Yah no, you're 100% wrong. Severely wrong.
Lol, not the best lead out to quote comments from a community of enthusiasts stoked on Starlink in an attempt to show how "wrong" my point is that there's always going to be a community of enthusiasts stoked on Starlink....
But anyway, let's break the rest of this down with more fact and reason and less hopes and dreams:
Starlink is going to have a much wider network than Dish Network and DirectTV.
You certainly missed the point about the US analysis: Dish and DirectTV do not broadcast beyond the US (technically they go to Latin America too, but I digress). The point is that in the US they have ~20 million subscribers and so will affect 3x (or more) people, or 20% of the country and, while I'm sure there's some die-hard corner of the internet with a DTV vs Dish rivalry full of snapping fingers and choreographed moves, there's not some massive group of enthusiasts sacrificing small animals in the name of those services. Starlink at peak can
hope to have half the subscribers, ostensibly with half the sacrifices.
It's going to be global relatively quickly.
Based on what evidence? And how do you define "relatively quickly"? As it turns out, most evidence indicates that ROW rollout will be slow and limited, based on the fact that
most countries in the world have serious roadblocks to approving Starlink including communism (China = hard no), economics (the ability for users to actually pay for service = hard no on the third world), and competing services (India is on the fence, for instance, but some billionaire just dumped a ton of money into OneWeb).
Evidence points to the US (and potentially Our Hat, depending on how Telesat goes) being the primary Starlink customer base for many years to come.
It's going to be massively disruptive to the status quo.
Please explain what this means. As it stands, there are going to be many millions of subscribers in the US that are going to switch from their crappy cable or satellite service and few if any new-to-the-internet subscribers in the US, because few if any people are out there waiting for an internet solution. They're already paying for crappy cable or satellite service and are just waiting for a
better solution.
It will be the same situation globally, with the added complexity of economics (its easy for us in the first world on our high horse to hand wave a $1000 terminal and $100/month for service) and all the fun and excitement of global politics. Starlink broadcasting in China, for instance, will barely be one step removed from a literal act of war. That is not hyperbole.
And then, the "status quo" (= the incumbents) are going to up their games and push back on Starlink expansion. Again, we're in the calm before the storm--the auction is only a few months away, and expect the first half of 21 to bring a number of announcements from the big legacy providers. Seriously, spend some time contemplating why the big incumbents--all of them in the business of making a buck--have basically responded to Starlink with collective silence. Spend some time contemplating why they would willingly and without a fight give up customers to Starlink, an imperative shift to realize the disruption you and others intimate.
It will enable millions to come to the 21st century with true modern connectivity
That's the rub--It will enable those
already in the 21st century to enjoy
true modern connectivity.
...will compel many to change their lifestyles by making rural life more accessible when it never was before.
The is the most salient point you've made. Thanks to the pandemic, distributed [white collar] workforces are going to become more of a thing, with generally well-to-do city/burbs folks moving to less densely populated areas. Those folks of course are used to their "don't have to think about it" internet, and they'll want that wherever they go. While this is more just <ahem> "good" timing with the advent of Starlink, Starlink will nevertheless be a significant element of this migration phenomenon.
The rub there, of course, is that the more people move into an area the higher the population density becomes and the easier it is for the terrestrial incumbents to move into town--with better service than starlink. And since most people
won't actually be stoked on starlink, human nature will lead many of them to go with whatever service is cheaper.
