Maybe I'm too pessimistic but at first I only see a big corporation (with an history) putting the blame on the local management.
Maybe it's due to my bad English, but I'm not able to find any sign of actual "overrule" of this decision. Is the WUC was finally accepted at this Hotel?
> There are a lot of places where local providers act like robber barons.
I agree, this may be the best effect Starlink can have : create competition.
> Population of the world is around 8 billion
Yes but which part is able to afford 99$/month (+antenna) + bad local provider which refuse to adapt to competition (first at price/offer level before even infrastructure) + no political reason for a global-us based provider ?
Sorry but i have difficulty to understand Starlink business : who are really their potentials customers ? It seems there is only a few possibilities :
- rural area (with sufficient incomes to afford the price)
- urban area with highly expensive/bad quality landline internet (but still with sufficient incomes to afford the price)
With the development of fiber in most urban area (usually fist in high income part) and the small number in the first category, I don't see how deploying tens of thousands of satellites could be profitable.
The only option will be to be able to lower the price but it will need a lot of customers...
Could you help me understand ?
In France (and probably in other European countries), private health insurances from employers are complementary to the government health care and don't replace it. That's why it is much cheaper. And so even highly paid professionals still use the government paid health care.
Moreover, if it wasn't the case it would make the national health care system a lot less efficient.