The Grounded Problem Holding Back Space-Based Connectivity
What if I told you that the biggest hurdle for satellite-powered global connectivity isn’t rocket science—it’s paperwork? It sounds absurd, but it’s true. While companies like AST SpaceMobile, SpaceX, and Skylo are launching satellites left and right, promising to connect every corner of the planet, the real bottleneck isn’t in orbit—it’s in the outdated financial systems that mobile network operators (MNOs) still rely on.
The Promise and the Paradox
On paper, the future looks bright. Satellite networks are expanding at breakneck speed. SpaceX’s Starlink has over 650 satellites in orbit, and AST SpaceMobile is aiming for a constellation of 45 to 60 by year-end. Skylo already connects 15 million devices, and Iridium’s NTN Direct is on the horizon. These advancements could revolutionize connectivity, especially in remote areas where terrestrial networks fail.
But here’s the paradox: despite the technological leaps, the industries involved—satellite and telecommunications—are stuck in a 1991 time warp when it comes to billing and settlement. It’s like trying to charge an iPhone using a rotary phone system.
The Billing Bottleneck
Personally, I think the core issue boils down to mismatched expectations and outdated infrastructure. MNOs are still using a clearing system designed for minutes, messages, and data volume, while satellite operators charge per connection or usage. This incompatibility creates a nightmare of workarounds that simply don’t scale.
What many people don’t realize is that this isn’t just a technical problem—it’s a psychological one. MNOs are hesitant to invest in satellite partnerships because they’ve yet to see a meaningful return. But their reluctance to upgrade their billing systems ensures that satellite traffic remains low, reinforcing their belief that it’s not worth the effort. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The Satellite Operator’s Naivety: A Blessing in Disguise?
One thing that immediately stands out is the contrast between satellite operators and MNOs. Satellite companies, unburdened by decades of telecom assumptions, are proposing innovative commercial models—like charging per satellite connection. In my opinion, this naivety is actually a strength. They’re not constrained by the ‘we’ve always done it this way’ mindset that often plagues established industries.
But here’s the irony: MNOs are pushing back, even though they faced a similar challenge when mobile roaming was in its infancy. Back then, they collaborated to create standards that now handle billions of dollars in settlements annually. If you take a step back and think about it, the solution is staring them in the face—they just need to apply the lessons they’ve already learned.
The GSMA’s BCE Framework: A Lifeline or a Pipe Dream?
The GSMA’s Billing and Charging Evolution (BCE) framework could be the answer. It’s designed to support the flexible charging models satellite connectivity demands. But adoption has been slow because MNOs don’t see enough immediate revenue to justify the switch.
From my perspective, this is shortsighted. Terrestrial roaming didn’t take off until common settlement processes were in place. The same logic applies here. Broader BCE adoption isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s essential for satellite communications to reach their commercial potential.
History Repeating Itself?
This raises a deeper question: why do industries resist change until it’s too late? Look at German automakers. They watched electric vehicles gain traction for years, assuming their market dominance would protect them. It didn’t. By the time they caught up, foreign competitors had already taken the lead.
The satellite and telecom industries are at a similar crossroads. Within five years, we could see standard voice calls over satellite from the open ocean. But making this a reality requires collaboration—and fast. The longer they wait, the fewer companies will be around to make it happen.
What This Really Suggests
A detail that I find especially interesting is how this situation reflects a broader trend: industries often fail to see the forest for the trees. They focus on the technology—the satellites, the networks—while neglecting the systems that make it all work. It’s a reminder that innovation isn’t just about what you build; it’s about how you sustain it.
If you ask me, the satellite industry’s most expensive problem isn’t in orbit—it’s in the boardrooms and back offices where decisions are made. The technology is there. The demand is there. What’s missing is the will to bridge the gap.
The Takeaway
In the end, this isn’t just a story about satellites or billing systems. It’s about the human tendency to resist change, even when the writing is on the wall. As someone who’s spent years in the telecom industry, I can tell you this: the companies that thrive aren’t always the ones with the best technology—they’re the ones willing to adapt.
So, here’s my prediction: the first companies to crack this billing puzzle won’t just dominate the satellite market—they’ll redefine global connectivity. The question is, who will step up? And more importantly, will they do it before it’s too late?
