This insight argues that satellite operators are entering telecoms markets with substantial structural advantages, including global scale, deep financial resources and, in many markets, significantly lighter regulatory obligations than incumbent mobile network operators (MNOs). At the same time, regulatory frameworks are developing slowly and inconsistently across jurisdictions, creating the risk of an uneven competitive landscape that may undermine terrestrial network investment and distort long-term market dynamics.

A central focus of the analysis is the emergence of direct-to-device (D2D) technology, which enables standard smartphones to communicate directly with satellites using spectrum bands also assigned to terrestrial mobile operators. This development fundamentally changes the competitive relationship between satellite and terrestrial networks, introducing new questions around spectrum rights, market access, interference management and competitive neutrality. While satellite systems currently cannot match the capacity and performance of well-developed terrestrial mobile networks, the paper highlights how rapidly improving low earth orbit capabilities mean that assumptions based on today’s performance limitations may quickly become obsolete.

The paper also explores the dual nature of the competitive threat facing operators. Satellite providers are not only competing directly for broadband and mobile customers, but are increasingly seeking access to the same spectrum resources that underpin terrestrial mobile business models. The acquisition of spectrum assets by major satellite players such as Starlink and Amazon signals a potential future in which satellite operators participate directly in spectrum markets, potentially driving up auction prices while operating under fewer obligations than MNOs.

Regulatory asymmetry is identified as one of the most commercially significant risks for operators. Terrestrial MNOs are typically subject to extensive licensing obligations, coverage commitments, quality of service standards and substantial spectrum costs, whereas satellite operators in many jurisdictions face far lighter regulatory requirements. Without greater regulatory symmetry, the paper argues that terrestrial operators could face structural disadvantages unrelated to network efficiency or service quality, ultimately weakening incentives for future network investment.

At the same time, the paper recognises that satellite technology also presents opportunities for MNOs. Strategic partnerships between mobile operators and satellite providers may offer commercially attractive ways to extend coverage into rural and underserved areas, enhance premium service propositions and improve customer retention. However, the paper stresses that partnership structures and timing are critical, particularly as regulatory frameworks evolve and satellite operators seek greater independence from terrestrial partners.

The analysis concludes that operators must actively engage in regulatory and spectrum policy discussions now, particularly in relation to WRC-27 and emerging national D2D frameworks. Operators that fail to engage risk becoming “rule-takers” in a regulatory environment that will shape the competitive dynamics of the industry for decades to come. The paper emphasises that MNOs need clear strategic positions on partnership models, spectrum policy, competitive responses and regulatory advocacy if they are to respond effectively to the satellite challenge.

Get in toucharrow_forward