• mbirth@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    “European Starlink rival” is a bit far fetched when there’s merely rumours that they might be able to offer a similar service. But that’s the stock market for you.

    • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They have both GEO and LEO satellites. Not on the scale of SpaceX (for LEO), but they do have a network.

      I am not commenting on the nature of the stock market or anything like that. Just pointing out that they do have a working network, it’s not 100% speculation (like you see with crypto schemes).

      • Zetta@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re correct but their LEO constellation is over 10x smaller than Starlink, so they’ve still got a lot of catching up to do.

        They are doing much better than other fabled starlink competitors though, like amazon kuiper which is still not a real thing after all this time.

        • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          They have one strong competitive advantage that Starlink will never have; they are not American.

          By definition, you cannot trust an American service. Even if the people who run a given service are not degenerates, there are enough degenerates in the US that they could elect a degenerate who will fuck you over.

        • GrosPapatouf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          They have very, very different business models. Constellation size is meaningless on its own, you have to account for the satellites capabilities, orbits, and the number and needs of your customers.

    • Skvlp@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Now they have to offer a similar service. No pressure then 😊

      • th3_n4m31355_0n3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        They do offer a better service, albeit marginally - better download speeds, lower latency, slower upload speeds though. Problem is their antennas - they cost 8.000€ compared to 300€ the starlink ones…

    • VeryInterestingTable@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Look up Ariane 6. It’s still more costly than the Falcon 9 but who in their right mind would trust the numbers Elon is sharing? Seems like they both cost around 100million $ cost per launch. Elon is claming 30million per launch and that he will make it cost 2 million…

  • RangerJosey@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    We all know why CNBC. You could have just posted the title.

    Because the drug addled used car salesman who’s currently about to default on his Twitter loans decided to embrace his roots and started throwing up seig heils and is currently having a crack team of 4chan incels dismantle a government while he threatens the world and works to make what he’s doing here happen everywhere.

    Dude is a comic book villain. Villain of the week level. No real staying power. Either he’ll go broke or die from a ketamine overdose before Xmas. And what a gift that will be. I hope it happens on video.

    • cabbage@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      But also, we cannot have so many god-damn satellites polluting the night sky. Starlink should never have been allowed to get up there as a private actor in the first place.

      It’s a tricky situation, as international cooperation would be extremely difficult to maintain, especially during situations like the Ukraine war. But having private companies compete to fill the orbit with space waste as soon as possible is hardly a good solution either.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    A European Starlink rival’s shares skyrocketed 390% in a week — here’s why

    OOOH!!! OOH!!! I KNOW THIS ONE!!! STARLINK GO BOOM! PEOPLE GO NOPE! TESLAS STOCK PRICE GO (bomb falling sound effects) KABOOM!!!

  • Bev's Dad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’ll be interesting to see what the Canadian telesat LEO system will be capable of. They’re supposed to be launching satellites next year and are using a higher orbit so will need much fewer satellites than starlink.

  • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Bye bye future space launches once we have full or partial Kessler syndrome.

    Bye bye earth based astronomy.

    But dang this tech is so much better than Hughesnet

    <ButtonPressingMeme>

    • mholiv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Kessler syndrome doesn’t really apply for purely LEO satellites. They all burn up in a single digit amount of years.

      It’s not something to worry about yet.

  • bassad@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Is starlink business model like uber/airbnb? Killing the market with low prices by circumventing regulations to establish their monopoly?

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      No, it just vertical integration. You need to send up rockets to make money, so you make sure they never have an empty slot on them by filling it yourself. You get enough satellites up, then you have a revenue generating payload you can send up steady from then on.

      • bassad@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Then it is a monopoly building if you take the limited slots before others companies 😁

        I was wondering because starlink’s terminals are around $500 while eutelsat’s are 10k. It seems it can be only possible if you accept massive losses on first years, with help of to investors to keep the company running, to take down competitors. Like uber and many others did, which had years of losses before having income.

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          SpaceX isn’t an Uber model, its a goverment leech model. It’s had heavily, heavily goverment subsidies to the tune of 18 billion dollars over its 10yr lifetime.

          Terminal prices are likely just an economy of scale issue. Much cheaper per unit to make 100,000 than 1,000. Im sure as eutelsat grows the prices will come down.

          If Eutelsat and the EU rocket program get 18 billion in goverment investment like SpaceX, im betting they can also accelerate all of the above.

          SpaceX doesnt have a moat, it just has the lead. Rocket labs in new Zealand is already hot on their tails. No reason the EU cant join or surpass them.

  • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is why I will never be rich. I never see business opportunities to buy tons of stock and act upon them.

      • Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Commission fees are less than a buck. The rules don’t change just because you have little money.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          No, the problem is that 20% growth of $2000 gives you a gain of $400. 20% growth of $10,000 gives you a gain of $2000. An average Americans entire yearly income is $70,000, it’s 20% growth is $14,000.

          Edit: this is all in terms of a full year of investing.

          But 20% isn’t happening every year, you are more likely to average 10%. Some years can be single digit, some can be negative, the point is this, you must begin with a very large amount of money to get real money out of the stock market. Even solidly middle class incomes aren’t going to be able to save up a years worth pay in only a few years, it would take many years, often enough to ensure the money will never be realized by anyone but by your children or grand children

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    SpaceX and Starlink have no competitors. They’re so far ahead that it’s not even funny. I really wish Elon had just kept his mouth shut and kept working on it without sullying its image. I bet he wishes that too sometimes.

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s not a mode of thinking it’s a fact. As of this moment there’s no one who is even close to being a competitor to them. I’m not saying there can’t be one, but there isn’t one right now.

        • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I am not denying Starlink and SpaceX have a dominant market position.

          When I said “this is a very soviet mode of thinking,” I meant that it’s unreasonable to think that they are unbeatable.

          This is just one thing, but if you use Starlink or SpaceX you have to deal with Americans and Americans cannot be trusted.

          Being a reliable partner is a competitive advantage and has an impact on the cost function of a given relationship. Americans (government or companies) are not reliable.

    • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was just talking about this with a friend today. Musk was basically on track to become a real-life Tony Stark, exactly as he’d envisioned, but he just couldn’t keep his mouth shut and ended up ruining it for himself. Money buys many things, but it doesn’t buy respect - and once you’ve lost that, it’s nearly impossible to regain. The number of young and ambitious people he let down is simply staggering. I was really rooting for him and hoping he’d turn this around but after the nazi salute I no longer do. That was the last straw for me.

    • tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Idk. Musk seems to have gone completely mental. Dunno what the cause is, but the man is not healthy. Not sure how much self-reflection he’s capable of.

    • freebee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Clearly not what he wishes. Shows no regrets whatsoever. He wishes for everyone to lick his boots and obey whatever he thinks is right. He’s acting like he’s a king or god or so… He gets what he deserves, disrespect and contracts failing. They might lead technologically but that’s no reason to take all this BS. It’s extra reason not to.

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I don’t know, the man is hard to read. I’m extremely cynical and I don’t believe he’s genuine ever, but he gave an interview recently and he did choke up when asked how he was managing to run his companies. I don’t think he’s as good an actor to fake that.

        The best conclusion I have arrived is that the man may well be completely self deluded and he might really believe himself the savior of mankind so he needs to get us to mars by any means necessary. Maybe because of the heavy drug use and obvious sleep deprivation, his sense of reality is probably warped. Or maybe the pressure from the Twitter purchase got to him and he broke because that’s when he absolutely went bonkers. He had to overleverage himself in order to do that and he even took money from the saudis.

        All in all I don’t expect things to end well for him.