> technological advantage AST has in comparison with Starlink Direct-To-Cell
Unverified and unverifiable to date. Unacceptable for an ex-SPAC which nearly got delisted from the exchanges when it dropped to $2 a share a few months back.
>Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground.
Their bent-pipe architecture is going to have to do a LOT of heavy-lifting to mitigate the impacts of their anti-doppler mechanisms on top of the latency, SNR and jitter. Whole thing hinges on Bluebirds phased-array performance and their ability to handover cells at scale - presuming they've achieved a fraction of what they claim to have achieved using unmodified commercial handsets in real-world environments.
Schadenfreude at SpaceXs very understandable FCC interference issues is a bad look considering ASTS are wholly dependent on SpaceX to put their constellation into LEO!
>There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions.
A deSPAC with no major R&D heads of note, headed by an Auteur (Abel Avellan) whose only credence is partnerships with Rakuten/Vodafone leading to board seats.
ASTS have missed every single self-imposed roadmap delivery milestone, have had to hit up their ATM, previously lost 80% of their value from NAV, and are propped up pricewise by a small float and a rabid reddit-style fanbase as a holdover from the SPAC days. They've proven absolutely nothing so far, despite many lofty claims to the contrary, and Rakuten has already hit them up with a multi-million dollar fine for what was effectively non-delivery.
Fact that AST is deSPAC has nothing to do with this. AST has gone out of that phase stellarly.
Second, technological advantages are very verified, by AST doing 20 Mbps download and 5G calls and extremely good spectral efficiency.
Definitely both architectures have pros and cons, but for the fixed-earth cells the bent-pipe is way more optimal then constant switching of the cell position which Starlink has.
ASTS has missed some deadlines, but they are not centering divs, they really do innovation from the first principles and that takes some time. Check TSLA which is 10 years into "we are getting FSD next year out"
Rakuten didn't hit them with the fine, but they exercised a contractual right to get 10 million dollar back if they don't deliver something, but same Rakuten is officially promoting the 2026 as start of the commercial coverage for Japan, if we are taking them as authority.
SpaceX is definitely not the only one on whom they depend for delivery since they use ISRO from India for the first satellite, Falcon9 for the next 8 and New Glen for the rest. And given that they have enough money, they can as well go back to more SpaceX if needed since they have agreement with them.
It is interesting that company without research team has so many patents on this technology and partners with Google, AT&T, Verizon, Vodafone, Rakuten, American Tower and that none of them is seeing how hoax they are. Maybe they will come here and get actually enlightened.
Several things you disagree with or would like to reinterpret. All are perfectly accurate and factual.
> Fact that AST is deSPAC has nothing to do with this. AST has gone out of that phase stellarly.
Look at the work of fiction that is their original DA deck. Every. Single. Milestone. delayed. They went from $40 ATH during SPACmania to $2 last year. Also they've diluted with ATM offerings, which is of huge consequence to those buying in at NAV or higher.
> Definitely both architectures have pros and cons, but for the fixed-earth cells the bent-pipe is way more optimal then constant switching of the cell position which Starlink has.
Yes. One will be supported in NTN 3GPP and one supposedly circumvents the limitation of current 3GPP through undisclosed technological means. Guess which one is the incumbent with a track-record of delivering constellations into LEO, and which one is the startup claiming everything and delivering nothing commercially available or independently verifiable to date?
> Rakuten didn't hit them with the fine, but they exercised a contractual right to get 10 million dollar back if they don't deliver something.
Yes. In common parlance that's referred to as a fine for non-delivery.
>It is interesting that company without research team has so many patents on this technology and partners with Google, AT&T, Verizon, Vodafone, Rakuten, American Tower and that none of them is seeing how hoax they are. Maybe they will come here and get actually enlightened.
Wouldn't be the first time any and all of the above have thrown millions at snake-oil and pipe-dreams. Given what they've actually committed to in terms of cash you can draw your own conclusions.
Abel has had to absolutely tank the share price on multiple occasions - the at-the-market sale in Q4'24 of $400m was particularly telling given not a single one of their strategic partners were willing to step up and bridge them over the bare $440m runway they had to get them through 2025. After the CFO was interpreted as promising no dilution in 2024.
Stock price is a heavy swallow here, especially if someone had a bad timing and not much patience, but stock price is a tool to get funding which AST has successfully done, a year ago with very bad conditions, a week ago with excellent conditions. Not sure what that tells, but to me it tells that at least someone has trusted them with a 1B in cash, and some others with billions in spectrum to achieve their idea which would be transformational.
What is fact is that where Starlink has gotten approval from FCC to test only text messages, AST has gotten approval to test full 5G broadband in Europe, Turkey and USA for now. Not sure how can I interpret it differently then that they have technical advantage and that they might be first to really provide useful commercial service, which they will start providing very soon.
Unverified and unverifiable to date. Unacceptable for an ex-SPAC which nearly got delisted from the exchanges when it dropped to $2 a share a few months back.
>Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground.
Their bent-pipe architecture is going to have to do a LOT of heavy-lifting to mitigate the impacts of their anti-doppler mechanisms on top of the latency, SNR and jitter. Whole thing hinges on Bluebirds phased-array performance and their ability to handover cells at scale - presuming they've achieved a fraction of what they claim to have achieved using unmodified commercial handsets in real-world environments.
Schadenfreude at SpaceXs very understandable FCC interference issues is a bad look considering ASTS are wholly dependent on SpaceX to put their constellation into LEO!
>There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions.
A deSPAC with no major R&D heads of note, headed by an Auteur (Abel Avellan) whose only credence is partnerships with Rakuten/Vodafone leading to board seats.
ASTS have missed every single self-imposed roadmap delivery milestone, have had to hit up their ATM, previously lost 80% of their value from NAV, and are propped up pricewise by a small float and a rabid reddit-style fanbase as a holdover from the SPAC days. They've proven absolutely nothing so far, despite many lofty claims to the contrary, and Rakuten has already hit them up with a multi-million dollar fine for what was effectively non-delivery.