saveanon12Starlink lost another 43 satellites last night. Over 300 satellites have burned up since July 16th. NOAA has 3 job openings for space forecaster.
originaluciferhow many does he have to lose before the whole thing isnt worth it?
FaceDeerMore than this, because this loss rate is designed for. The constellation is at a very low altitude and is intended to be constantly replaced like this.
Well it won’t work out very well when they already have less than 15% of the subscribers they thought they would have by now.
And yet they are already profitable.
I highly doubt that. They just got to 2 million customers like 5 months ago. If you’d average the costs in pricing differences between residential and business, etc. you would figure it averages out to $200 a month per account. Even if you pretend that they have had 2,000,000 customers for that last three years straight that would only amount to $1.2B and I’d guarantee they have well over that in costs thus far. Skipping all the R&D the 5,000 satellites up there right now cost $500,000 to $600,000 per satellite to get to orbit (so total cost, fuel, making satellite, etc.). Even at just $500k each that’s still $2.5B.
So yeah. There’s not really a snowballs chance in hell it’s in the black right now.
That doesn’t say it’s made money. It says it is now bringing in more than it’s losing. It’s still currently upside down. Also, no way would I believe that website when it says starlink will make a profit by the end of this year. It’s a fluff piece to prime things for the upcoming IPO.
"Bringing in more than it's losing" means it's profitable.
But if you're simply going to refuse to believe anything that says something contrary to what you believe there's not much point in further discussion.