Starlink in the Falkland Islands – A national emergency situation?
23 comments
·February 8, 2025aetherspawn
petesergeant
Yeah, the only real solution here feels like paying off the monopoly, a cost which in the end is likely going to need a handout from the UK. It’s tough to identify anyone who’s done anything explicitly wrong in this story, or a solution that doesn’t end up shafting someone. Perhaps a negotiated tax on non-monopoly users there that goes to the monopoly to help defray their investment is the only sensible solution.
ggm
Ask one of the large nation states nearby to supply service.
bpodgursky
> The high level of Starlink usage sparked a successful petition backed by 70% of the island’s population. This petition demanded both a reduction of the £5,400 FIG VSAT licence fee and formal approval for Starlink’s operation in the Falkland Islands.
Kind of incredible that anglo trend towards governmental gridlock extends to an island of 3,600 people. A blanket majority of the population endorsed the petition... why was it necessary that "proposal was subsequently forwarded to the Falkland Islands Government (FIG) for implementation... However, the effective date for this approval has now been delayed until April."?
Just call the law passed and let Starlink know it's legal now. Why do the islanders put up with this bureaucratic molasses. What am I missing.
benatkin
> Regardless of differing opinions
Those opinions seem to be relevant here.
jeffgreco
Strong FAFO vibes.
decimalenough
By who? Are you blaming locals who want to use Starlink, or the incumbent monopoly that's likely twisting arms behind the scenes to ensure it retains the stranglehold on communications to the islands?
roenxi
> ...twisting arms behind the scenes...
Falkland Islands, pop 3,600 [0] - can they sustain a "behind the scenes"?
The Chinese National People's Congress is around 3,000 members. A bit of net emigration and the Falklands would be smaller than a legislative body.
pjc50
It's much easier to sustain corruption in a small community. The current setup will be personally beneficial to someone.
benatkin
This monopoly seems to be preventing unexpected changes.
roenxi
> Because Sure International holds an exclusive monopoly telecommunications licence, Starlink’s use in the islands is currently illegal.
The national emergency seems to be that they want to do something that is explicitly illegal. The article seems to be missing important context on why they expect to be able to do what they are doing.
sneak
Is it insensitive to say “move somewhere less corrupt”? It doesn’t seem to be anything to do with Starlink as it seems they can’t legally offer service there.
hirokio123
Mobile technology is promoted for use under the law of the universe. When human laws contradict the law of the universe, human laws are in violation of universal law.
paulkrush
If I moved to the middle of nowhere because of Starlink and them... "The sudden shutdown of Starlink services clearly qualifies as a National Emergency due to the widespread and unforeseen consequences such an action would have."
usef-
I didn't read the article deeply, but my impression is that it's mostly people that already live there - one firm has an exclusive license to provide internet. I think it's ok to complain about such a situation as internet is not the exclusive reason someone might choose a place to live.
I often hear people complain about milder internet monopolies -for instance, one cable provider in their town. But this sounds higher stakes because that internet provider has a single satellite for the island, so one malfunction could cut (most? All?) access completely.
edoceo
Is a third part of your comment missing or ...? I think this puts a focus on how much Internet connectivity is nearly necessary
nosioptar
I worked for a satellite provider's customer service years ago.
I'd get tons of calls from people upset that the service was only available in the US. About 40% were people trying to use it outside the US.
(The other 60% were all from the same American state.)
It's amazing what shit people expect sometimes.
Dylan16807
Were a lot of those 40% near the US and in range? If so I don't see why it's amazing they want to purchase services from your company.
Well an island like this is basically a big strata where dividing the cost of infrastructure between everyone makes things livable. Don’t be surprised there’s a monopoly telco, because it probably doesn’t make economic sense any other way.
And keep in mind they probably insisted on a monopoly contract because they probably spent an absolute bomb setting it up, only to get max 1500 or so subscribers.
Say: 1500 subscribers @ $100/pm and you’d be running a telco on only $1.8M per year. That’s about enough money to pay for compliance, infra upkeep, and hire maybe 2-3 staff who wear many hats.