[pixard]

$0.25 per GB... uh no thanks. I've generally been happy with Starlink but this throws somewhat of a wrench into things. I wonder if it will be US only or worldwide.

[kjksf]

This is only for priority access i.e. during hours of peak usage, after you cross 1 TB a month, you can choose to pay to get priority (i.e. higher speeds) over people who didn't pay.

If you're ok with lower speeds during peak usage, you don't pay.

If there's no congestion, you don't pay.

[philjohn]

Pray they do not alter the deal further.

[grecy]

If they do, you can easily cancel your service (no lock-in contract) and go with a competitor that offers a better deal.

[philjohn]

Bit of a large up-front fee to swallow though for the equipment

[QuarterReptile]

The vast majority of people probably pay much more per GB than that. My family's traffic averages maybe 200GB per month.

[bombcar]

And even more if you look at your cellphone - compare data used last month with your bill and divide it out.

[QuarterReptile]

I don't consider them equivalent at all, though embarrassingly I don't know enough about wireless bandwidth and RF comms provisioning generally to be able to state conclusively that they're not.

[bombcar]

Just that most people pay $100/mo for phone service and use 10-20gb or so (no idea) which is $10-5 a gig.

[nasmorn]

I pay 20 for 25GB in Austria. Why is it so expensive in the US? You have not even close to twice our GDP/capita. Nationwide cartel?

[bombcar]

I’m talking (amount actually used)/(amount actually paid).

Many people have unlimited or some high limit but don’t use it all.

(It’s not entirely fair as the device can do things like text and phone calls, but if I consider my phone as a phone only I was paying $100 for about 5-10 minutes of talk time a month (used) so in a way I was spending $10 a minute. Of course the main thing people want is data. We’re probably a few years from phones with data only and no phone number at all