is in future tense
They have a monopoly on sat-only market, but that isn’t really big enough of a market to support their growth goals. They want to eat all wireless providers Internet as well.
They have an absolute monopoly on a very niche market in developed countries. 5G beats satellite in both speed and convenience IMHO.
It's a completely different story in countries with crappy networks (looking at you Philippines), remote areas, or offshore.
Makes sense. Make your service good enough with your rocket+satellite synergy that competitors would need to spend $500B to be competitive.
Some lessons were learned from iRobot.
I've never read Peter Thiel's books, but isn't that kinda a part of his playbook? Monopolies, but driving progress? "Competition is for losers"? I never fully understood it because it seems like then you're just competing with yourself.
Blue Ocean Strategy.