frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

Open in hackernews

Starlink 2X Price Increase

https://www.corporatejetinvestor.com/news/starlink-price-rise-reckless-says-correnti/
76•r2sk5t•1h ago

Comments

p-o•35m ago
Hard to not look at the crazy valuation of SpaceX and not see a correlation. At some point, something's gotta give.
idontwantthis•29m ago
Unfortunately, their valuation has almost nothing to do with starlink revenues. It’s almost entirely speculative oribital data centers that have not been invented yet. They could double their starlink revenues and it would have no impact on the valuation.
_doctor_love•26m ago
Wasn't it Jeff Skilling who once waxed poetical about hypothetical future value?
croes•19m ago
Even if invented, what is the advantage of orbit data centers?
0cf8612b2e1e•12m ago
The best I have heard: It makes you fully independent of the terrestrial energy grid. There is also some nebulous freedom from governmental authority possibilities.

Both of which strike me as poor arguments. We are in a short term energy crunch. I expect within five years that most of the energy problems will be resolved and the eye watering financials of launching a GPU into space will look absurd

Governments also do not like to cede authority, so I find it hard to believe that they will not claim jurisdiction over any business operating within their borders (all of those ground stations).

amanaplanacanal•11m ago
I think the idea is easy energy availability and no push back from the locals. Those both seem to be to be fairly simple to solve on the ground compared to the unsolved issues doing it in orbit.
largbae•9m ago
Regulatory problems are doing the heavy lifting. Sure power is "free", if you can launch it, station keep it and cool it and if the data services are useful at the modem latencies of geosync and lunar orbits. But if datacenter projects can't be built/powered fast enough due to permitting, this is an expensive workaround.
whatisthiseven•17m ago
Might as well base the valuation on SpaceX getting a colony to Alpha Centauri and then billions living there and needing regular SpaceX shuttle services from Sol.

Then we could properly value the IPO in the quadrillions. (I know you know this is ridiculous. But investors clearly are riding high on the tulip mania).

epistasis•14m ago
In the meantime, until Musk comes up with the next big "idea" to switch to, all the current revenue levers need to be pushed to max to try to make it to that next stage, since public companies demand revenue every quarter.

A lot of their revenue is also from renting out GPUs to more productive AI companies, so depending on how long that game can keep on going (getting access to GPUs before other companies), it could last for a while too.

prymitive•10m ago
Here’s an idea: Musk launches a ton of orbital gpus but in reality it’s just an empty shell and real gpus sit in unused grok data centres. How would we even know?
arijun•10m ago
I disagree, but not for the reason you think. They need to fund R&D to justify their high valuation. A new stock issue would decrease the valuation, and they will have a difficult time borrowing the money with their poor bond valuations. So this will (maybe) slow the bleed.

Musk doesn't need to deliver to keep valuation up. We've seen him doing pretty well stringing people along indefinitely with "3 months maybe, 6 months definitely" self driving capabilities.

idontwantthis•7m ago
It’s not an opinion it’s laid out clearly in the prospectus. Spacex is not a space company. It is a 2 trillion dollar AI company with a small launch business and a smaller ISP.
arijun•4m ago
I am not disagreeing with that. I am saying that having enough revenue is necessary to keep the house of cards standing.
ZiiS•26m ago
It is possible they delayed this rise as they didn't want bad news in the run-up to going public; but the is absolutely no way this can touch their fundamental numbers.
BoppreH•34m ago
Note that this is for the "aviation plan" which already requires six-digits equipment.
vel0city•27m ago
Yeah, for regular people they're just starting to suddenly charge $1,500 fees.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/1uklz4q/starlink_...

r3trohack3r•24m ago
> He then reviewed my billing history and account details, confirmed that my service address had never actually changed, and determined that nothing had been moved. As a result, he issued a full refund.
BoorishBears•10m ago
Yeah but it still sounds like $1,500 demand fee was not a mistake, charging OP was the mistake.

People first mentioned these fees at like $100... now you can go to Costco, grab a Starlink, and they'll randomly ask for $1,500 to actually start service.

Congestion is a thing when each node needs to go to space, but it also feels like they're cashing in on years of "just move to a cabin in the woods and work off Starlink"... once you've done that they have you by the balls even worse than a typical ISP.

wat10000•3m ago
Isn't this fee specifically before they have you by the balls?
panative•29m ago
Won’t somebody please think of the luxury private aviation consumers?
Finnucane•25m ago
Rich people are screwing over the slightly less rich, get out the silver pitchforks.
scottyah•23m ago
I don't think spacex is rolling in cash. Their valuation has little bearing on cash reserves until they sell.
estearum•22m ago
A lot of people on this forum actually have investments in SpaceX, directly or indirectly, and they're interested in this stuff as a signal of the health of the company.

Not everything has to be some little gripefest.

behnamoh•23m ago
As I write this, I'm disputing a charge from Starlink because when I activated mine, they automatically started the free trial for me, but nowhere in the receipt or on their website did they say they would switch me to the most expensive plan after the free trial was over. And they made it extremely confusing to cancel my free trial. So I ended up being charged $120 for something that I had just opened out of the box. I disputed it twice through Apple Card and it still got rejected, even though I have the invoices. So I'm disputing it a third time, and I know one thing is clear: I am never going to purchase anything that Elon has made ever again. They also lied to me about the cost of keeping the Starlink. Their app said the satellite would need to stay "alive," and to do so I had to pay $5 a month. But then I recently realized that that was also a lie—you don't have to pay to keep the service or the satellite alive.
pfdietz•16m ago
As a matter of personal policy I never sign up for free trials, for just this sort of reason.
petilon•15m ago
Apple Card aka Goldman Sachs is notoriously bad at handling disputes. They were fined $89 million for mishandling disputes, yet the continue to reject disputes offhand [1]. I no longer use Apple Card other than for Apple Store purchases.

[1] https://www.consumerfinance.gov/archive/newsroom/cfpb-orders...

delichon•22m ago
At the other end they recently doubled the cost of the Starlink Mini standby plan, from $60 to $120 per year.
rsyring•14m ago
I have a Starlink v2 dish and I pay $10 per month for a residential "standby" plan.

I only get 10G per month of bandwidth but I rarely use it since I have a fiber connection that is mostly reliable.

It might be a grandfathered plan because they don't list it anywhere I can see:

  - https://starlink.com/service-plans
  - https://starlink.com/roam
Edit: turns out this is a feature/mode and not a plan:

https://starlink.com/na/support/article/37bb3b47-9525-7224-5...

And, apparently, I now have to reactivate the service to one of the published plans if I want to use more than low-speed data. Previously, I still had high-speed bandwidth for $10 a month just not a lot of it.

They apparently changed things recently. And, now that I'm thinking about it, I probably skimmed an email that said something about this a month or two ago but, since the charge was staying at $10 a month, didn't pay much attention to the details.

kamranjon•22m ago
I am traveling in Europe currently and got a Saily SIM card - 5g coverage is really good and seems to be expanding fast - a small village I visited 2 years ago that had no cell coverage at all I was getting 250mbps download, faster than than the wired internet at most of the places I was visiting. This prompted me to actually look into Starlink speeds and apparently 5g is generally faster than Starlink...

This made me wonder if Starlink is a much more niche product than I thought - I actually thought it was significantly faster than cell data - but it seems it's just for folks in super remote areas at this point?

esseph•19m ago
> but it seems it's just for folks in super remote areas at this point?

TBF that's like 70% of the US, large parts of the Southern Hemisphere in general, much of China, India, Russia, etc.

But yes, StarLink is best when it has some user density but not too much user density. It will be this way until... probably forever.

If I go camping? StarLink. Otherwise no cell/internet service.

justapassenger•17m ago
Remote areas of USA (and other third world countries when it comes to the communication infrastructure) + companies that operate in remote areas (logistic, resource extraction, etc) + military are main customer base.
croes•17m ago
Just look at the price and you see it’s for those without other alternatives
gruez•8m ago
Presumably local telecoms would be able to sell it for cheaper? "travel esim" providers like saily are basically paying roaming rates for whatever carrier the customer is physically in, it's definitely not the cheapest price available.
justapassenger•20m ago
I’m pretty sure rest of starlink customers will get similar treatment in the future. Their potential customer base is limited and it’s only ISP that literately burns their backbone network every few years and has to replace to keep it running.

On top of that, their claims it’s profitable does some heavy lifting with how to account for the cost of launching rockets.

It’s extremely cool product and very useful for many customers. But sustainability of current pricing is very questionable.

mattmaroon•19m ago
Their potential customer base is literally everybody because they are the only ISP that can cover the entire globe. Everybody’s potential customer base is technically limited because there are only so many humans, but they have the least limited potential customer base of anything that exists.
novafunc•12m ago
Yes, but the primary reason for Starlink is for areas with poor traditional ISPs.

If you had a choice between Fiber or Starlink, you’d choose Fiber.

So as traditional ISPs improve service and coverage, Starlink becomes less in demand.

grim_io•6m ago
Sounds like a great long-term investment.

Starlink would only make sense if the world was not getting more and more concentrated around densely populated areas.

StephenMelon•3m ago
The killer app is military usage, so they just need enough consumer and b2b demand to keep what they charge governments within what they can justify to taxpayers
ForOldHack•19m ago
Surprise, surprise, surprise. Well, well well. The honeymoon is over. It's just so predictable.
epistasis•16m ago
Gotta pay the massive coupons on SpaceX's bonds, whose yields are heading towards junk territory:

https://www.ft.com/content/3a023b95-66c3-41e1-b0ce-df752a499...

Having just flown some flights with Starlink internet connection, I really love the service, it's just amazing. But the rugpull here might actually break through the distortion field of Musk. It's really interesting to compare the reality distortion fields of Elon Musk and Steve Jobs. It took a looooooong time for Apple stock to get properly valued in the 2000s, after it was clear that they would take over consumer computing. Jobs' RDF worked amazingly well on aligning engineering towards consumer needs, and towards convincing consumers and (some) reviewers that they had created the right sort of products for the future. Elon Musk seems to have mastered RDF on investors plus consumers, and when you're chasing sky high valuations by always piling your prior failed "ideas" into your next big thing (i.e. next big gamble), it only takes a few bad gambles to bring down the entire house of cards.

jameskraus•16m ago
It is an reckless business practice to not have the monthly price locked down, with strong contractual protections. Sounds like Correnti didn't negotiate well and are now finding out.
e_i_pi_2•11m ago
Agreed with this, and it also doesn't seem like this is the case but I'm generally a fan of charging B2B as high as possible to lower costs for regular consumers - other companies will generally pay a lot more even if it just includes the potential of getting better support, and that profit can be used to give access to more people at a lower price.

A lot of open source software uses this model - free for everyone, but if you're a company that wants support then you have to pay for it, and that covers the development for everyone

smt88•9m ago
The aviation pricing will be passed to consumers either way, as increased fares or in-flight fees.
w10-1•8m ago
> Sounds like Correnti didn't negotiate well

Are you sure this is negotiable?

petilon•14m ago
Blue Origin's Terawave [1] can't come soon enough.

[1] https://www.blueorigin.com/terawave

sucrosesucrose•10m ago
What we need is a public service constellation, not more billonaire ones.
khurs•11m ago
There will be many price increases seeing as:

-SpaceX raised $75bn in the IPO which will only last so long for a loss making high capital requirements company.

-Then $25bn via bonds which have an annual interest rate repayment of $1.46 billion + repayment of the $25bn in 2031.

-Morgan Stanley said: "In our model, we estimate SpaceX raising an average of $72bn annually between 2027 and 2030 and then an average of $95bn annually between 2031 and 2034."[0]

So huge amounts needed continuously.

[0]https://www.ft.com/content/09a62ed4-16af-433c-adb7-c877d1975...

jerlam•2m ago
SpaceX stock has also dropped below their IPO price. It doesn't change their current financials but it may make it more difficult to raise money in the future.
w10-1•10m ago
Note that the objection is as much to the abruptness as the scale of the price increase.

Large customers sinking millions into (here aviation) assets rightly expect that their vendors respect their market lifecycles.

Starlink's behavior creates a credibility gap that could drive such customers to the 2-3 upcoming competitors with poorer service and even higher costs, but perhaps more reliability as partners.

I'd see this as an opportunity.

huslage•7m ago
The "upcoming" is doing a lot of work. There is not currently a viable alternative to Starlink with the same capability, speed, or latency. Amazon Leo will be the next to go online and it won't be fully operational until sometime in 2028. No one in the aviation industry will want to wait for that.
khurs•6m ago
> Note that the objection is as much to the abruptness as the scale of the price increase.

When companies buy a service, they normally agree a bespoke contract for 5 years or so and additional seats (planes in this case), often with an option of a further x years period too.

So sounds like there wasn't a bespoke contract as lawyers should have picked it up.

paulsutter•10m ago
Let's cry a few tears for the billionaires being repressed by trillionaires!
CamelCaseName•9m ago
This is so par for the course for Elon's companies.

He will extract as much as possible, whenever possible.

grim_io•8m ago
You don't get to be all of the USA's GDP without a buck or two more per month, you know?
khurs•4m ago
>SpaceX has also increased the price of its Starlink Aviation equipment to $200,000 per business aircraft, up from $145,000 last year.

ouch.

vel0city•2m ago
So not his service address, but a slightly different latitude/longitude would have received that.
engineer_22•19m ago
Furnishing low-latency, broadband connectivity to private aircraft. The Challenger 350 noted in the article stickers north of $10M
toomuchtodo•17m ago
They are attempting to juice revenue across all product cohorts, this is simply another datapoint. Customers are captive until there are more connectivity options.
Rebelgecko•14m ago
They also recently doubled the price of the standby plan
wongarsu•4m ago
There are plenty of super remote areas in Europe as well. Even more in the US, where population is more clustered to population centers

But the big selling points of Starlink are either as a backup connection (which the consumer plan actively enables: in months where you use less than 10GB you pay $10/month) or as a connection for ships and airplanes

justapassenger•12m ago
For any dense populated area, starlink cost explodes exponentially to support customers there, while fiber/5G is linear.

You cannot just put more satellites on top of cities, as they aren’t geostationary (which is why they’re fast), so you need to add insane amount of satellites, that would do nothing most of the time, when they’re not on top of densely populated area.

latchkey•17m ago
it has already gone up in price two times since i got mine. i still happily pay for the convenience and safety of having internet on my campervan in the middle of a national forest. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
mauvehaus•6m ago
What harm are you worried about coming to in the middle of a national forest that having the internet could possibly save you from? You're in a van, for heaven's sakes. You can roll up the windows, lock the doors, and/or drive off from most dangers save a breakdown or a wildfire, and the internet won't save you from a wildfire.

I've tent camped a lot on forest service land (and BLM land) both out west and in the east. Generally having arrived there by human power. Not once have I been confronted with a situation where the internet would've added to my safety in any way whatsoever.

grim_io•5m ago
At some point, everyone becomes price-sensitive.

Linus Torvalds Reaffirms That Linux Is Not "Anti-AI"

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Is-Not-Anti-AI
3•moelf•1m ago•1 comments

Modelplane

https://modelplane.ai
3•hasheddan•7m ago•0 comments

Flock to Pay for Vandalized Flock Cameras

https://ipvm.com/reports/flock-pay-vandalized-cameras
2•jhonovich•7m ago•0 comments

People in Many Countries Now View China More Positively Than the U.S.

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/07/15/people-in-many-countries-now-view-china-more-positi...
1•dabinat•8m ago•0 comments

AVAL: A new open-source format for interactive video on the web

https://pixelpoint.io/aval/
1•nopinsight•10m ago•0 comments

75% of PlayStation 3 games are now playable on PC

https://videocardz.com/newz/rpcs3-says-75-of-playstation-3-games-are-now-playable-on-pc
1•LordDefender•10m ago•0 comments

Does Anthropic Buy Legitimacy Through Hiring?

https://artificialrhetoric.substack.com/p/every-anthropic-hire-is-a-legitimacy
1•Ben_Pota•11m ago•0 comments

Language Server Protocol Specification – 3.18

https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specifications/lsp/3.18/specification/
1•qbane•11m ago•0 comments

Capture Clauses as Effects (Rust)

https://blog.yoshuawuyts.com/capture-clauses-as-effects/
1•dabinat•12m ago•0 comments

Useful Is Not Sufficient

https://tante.cc/2026/07/15/useful-is-not-sufficient/
3•rapnie•13m ago•0 comments

Optimizing a Ring Buffer for Throughput (2021)

https://rigtorp.se/ringbuffer/
2•mattrighetti•15m ago•0 comments

Save Standard Time

https://savestandardtime.com/
2•throw0101d•15m ago•0 comments

Maybe we could tone down the JavaScript (2016)

https://eev.ee/blog/2016/03/06/maybe-we-could-tone-down-the-javascript/
1•downbad_•16m ago•0 comments

Do YC companies get preference on the homepage?

1•e_i_pi_2•16m ago•0 comments

American AI is expensive. Some startups are turning to cheap Chinese models

https://www.npr.org/2026/07/15/nx-s1-5886476/startups-cheap-chinese-ai-models
2•makerdiety•16m ago•0 comments

US Debt Clock Live

https://www.us-debt-clock.com/
2•ourmandave•17m ago•0 comments

When agents talk: tool calls, handoffs, and two wallets

https://www.kulikowski.me/blog/agents-talking-to-each-other
1•kinlan•17m ago•0 comments

Funny item co-occurrences in 3.2M Instacart orders

https://rogerdickey.com/funny-item-co-occurrences-in-3-million-instacart-orders/
1•rogerdickey•20m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Pullrun – Run OCI Images as Containers or Firecracker MicroVMs

https://github.com/pullrun/pullrun
2•liquid64•21m ago•0 comments

Eight Writers on Facing the Blank Page

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDH7yAWsyG0
1•brudgers•21m ago•0 comments

Show HN: 3,225 trials of LLMs guessing author age – confident and wrong

https://github.com/BraveAnn011/llm-author-misattribution
1•BrianneLee011•24m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Stillwind – PCB part selection as constraint solving

https://stillwind.ai
5•hannesfur•24m ago•2 comments

Show HN: Summa, a tool that annotates over whatever you're reading

https://summa.josephruocco.net
2•jruocco•24m ago•1 comments

Vacuum of the Imagination: Why Space Rockets Could Have Flown Centuries Earlier

https://angadh.com/rockets-1
1•angadh•25m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Painterly – Turn pictures into digital paintings without generative AI

https://github.com/jbunke/painterly
2•flinkerflitzer•25m ago•0 comments

The Download: a useful quantum machine and a record-breaking subsea tunnel

https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/07/15/1140498/the-download-useful-quantum-computer-subsea-t...
1•joozio•26m ago•0 comments

Reverse Engineering Crazy Taxi, Part 3

https://wretched.computer/post/crazytaxi3
2•marklit•28m ago•0 comments

I Switched from Hugo to Astro

https://hmmr.online/posts/why-astro-not-hugo/
1•ZanderHammer•29m ago•0 comments

Rustwright: Playwright rewritten in Rust that uses 70% less memory

https://github.com/Skyvern-AI/rustwright
1•suchintan•30m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Zappio – a native iOS player for M3U/Xtream playlists

https://zappio.maritsol.at
1•zappio_iptv•31m ago•0 comments