With Starlink firmly positioning itself as the leading LEO satellite internet solution, we consider why consumers still opt for GEO satellite solutions. Like all technology, owning the latest and most significant kit comes with bragging rights and a sleuth of new features and functionality. The same can be said for broadband. Those enjoying the unparalleled connectivity of fibre broadband boast speeds of up to 900Mbps, but when you move away from cities and towns, those speeds and the options available dwindle.

In rural and remote locations, GEO satellite broadband internet has long been the go-to solution for those underserved by terrestrial broadband with speeds below 5Mbps. GEO Satellite broadband, despite its limitations, offers unique benefits such as providing speeds up to 50Mbps down and 10Mbps up. It serves as a lifeline, bridging the connectivity gap, although it does have limitations including higher latency, data caps, and susceptibility to weather degradation.

LEO satellite broadband has made significant strides in addressing the issues experienced by GEO satellite broadband users. It has substantially lower latency and greatly increased speeds of up to 220Mbps down and 30Mbps up. While one limitation remains in place, which is data caps, the approach adopted by Starlink greatly differs from traditional data caps. Starlink bundles priority data with unlimited standard data, the priority data is the capped data that you subscribe however once depleted you are not restricted to unbearably slow speeds but instead you simply gain a lower priority when the network becomes loaded and to date it seems to have had little impact on user experience.

You are likely asking yourself why anyone might intentionally opt for a GEO broadband solution over a LEO satellite broadband solution; it comes down to cost. GEO satellite equipment is well established, with components readily available and some of the equipment available from different hardware vendors. In contrast, LEO satellite broadband equipment utilises the latest technology with closed ecosystems, with equipment still relatively expensive compared to its GEO alternative. The cost of LEO broadband equipment is coming down as the technology matures, and the likes of Starlink are keen to use more off-shelf rather than bespoke components. Equally, LEO satellite broadband subscriptions are more expensive than their GEO counterparts. Still, the LEO satellite broadband service is not directly comparable due to the already highlighted speed, data and latency enhancements. Some users do not need or cannot justify the requirements for more extensive data caps and higher speeds, while others are content with what GEO satellite offers for a smaller monthly outgoing. We have seen similar pricing differences between terrestrial broadband solutions and mobile phone connectivity (think 4G vs 5G). We expect these costs to keep coming down as technology advances and LEO satellite capacity continues to grow.

So, to answer the question of why someone would intentionally pick a GEO satellite broadband solution over a LEO satellite broadband solution, simply, it is a matter of cost. It is true that some other factors may come into the decision process, and GEO satellite broadband may, in some instances, be a better fit for certain use cases, but these remain very niche.