Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Seems like SpaceX is using big pharma level pricing games to get DoD to bail out Starlink.

CNN: Exclusive: Musk's SpaceX says it can no longer pay for critical satellite services in Ukraine, asks Pentagon to pick up the tab.
Seems very reasonable to me and nothing at all like big phama. SpaceX is a private company. Why should they foot the bill for this indefinitely? It's certainly not a bailout. Did you think Starlink satellites got built and launched for free and then stayed in orbit forever? Cutting back on philanthropy is not at all the same thing as massive price gouging.

Elon stepped up to the plate and gave the Ukrainians a bunch of free internet access soon after the war started. But as the war is now dragging on for many months, Elon is asking someone else to help defray the ongoing expense while SpaceX still covers their initial massive donation.

About a year ago Elon warned that SpaceX may go bankrupt due to delays in Starship orbital launches delaying deployment of version 2 of the Starlink satellites. Why do you think it's a good idea for SpaceX to continue to give away $10 million per month as they struggle to make a profit?
 
Seems very reasonable to me and nothing at all like big phama. SpaceX is a private company. Why should they foot the bill for this indefinitely? It's certainly not a bailout. Did you think Starlink satellites got built and launched for free and then stayed in orbit forever? Cutting back on philanthropy is not at all the same thing as massive price gouging.

Elon stepped up to the plate and gave the Ukrainians a bunch of free internet access soon after the war started. But as the war is now dragging on for many months, Elon is asking someone else to help defray the ongoing expense while SpaceX still covers their initial massive donation.

About a year ago Elon warned that SpaceX may go bankrupt due to delays in Starship orbital launches delaying deployment of version 2 of the Starlink satellites. Why do you think it's a good idea for SpaceX to continue to give away $10 million per month as they struggle to make a profit?
SpaceX is using a $4,500 monthly rate for service for nodes that had a $500 plan. And the normal rate for basic consumer service from SpaceX in Ukraine is $60.

This is a telecommunication service, so rates aren't based on marginal costs of service, but on what the markets will bear.

Musk is using the difference between $500 and $4,500 to quantify the amount of "free" service SpaceX has been contributing.

So, more of less exactly like pharma in terms of setting prices at what a desperate buyer will bear.
 
Guess Elon got tired of giving free internet to people who told him to **** off. Also people have been saying that US Gov have been paying for starlink, well now he gave US Gov the chance to actually do that:
Well, if people didn't think that Elon was an arse before, they sure do now. Talk about running an effective clinic on "How to double-down and ruin whatever scrap of reputation and good will you have left in 3 easy steps.

1. Insult citizens of a country being illegally invaded while committing numerous war crimes by suggesting they give their land back to the invaders - because a long time ago different people lived there - demonstrating your own ignorance of the situation.
2. Double down on said insult by running Twitter polls to try to garner support for said actions and then suggesting that a vote be held (never mind that nearly all the people in the most heavily conflicted areas have already been kidnapped, killed, tortured or worse rendering the possibility of holding a fair vote in the near term impossible - again demonstrating further ignorance).
3. When people tell you you're ideas are somewhat ... lacking ... threaten to take your ball and go home because you got your feelings hurt.
 
SpaceX is using a $4,500 monthly rate for service for nodes that had a $500 plan. And the normal rate for basic consumer service from SpaceX in Ukraine is $60.
To be fair, SpaceX does have plans that can run $5,000 / month - have a look at their Maritime plans.

How this differs from the service that they are currently getting in the Ukraine, I don't know, but it was mentioned that they are using different terminals than the ones that are used for regular residential and business service.
 
SpaceX is using a $4,500 monthly rate for service for nodes that had a $500 plan. And the normal rate for basic consumer service from SpaceX in Ukraine is $60.

This is a telecommunication service, so rates aren't based on marginal costs of service, but on what the markets will bear.

Musk is using the difference between $500 and $4,500 to quantify the amount of "free" service SpaceX has been contributing.

So, more of less exactly like pharma in terms of setting prices at what a desperate buyer will bear.
So you are saying the US Pentagon is a "desperate buyer" having to pay $10 million per month for internet service for an entire country in wartime?

And again, you seem to be assuming that the cost of the satellites is free. You are also assuming that Starlink has already become profitable. The marginal cost to SpaceX is not the rate and numbers that would have been paid in peace-time Ukraine but the rate and numbers that would have been paid had the satellites been deployed as originally planned which would have been to the most lucrative market at this early stage of development. But until they become profitable, the cost to deploy the network is greater than the revenue they get from the dishes. There is also the bad-will that was incurred when customers who ordered Starlink had their orders further delayed.

Elon acted fast and provided internet service to Ukraine in war time. SpaceX delayed coverage of other areas and delayed other technical development to war-harden their deployment in Ukraine. For free!

And now that Elon has finally asked the US government to pay a tiny tiny tiny fraction of a percent of their Ukraine budget to cover the ongoing expenses, you're trying to paint Musk as an evil greedy capitalist, trying to make a buck by gouging the Ukrainians he has been helping for free.

He's not asking for any money from Ukraine. He's not asking for any of the money he already spent back. He's just asking the US government to help defray ongoing expenses so this vital aid to Ukraine becomes revenue neutral for SpaceX.

What is the minimum monthly charitable contribution Elon needs to make for you to not consider him price gouging people he is not asking any money from? Why is anything other than "completely free" or "at a great discount" price gouging? The Pentagon is spending $220 million per month on satellites. How can Elon asking for a tiny fraction of that amount to provide satellite internet coverage to a warn torn country be considered price gouging?
 
No doubt Elon is creating ill will. The whole tangent on Ukraine and the polls was terrible ugly. What right do any of us, in the USA, have to dictate to Ukraine what is and isn't worth fighting for? Supply starlink or not but don't tell try to condition that on the rights of others...scary. Because what EM obviously does not get...is that Ukraine will free itself of russia, it might take 5 years, it might take 10 but Crimea is Ukraine. All the Oblast voted to stay in Ukraine in the single and only free election in 1991.

That said I find it interesting that basically the internet service for a country is 120 million a year more or less.

Slava Ukraine
 
At the same time, you have multiple sources stating that they operate Starlink terminals and pay for the monthly cost, or even that they purchased the terminals themselves.
For example, this thread:
Elon also tweeted few hours ago that he's "obeying" the Ukraine ambassadors that said "f**k y**".
We know he's kinda petty about these things (remember California?).
The users are paying for the cheapest civilian price of the service, while SpaceX is providing military grade support for them (i.e. priority on bandwidth and support, fighting off Russian jamming and cyber attacks), the price and cost of the two services are hugely different, especially since Starlink is not supposed to be a military service in the first place. Also when Elon Musk mentioned not wanting to give away more terminals for free, that's referring to the request from an Ukrainian general who's asking for 8,000 more terminals, this is in the CNN article.
 
So you are saying the US Pentagon is a "desperate buyer" having to pay $10 million per month for internet service for an entire country in wartime?

And again, you seem to be assuming that the cost of the satellites is free. You are also assuming that Starlink has already become profitable. The marginal cost to SpaceX is not the rate and numbers that would have been paid in peace-time Ukraine but the rate and numbers that would have been paid had the satellites been deployed as originally planned which would have been to the most lucrative market at this early stage of development. But until they become profitable, the cost to deploy the network is greater than the revenue they get from the dishes. There is also the bad-will that was incurred when customers who ordered Starlink had their orders further delayed.

Elon acted fast and provided internet service to Ukraine in war time. SpaceX delayed coverage of other areas and delayed other technical development to war-harden their deployment in Ukraine. For free!

And now that Elon has finally asked the US government to pay a tiny tiny tiny fraction of a percent of their Ukraine budget to cover the ongoing expenses, you're trying to paint Musk as an evil greedy capitalist, trying to make a buck by gouging the Ukrainians he has been helping for free.

He's not asking for any money from Ukraine. He's not asking for any of the money he already spent back. He's just asking the US government to help defray ongoing expenses so this vital aid to Ukraine becomes revenue neutral for SpaceX.

What is the minimum monthly charitable contribution Elon needs to make for you to not consider him price gouging people he is not asking any money from? Why is anything other than "completely free" or "at a great discount" price gouging? The Pentagon is spending $220 million per month on satellites. How can Elon asking for a tiny fraction of that amount to provide satellite internet coverage to a warn torn country be considered price gouging?
When he says/does something stupid and gets called out his response has been to want take his toys and leave. It's terrible behavior from a corporate investor point of view and it is now historical as in he has created behavior that can be predicted and manipulated and not to the benefit of the company but to EM. Tesla created an EV company that fulfilled huge unmet demand for EVs and quickly took all the air in the room. He forgets that California provided not just the room but the house. Now with Starlink and Ukraine he seems to have forgotten this again and...well do you think Ukrainians as they develop are going to look to Tesla for vehicles or VWs? Will they ditch starlink as soon as they can?
 
SpaceX is using a $4,500 monthly rate for service for nodes that had a $500 plan. And the normal rate for basic consumer service from SpaceX in Ukraine is $60.

This is a telecommunication service, so rates aren't based on marginal costs of service, but on what the markets will bear.

Musk is using the difference between $500 and $4,500 to quantify the amount of "free" service SpaceX has been contributing.

So, more of less exactly like pharma in terms of setting prices at what a desperate buyer will bear.

Imagine the $500 plan is one trash can residental service.
The $4,500 plan is a commercial dumpster a day service.
Perhaps they are getting a dumpster's worth of service for the price of a can.

In Starlink terms, this is data and volume. Both limited quantities that SpaceX is paying for backbone interconnect on, along with opportunity cost of not selling that capacity to others. If they are turning down $4,500 subscriptions due to lack of capacity because if the donated bandwidth, that is a real loss.
 
Guess Elon got tired of giving free internet to people who told him to **** off. Also people have been saying that US Gov have been paying for starlink, well now he gave US Gov the chance to actually do that:
Golden rule....... I've paid so I want my influence (ability to express my opinion about how you should compromise on your people's lives and your territory). The more money someone gets in general, the more they value their judgement over yours. If they give you some of their money, they expect something in return.

Combine this with the "non-violent" post and you can see the huge miss-match that can occur.
 
There is a disconnect between the info you relay and the latest mapset from one of them. (I agree with your assessment of objectives mind you.)

Sometimes they are waiting on geo locations or just waiting on some things but geo locations from some sources seem almost moot now for reasons I won't go into here. I don't know what russia has pushed up into Svatove but I think it is clear and easy enough to speculate on the particular overall strategy, certain people have been doing so on Twitter and telegram channels for weeks. I do know that russia tried to establish artillery positions that would cover a wide swath of northern luhansk with minimal re positioning (I imagine to centralize ammo- the supply lines may be cut here shortly). Ukr security has been superb and these guys are superb too (defmon nlwartracker and about 3 others). If they say it is X or Y than it absolutely is and likely has been for a day or more, maybe quite a bit more. They are tracking reports and shelling positions and telegram and buying sat images of the hottest areas. If people are flush with a bit of cash than a small donation to them helps them buy imagery.

Svatove is so hard to defend i don't know if russia really tries or if they just leave a large force of mobiks there to give more time to develop a better line outside Staroblisk. In the days of WWII Russia would have had that garrison fight to death- which has proved to be pointless as proven in every war since then. Geography is basically a series of broad bluffs as you approach from the west, narrowing to narrow bluffs as you approach the town itself. So the point of attack can be broad and the defense gets concentrated as you move backwards into the defense. The bluffs overlook the town and provide superior observation. Really a terrible terrible place to defend. Trains and roads in and out. Good point to control but lousy to defend.

Maybe more later today
 
Imagine the $500 plan is one trash can residental service.
The $4,500 plan is a commercial dumpster a day service.
Perhaps they are getting a dumpster's worth of service for the price of a can.

In Starlink terms, this is data and volume. Both limited quantities that SpaceX is paying for backbone interconnect on, along with opportunity cost of not selling that capacity to others. If they are turning down $4,500 subscriptions due to lack of capacity because if the donated bandwidth, that is a real loss.
To follow up on this, a recent tweet from elon:
SpaceX is not asking to recoup past expenses, but also cannot fund the existing system indefinitely *and* send several thousand more terminals that have data usage up to 100X greater than typical households. This is unreasonable.


 
Guess Elon got tired of giving free internet to people who told him to **** off. Also people have been saying that US Gov have been paying for starlink, well now he gave US Gov the chance to actually do that:

I know SpaceX did not expect the war to drag on, and there does come a point where they need to get someone else to foot the bill. Russian hackers have been attacking the system and SpaceX and they have probably expended a fair bit of manpower stopping them.

While Elon is the richest person in the world on paper, like most wealthy people only a small amount of that is liquid.

However, just looking at this the way the rest of world is going to see this, someone worth $200 billion is saying he can't afford an expense of around ~$10 million a month right after he made some really asinine posts on Twitter that looked pro-Russia and pro_mainland China.

In the eyes of the public he's really beginning to look like a Bond villain.

From the perspective of Tesla, I think it's time the board got rid of him and replaced him with someone less controversial. The top tech billionaires only a few years ago didn't generate controversy. Bill Gates was a shark in the business world, he cut a number of competitors off at the knees, but his personal life was very non-controversial. Steve Jobs was even less controversial.

Jeff Bezos has come off as kind of a jerk at times and now Elon is staying on the tracks about as well as you could expect a train on the Kerch Bridge right now.

He's bad for Tesla's image and I shudder to think what he's going to do to Twitter. I suspect it's going to end up looking like 8Chan after a year or two.

No doubt Elon is creating ill will. The whole tangent on Ukraine and the polls was terrible ugly. What right do any of us, in the USA, have to dictate to Ukraine what is and isn't worth fighting for? Supply starlink or not but don't tell try to condition that on the rights of others...scary. Because what EM obviously does not get...is that Ukraine will free itself of russia, it might take 5 years, it might take 10 but Crimea is Ukraine. All the Oblast voted to stay in Ukraine in the single and only free election in 1991.

That said I find it interesting that basically the internet service for a country is 120 million a year more or less.

Slava Ukraine

I expect the war to be over within a year, it could be six months. One thing I'm sure the Ukrainians remember from the Soviet era (but the Russians may have forgotten) is how to fight in winter. Even in the first two years of the war when the Germans were definitely the stronger army the Soviets ruled the winters.

Russia is running out of basics, newly mobilized troops are being given AKs that are more rust than gun and War Translated picked up something from a Russian soldier in an artillery unit that was issued a 152mm gun made in 1943.

Soviet era vehicles were designed for good maneuverability on frozen ground, but the drivers still need to know how to drive on ice and it looks like many of the new drivers can barely drive in a straight line. The Ukrainians have tank drivers who know how to drive on ice and they have probably been teaching the newbies.


Fighting in winter with the right equipment has advantages. With the right uniforms, it's much easier to blend into the landscape and with modern infrared technology, it will be easy to find Russian soldiers trying to stay warm with fires. In the winter of 1944 American troops in France and Belgium suffered quiet badly because they didn't have adequate winter uniforms, but the NCOs enforced keeping the campfires down to prevent smoke from giving away positions. It did lead to a lot of frostbite injuries though.

In the east early on the Russians were the only side equipped for the cold, but the Germans adapted by 1943. The Ukrainians are getting winter uniforms now. With the right gear, troops can be out in the field for some time without having to light fires. Additionally the Ukrainians are rotating their troops off the line so nobody needs to be exposed to the cold for too long.

The Russians on the other hand are struggling to give their new recruits any uniforms and will likely be lacking winter uniforms when it gets cold. Without officers or NCOs telling the troops what to do, they will likely be starting camp fires to stay warm and the drones with IR sensors will spot them.

Ukraine might be taking an operational pause now because of the weather, or they might be building up supply and positioning troops for the next move, I'm not sure, but they won't stay in one place through the winter. They will be able to maneuver quite well once the ground starts to freeze. If it does. Last winter it was not cold enough to freeze the ground very hard in northern Ukraine and I don't think it froze at all in the south. The Russians were able to capture ground as fast as they did in the south because the ground was dry enough for tanks in February.

In any case, the Ukrainians have the momentum right now and the Russians don't have the equipment to get it back, nor the trained personnel. They will soon have a lot more bodies on the front lines, but many are going to be looking for an exit ramp from day 1 and none are going to be too enthusiastic about fighting. In the cold weather they will probably be per-occupied with just staying alive.
 
This is just tactless:
Screenshot_20221014-063637.png
 
In any case, the Ukrainians have the momentum right now and the Russians don't have the equipment to get it back, nor the trained personnel. They will soon have a lot more bodies on the front lines, but many are going to be looking for an exit ramp from day 1 and none are going to be too enthusiastic about fighting. In the cold weather they will probably be per-occupied with just staying alive.
Well it´s knife edge in Ukraine right now. No Starlink- collapse.
I fully agree on your assessment about Musks behavior ATM.
Question is, will he be so stubborn to cut them off if the government doesn´t get up to speed?
My guts feeling says yes, he was always favoring temper for reason, displacement before introspection.
It could even be as simple as him being vexxed by the potiential upcoming Dogecoin lawsuit and looking for letting some steam off as distraction.

Should the Ukrainians fall back due to this shenanigans and their (in Musks eyes) insensible behavior, the shitstorm will be absolute unique and could even drag Tesla down.
I´m just wondering why he always pulls these discussions into the Twitter limelight instead of discreetly and professionally dealing with the government behind the scenes. All on the shareholders backs. The SEC is a lame duck. They could prevent this to happen.
 
If this timeline is true I guess I was wrong about the blast from underneath and the truck bomb theory is correct.
Thread by @ChrisO_wiki on Thread Reader App

IMHO seems unlikely. I guess we wait and see when something firm enough to rely on surfaces.

EDIT - add:
Why o why does Musk insist on doing some of the right things in the worst possible ways. Behaviour over Starlink being case in point. Sheesh.
 
Last edited: