Silicon Valley bros Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos regularly move companies, workers (and major media outlets) around like pawns on a chess board. It’s all just a big ego game for them. But when it comes to closing the digital divide in America, their antics could negatively affect a lot of people in rural areas who just want to get a decent connection to the internet.
You’d think a country as big, affluent and technically savvy as the U.S. could accomplish the task of closing the digital divide.
But alas, now that Musk’s Starlink and Bezo’s Amazon Leo have won big hunks of the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) eligible locations, they’re whining and complaining about the rules.
Starlink made a big fuss about being included in BEAD. And even though President Trump and Elon Musk unfriended last summer, the Trump Administration still went out of its way to make major changes to BEAD so that a lot more eligible locations were awarded to satellite.
Starlink nabbed about 472,600 BEAD locations, while Amazon Leo got about 415,000. These two operators are the top recipients of eligible locations in the program.
This week, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) said it has approved 50 out of 56 of the BEAD final proposals from states and territories. In a statement, NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth said the milestone reflects “better results for consumers” after the Trump administration required states to re-do their proposals.
But I’m skeptical. Will consumers really come out ahead with these satellite companies?
At the end of January, Starlink was already complaining that BEAD has too many rules, and it was asking states to exempt it from a lot of them.
Fortunately, it does appear that NTIA is not open to Starlink fudging the rules. In early February, NTIA updated its FAQs page, stating that BEAD award winners can’t negotiate an agreement inconsistent with program rules.
But Starlink parent company SpaceX plays hard-ball, so it’s unknown how the company might respond now that it’s been told it can’t have exemptions. It could potentially drop out of BEAD altogether.
That would hardly benefit consumers in remote rural areas. If Starlink defaults, consumers are likely screwed in the same way they were after all the defaults from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF).
"Starlink is a black box. I don’t think the BEAD money is very important to them in the big scheme of things, so there is always the possibility of them walking away. Who the heck knows," telecom industry consultant Doug Dawson told Fierce.
Interesting timing for Amazon Leo's waiver request
As for Amazon Leo, it recently filed a request with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for a 2-year extension on its promise to deploy a constellation of 3,232 satellites. It had previously committed to deploy half that constellation by July 2026, but it’s woefully behind schedule and can’t possibly meet the deadline. It now promises to have the full constellation by July 2028.
I’ve got to wonder if Amazon knew good and well in 2025, while it was submitting BEAD applications, that there was no way it was going to meet its satellite launch deadline.
Under NTIA’s revised BEAD rules issued June 6, 2024, LEO providers have up to four years within winning a BEAD grant to deliver the minimum required 100/20 Mbps service to customers.
I asked Dawson if Amazon will be able to meet this BEAD requirement. He said, “I think if Amazon Leo actually pulls off a working constellation that BEAD will be fine. The big question is if they can really create the working network. Nobody outside the company has any clues about that.”
In fact, both Amazon and Starlink are secretive about their satellite businesses, and they aren’t very open to reporters’ questions.
“Better to ask forgiveness, rather than permission," seems to be their operating mantra.
And now that they’ve been given so much clout in the BEAD program, how will it be possible to rein them in?
Meanwhile, all the companies who deploy fiber broadband keep playing by the rules. And I wonder if we should have stuck with the preference for fiber in the first place.
Linda Hardesty is Executive Editor and Chief Analyst, Communications Technologies, for Fierce Network Research, covering wireless and wireline networks, broadband and communications service providers. She oversaw broadband coverage as former Editor in Chief of Fierce Telecom and Executive Editor for the award-winning Fierce Network. She's been a trade journalist since the mid-1990s covering the business and technology of telecommunications networks. Her editorial content for Fierce Network won a 2024 Eddie and Ozzie Award in the Planned or On-location Coverage category for Fierce Network's 2024 reporting from Mobile World Congress. Prior to Fierce, she wrote for SDxCentral, Communications Technology/CableFax, and Cable World.
Opinion pieces from industry experts, analysts or our editorial staff do not necessarily represent the opinions of Fierce Network.