Looks like Starlink was supposed to be 40% built with their participation starting in 2020, that are consistent with their winning bid (in this case 100/20). It seems they clearly failed by that metric.
Seeing as they offer service basically everywhere in the US right now and the only quibble is that the average speed is only 75 Mbps instead of 100 Mbps I'd say they are well ahead of 40%.
That isn't a quibble, the 100/20 requirement was a key requirement they set themselves.
Regardless though, I was wrong about the buildout reasoning. The FCC just doesn't believe, based off the information provided by Starlink, they had a strong enough likelihood of success with the plan provided to stay in the running.
Yeah I messed that up. After reading more the denial was focused on the fact that Starlink didn't refute they were not consistently delivering speeds and latency that matched the tier they bid on, and their plan to bridge that gap wasn't convincing to the reviewers or the Commission.
The argument is if they had paid on time would they have been able to deliver to the particular customers by 2025? i.e not everyone. Just RDOF subsided users in the awarded areas
The Dems say no. Evidence is current state of network and absence of starship.
SpaceX says yes. V2 is already launching on Falcon. We don't need starship to meet our obligations but it will make it faster.
Republicans say both of you are talking nonsense. Until 2025 you can't find out. And there's a process for getting there. You only test devices that are under the RDOF plan, not everyone. And since SpaceX hasn't been awarded, you can't do any testing that's relevant.
Imagine SpaceX got awarded say Diomede and you're bringing up speeds in LA and Seattle or the Midwest.
Looks like Starlink was supposed to be 40% built with their participation starting in 2020, that are consistent with their winning bid (in this case 100/20). It seems they clearly failed by that metric.