Satellite lacks bandwidth capacity<\/p>\n
Bandwidth capacity Bandwidth capacity \u2013 or lack thereof \u2013 is still the biggest obstacle in reaching widespread satellite coverage. SpaceX\u2019s Starlink for instance has excess network capacity in only about half the U.S.<\/a>, elsewhere customers are often stuck on a waitlist to receive service. Even if the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allocates more spectrum<\/a> for satellite providers, it won\u2019t be enough to solve the capacity bottleneck, Arun Menon, lead analyst at MTN Consulting, told Fierce.<\/p>\n We don\u2019t know yet how many satellites will be used to connect BEAD locations. But the more satellites there are in the sky, the more \u201ccomplex coordination<\/a>\u201d is required for them to avoid interference with each other and ground-based systems, Menon added.<\/p>\n Satellite has higher latency and packet loss<\/p>\n Satellite service suffers from higher latency and packet loss compared to a standard fiber connection. Users can do basic tasks like web browsing, email and even some HD video streaming, but they\u2019ll likely run into data caps if they\u2019re gaming, video-conferencing or using some other high-bandwidth application, Menon previously told Fierce.<\/p>\n In other words, he thinks satellite broadband needs \u201csubstantial technological advances\u201d to become a true fiber alternative.<\/p>\n Satellite costs more than fiber and 5G<\/p>\n Proponents of satellite broadband frequently bring up how it\u2019s much cheaper for rural internet deployments than fiber, as the cost to lay fiber<\/a> cables typically goes up in areas with low population density. It\u2019s true a satellite connection doesn\u2019t require the same extensive construction \u2013 merely a modem and a dish at each location \u2013 but it won\u2019t come cheap for the consumer.<\/p>\n Starlink gear has an upfront cost of $349, on top of the data plan which starts at $120\/month. The company earlier this year did launch a \u201cResidential Lite\u201d offering<\/a> that costs $80 per month, but it\u2019s still quite a hefty price for what\u2019s supposed to be an affordable broadband option.<\/p>\n The price of fiber broadband meanwhile varies between $50 to $200\/month<\/a>, and fiber ISPs typically provide the customer premises equipment (CPE) at no extra cost. Additionally, data, particularly from satellite-based non-terrestrial networks (NTN), can potentially be more expensive than that on terrestrial 5G. Mobile Experts principal Joe Madden estimated data from providers like AST Mobile to cost between $5 to $9 per GB<\/a>, compared to roughly $0.30 per gig for a typical 5G plan.<\/p>\n How big is the satellite market?<\/p>\n Technical kinks and cost barriers aside, analysts believe the satellite market is poised to see explosive growth in the coming years. Goldman Sachs projects the market for satellite services could reach a whopping $108 billion by 2035<\/a>.<\/p>\n What’s Fierce Network’s take on satellite broadband?<\/p>\n Today, satellite broadband can offer an alternative for rural areas where cable and fiber access networks don’t exist. In fact, analysts from Mobile Experts and Ookla have told us that satellite is up to snuff when it comes to video conferencing, download performance and even downtime. However, the cost of satellite outweighs benefits when it comes to closing the digital divide, considering the initial outlay of $349 and then $120 per month, satellite broadband is out of reach for many Americans.<\/p>\n![\"Average](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Broadband_Cost_Comparison_US_2024-2025.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n