It feels like a consequence of market/regulatory failure in the US rather than a real demand for the technology. Internet access is far cheaper and more widely available in most other developed countries.

The military demand is real enough, though.

From personal experience, there's still a considerable chunk of rural America that isn't wired. I'm currently looking at an area to buy a house, and the only option around is Starlink.

Zero competition. No fiber. No cable. 5G coverage isn't sufficient for my daily needs, but okay for a failover.

I've been following the Russia/Ukraine war and satellite internet has been pretty important there. For first world countries not currently being bombed to death, you're probably right. But for everywhere else it is better than waiting for new ISPs to start up and get fiber rolled out. It is the global market outside the US that they are probably going for.

Do you really think these companies are spending billions of dollars on such systems without doing any research as to whether a market for it exists?

"Starlink is SpaceX's primary revenue driver, generating $11.39 billion in 2025 and accounting for roughly 61% of the company's total sales. The satellite connectivity unit is the only highly profitable division of the company, generating an operating income of $4.42 billion"

Wired cable is such a monopoly that even Google fiber couldnt compete.

Its the only innovation in the space (literally and metaphorically.)

There are plenty of roaming applications: camping, boating, flying and war zones, which have both private and enterprise customer possibilities.

Then there are remote places that either have no other option or would like a backup solution.