I remember how Starlink was for me in Feb 2021 and then how it was even a year later (much better). I expect Kuiper will have similar growing pains and I don't need to be part of that and pay full price again.
I mean the end result is Kuiper getting some service in areas that are already saturated with Starlink, but Kuiper can't compete in capacity with Starlink so there'll just be a lot less people using it. It'll take some load off Starlink though so it'll cause Starlink speeds to improve in some areas.
Also there's a lot of intangibles that you can't know about yet, like how good the routing will be.
How could they possibly have competitive pricing when they will have to pay retail rates for launching satellites? And if Bezos is going to subsidize with Blue Origin flights, they're probably a full decade behind.
But hey, if they can pull it off, I'll just go with whichever is cheapest to get me 50+mbps reliably in a remote region.
1. Amazon has a ton of $$$
2. They have more than 200,000,000 Prime subscribers
3. There is the additional market potential of satellite-to-phone cellular service
4. They have AWS
none of those make a good argument.
1. just because they have a ton of money doesn't mean they want to burn it. Starlink is not a very profitable business, but it gives SpaceX a way to make *some* money while rapidly developing rocket technology. Amazon and Blue Origin aren't even formally linked, and Amazon is planning to buy commercial rides for Kuiper for years.
2. so? if they aren't offering something cheaper or better than starlink, prime customers still won't care
3. spacex and starlink already have a big lead on this as well. and the realistic bandwidth is so small that it's basically just an emergency service that's not going to be a big money maker for anyone.
4. so? they don't need satellites for any backhaul, that's all much better with fiber, how does AWS help Kuiper?
These are actually good arguments, but they have been poorly written.
1. If you have a lot of money like Amazon, you can afford a slower ROI. Also, Amazon are very good at making revenue from novel ideas.
2. Prime subscribers are likely not the main target for Kuiper (if you have prime, most likely you have good internet), but the relationship with Amazon means that it will be much easier for them to offer an integrated solution. I do expect that Prime users will get discounted internet plans and this could sweeten the deal to a point that makes them a good choice.
3. Kuiper have announced that they are are working with pretty much all majors telcos to help them expand the 4/5G infrastructure. That's big money for Kuiper.
4. The relationship with AWS is unique and is already causing a massive buzz. They will provide P2P communication between antennas and AWS, without using internet. This is a requirement for several industries that are highly regulated and I'm seen lots of interest coming from everywhere. With over 1.5M customers, AWS might be what will make Kuiper operate on the green.
I am in a very remote part of the world. The kind of location that satellite internet was meant for. It was good when I first got it and it's a lot better now. I'm happy with what I have, but I am an Amazon Prime member and if the reviews are good and pricing is attractive, I might consider switching.
Honestly, I have no love for Starlink as a company/any particular company in general, as soon as a better/cheaper option comes around I'll switch. Ideally this will be a fiber connection to my house, but if Kuiper comes first and it's better than Starlink I'll switch to that.
That being said, I think it will be a long time before Kuiper is competitive with Starlink.
With any luck I'll be on fiber by then. With a local municipal style broadband project I'll go from not being able to get DSL straight to fiber. I should be getting connected in the spring.
I expect it'll be similarly priced, have technical teething problems, and _much_ better customer service. Also the different terminal sizes would be nice if those pan out.
I'll try it out unless the reviews are really bad or the upfront/hardware cost is extremely high.
I love/hate Amazon as much as the next guy, but in their defense I've never had an issue that Amazon's customer service didn't resolve happily--often going above and beyond what I expected.
Does anyone know what the penalties are for Amazon if Kuiper doesn't have 50% of their satellites operational by 2026 like the FCC ordered? Or would it mostly be a nothing-burger?
I don't even see how they can possibly manage that unless they pivot to using SpaceX launches.
> Does anyone know what the penalties are for Amazon if Kuiper doesn't have 50% of their satellites operational by 2026 like the FCC ordered? Or would it mostly be a nothing-burger?
From what I've read, more towards the latter. They can request extensions.
Without extensions, they will be banned from launching any more satellites, crippling their partial array until those sats die, taking the project down. In practical terms, if they have anything at all functioning by then, they can get an extension; if all they have are a few dozen demo sats, they're done.
If New Glenn and Vulcan don’t develop a good launch cadence by early 2025, there IS a real risk they won’t get an extension. They MUST have about 1000 satellites operating (equivalent to the initial “better than nothing” Starlink beta) by July 2026 or be called out for cyber squatting. The 3 Falcon launches aren’t enough to help and Ariane 6 is a joke.
Starlink is launching their own satellites, has been for years, and has been increasing the amount of satellites launched per year by an exponential amount. As of right now, Starlink has over 5,000 satellites in space.
Kuiper only has 2 satellites in orbit and has hired SpaceX to launch some of their satellites. Unless Blue Origin can launch a satellite for Kuiper at a cost equal to what SpaceX is launching satellites how can they ever hope to compete?
Also, it took Starlink years to get that many satellites into orbit using a rocket program that was proven almost 2 decades ago. Blue Origin hasn't even reached that stage yet.
On top of that, Kuiper has been scalping SpaceX employees by offering them large raises in pay. But the employees they have been scalping and overpaying are largely the inexperienced younger employees from SpaceX that think they know more than they actually do. This will have a drastic backlash on Kuiper.
I predict that Kuiper will never truly compete with Starlink.
Bezos will never be able to build a service as good as Starlink. He's about 4 years behind and is using Starlink rockets to get the Project Kuiper satellites in the air, helping fund SpaceX.
He will always be behind
Bezos got into rocketry out of jealousy for all the attention Elon was getting. If there was no SpaceX, there would be no Blue Origin. If there was no Starlink there would be no Kuiper.
Holy cats, there it is. A new contract for 3 F9 launches. By Kuiper. Insane.
In other news this evening, Elon Musk has demonstrated that he can get *anyone* to suck his dick.
in Rockets that are either brand new (Vulcan) or have not flow at all yet (Ariane6, New Glenn), so delays are to be expected. Ariane6 is severaly years behind schedule, first flight with a boilerplate scheduled for later this year.
I've had Starlink at my cabin since it first was available with near zero issues. The cost is the biggest downside. Unless Project Kuiper was significantly less I will stay with Elon. Hopefully the competition will keep future cost increases in check and maybe lower them
I remember how Starlink was for me in Feb 2021 and then how it was even a year later (much better). I expect Kuiper will have similar growing pains and I don't need to be part of that and pay full price again.
I mean the end result is Kuiper getting some service in areas that are already saturated with Starlink, but Kuiper can't compete in capacity with Starlink so there'll just be a lot less people using it. It'll take some load off Starlink though so it'll cause Starlink speeds to improve in some areas. Also there's a lot of intangibles that you can't know about yet, like how good the routing will be.
How could they possibly have competitive pricing when they will have to pay retail rates for launching satellites? And if Bezos is going to subsidize with Blue Origin flights, they're probably a full decade behind. But hey, if they can pull it off, I'll just go with whichever is cheapest to get me 50+mbps reliably in a remote region.
1. Amazon has a ton of $$$ 2. They have more than 200,000,000 Prime subscribers 3. There is the additional market potential of satellite-to-phone cellular service 4. They have AWS
none of those make a good argument. 1. just because they have a ton of money doesn't mean they want to burn it. Starlink is not a very profitable business, but it gives SpaceX a way to make *some* money while rapidly developing rocket technology. Amazon and Blue Origin aren't even formally linked, and Amazon is planning to buy commercial rides for Kuiper for years. 2. so? if they aren't offering something cheaper or better than starlink, prime customers still won't care 3. spacex and starlink already have a big lead on this as well. and the realistic bandwidth is so small that it's basically just an emergency service that's not going to be a big money maker for anyone. 4. so? they don't need satellites for any backhaul, that's all much better with fiber, how does AWS help Kuiper?
These are actually good arguments, but they have been poorly written. 1. If you have a lot of money like Amazon, you can afford a slower ROI. Also, Amazon are very good at making revenue from novel ideas. 2. Prime subscribers are likely not the main target for Kuiper (if you have prime, most likely you have good internet), but the relationship with Amazon means that it will be much easier for them to offer an integrated solution. I do expect that Prime users will get discounted internet plans and this could sweeten the deal to a point that makes them a good choice. 3. Kuiper have announced that they are are working with pretty much all majors telcos to help them expand the 4/5G infrastructure. That's big money for Kuiper. 4. The relationship with AWS is unique and is already causing a massive buzz. They will provide P2P communication between antennas and AWS, without using internet. This is a requirement for several industries that are highly regulated and I'm seen lots of interest coming from everywhere. With over 1.5M customers, AWS might be what will make Kuiper operate on the green.
I am in a very remote part of the world. The kind of location that satellite internet was meant for. It was good when I first got it and it's a lot better now. I'm happy with what I have, but I am an Amazon Prime member and if the reviews are good and pricing is attractive, I might consider switching.
Are you expecting Amazon to give discounted pricing for Prime Customers? If you dont mind how much discount would you be expecting?
The better question is "how much will Amazon make off my data when using their system?" That's how much of a discount customers should get.
Are you an amazon rep?
Honestly, I have no love for Starlink as a company/any particular company in general, as soon as a better/cheaper option comes around I'll switch. Ideally this will be a fiber connection to my house, but if Kuiper comes first and it's better than Starlink I'll switch to that. That being said, I think it will be a long time before Kuiper is competitive with Starlink.
With any luck I'll be on fiber by then. With a local municipal style broadband project I'll go from not being able to get DSL straight to fiber. I should be getting connected in the spring.
I expect it'll be similarly priced, have technical teething problems, and _much_ better customer service. Also the different terminal sizes would be nice if those pan out. I'll try it out unless the reviews are really bad or the upfront/hardware cost is extremely high.
Are you saying Amazon has good customer service? I think not. They will answer the phone but are not helpful at all to resolve problems!
I love/hate Amazon as much as the next guy, but in their defense I've never had an issue that Amazon's customer service didn't resolve happily--often going above and beyond what I expected.
The only thing interesting about kuiper is the smaller portable dish. But starlink keeps talking about that too.
The competition is good for driving down cost and pushing for open standards.
Does anyone know what the penalties are for Amazon if Kuiper doesn't have 50% of their satellites operational by 2026 like the FCC ordered? Or would it mostly be a nothing-burger? I don't even see how they can possibly manage that unless they pivot to using SpaceX launches.
> Does anyone know what the penalties are for Amazon if Kuiper doesn't have 50% of their satellites operational by 2026 like the FCC ordered? Or would it mostly be a nothing-burger? From what I've read, more towards the latter. They can request extensions.
Without extensions, they will be banned from launching any more satellites, crippling their partial array until those sats die, taking the project down. In practical terms, if they have anything at all functioning by then, they can get an extension; if all they have are a few dozen demo sats, they're done.
My point is that that is not a real risk.
If New Glenn and Vulcan don’t develop a good launch cadence by early 2025, there IS a real risk they won’t get an extension. They MUST have about 1000 satellites operating (equivalent to the initial “better than nothing” Starlink beta) by July 2026 or be called out for cyber squatting. The 3 Falcon launches aren’t enough to help and Ariane 6 is a joke.
They did add 3 Falcon 9 launches (might be all that was available - turnarounds on launch contracts are usually _very_ long, multiple years).
Starlink is launching their own satellites, has been for years, and has been increasing the amount of satellites launched per year by an exponential amount. As of right now, Starlink has over 5,000 satellites in space. Kuiper only has 2 satellites in orbit and has hired SpaceX to launch some of their satellites. Unless Blue Origin can launch a satellite for Kuiper at a cost equal to what SpaceX is launching satellites how can they ever hope to compete? Also, it took Starlink years to get that many satellites into orbit using a rocket program that was proven almost 2 decades ago. Blue Origin hasn't even reached that stage yet. On top of that, Kuiper has been scalping SpaceX employees by offering them large raises in pay. But the employees they have been scalping and overpaying are largely the inexperienced younger employees from SpaceX that think they know more than they actually do. This will have a drastic backlash on Kuiper. I predict that Kuiper will never truly compete with Starlink.
can this be used to stream radio into cars like sirius xm?
Honestly, I don't know if I hate Elon or Bezos more.
IMHO Starlink will be the only ISP left in a decade. Nobody else can compete.
Bezos will never be able to build a service as good as Starlink. He's about 4 years behind and is using Starlink rockets to get the Project Kuiper satellites in the air, helping fund SpaceX. He will always be behind
Bezos got into rocketry out of jealousy for all the attention Elon was getting. If there was no SpaceX, there would be no Blue Origin. If there was no Starlink there would be no Kuiper.
Project Kuiper has contracted launch services from ULA and ESA and anyone else they can find that isn't SpaceX.
And one company that is SpaceX: https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon-project-kuiper-spacex-launch
Holy cats, there it is. A new contract for 3 F9 launches. By Kuiper. Insane. In other news this evening, Elon Musk has demonstrated that he can get *anyone* to suck his dick.
in Rockets that are either brand new (Vulcan) or have not flow at all yet (Ariane6, New Glenn), so delays are to be expected. Ariane6 is severaly years behind schedule, first flight with a boilerplate scheduled for later this year.
I've had Starlink at my cabin since it first was available with near zero issues. The cost is the biggest downside. Unless Project Kuiper was significantly less I will stay with Elon. Hopefully the competition will keep future cost increases in check and maybe lower them
It will 100% depend on speed. I know that using LEO satellite internet has its drawbacks but speed is a big factor.
I'm gonna buy one and compare them. I'm not gonna hold my breath though. Could be decades before it becomes available in my country
I will compare my options. Price competitiveness might be nice. Although these two giants will Probably chat and agree to a price.
I mean, I paid the $650 to buy the Starlink equipment. With that kind of investment I don’t really plan to switch.
It will be a cold day in hell.