Of course, there will still be the Starlink stock pumpers on here who think we are all flat earthers.
Looks like someone coached Dan about how Starlink CANNOT take away from the terrestrial networks in a very substantial way. Physics!
Per Dan, in the article:
In terms of broadband competition from satellite providers, “it is very difficult for satellite providers to provide a service that's even close to what we can provide with our broadband services,” he said.
He walked through the basics of satellite beams and what they can offer by way of speeds versus ground-based systems.
“We’re like 100 times to 1,000 times more efficient,” he said. “Our speeds and capabilities are much higher, and it’s basically not possible because of physics. Not because of execution, but because of physics.”
The majority of Verizon’s service revenue is in urban and suburban geographies. He acknowledged that satellite does have a total addressable market (TAM) that’s probably between 6 million and 8 million homes in the U.S., primarily in very rural geographies where building out a terrestrial network is cost prohibitive.
“It doesn’t pencil out,” he said.
https://www.fierce-network.com/wireless/verizon-ceo-shuts-down-starlink-mvno-talk-touts-strong-q2-comeback