Register and share your invite link to earn from video plays and referrals.

Rob Maurer
@robmaurer
Managing partner @fpg. Hosted Tesla Daily from 2017-2024.
Joined August 2017
163 Following    373.9K Followers
The metric I keep coming back to for SpaceX is $/Mbps to orbit Starlink exists because Falcon 9 dropped bandwidth deployment costs ~10x to ~$6.55/Mbps. That’s about to drop again to just $0.30/Mbps because of Starship. A business that is doubling users annually with a 63% adjusted EBITDA margin is about to cut their biggest cost by 95%… It really seems like people don't understand the implications of this. The math assumes a reusable Falcon 9 launch is 17 tonnes at $1,000/kg and 2,600 Gbps per launch. Starship is targeting 100 tonnes at under $185/kg and 61,000 Gbps per launch. That's $17M for 2,600 Gbps ($6.55/Mbps) verse $18.5M for 61,000 Gbps ($0.30/Mbps). Starship's additional volume allows for larger satellites, enabling simultaneous gains on multiple cost curves. The math suggests V3 satellites are ~600 Mbps/kg vs ~150 Mbps/kg from V2 mini. Combining the 4x improvement on satellite bandwidth density with a 5x improvement in launch gets you the 20x improvement to 30 cents per Mbps to orbit. These are fairly conservative assumptions because launch probably comes in even lower as Starship ramps, and satellite improvements probably keep coming. At $0.10 / Mbps, $1 billion spend on launch represents 10,000 Tbps or about 15x the bandwidth of Starlink's constellation today. $1B is 90 days of operating income for Starlink... at it's current scale... Yeah, I really don't think people are getting this. Starlink is the internet now.
Show more
0
202
4.1K
420
Forward to community