SpaceX wird beschuldigt, Vereinbarungen zur Frequenzteilung erzwungen zu haben

>This question of fairness of operating model was always going to arise at some point. And now it has, it’s unlikely to go away.

>The *Journal* quoted industry executives – anonymous, of course – with opinions on both sides of the argument. While some said they would not expect the issue of spectrum to arise during rocket launch deal negotiations, others noted that that type of broader bargaining is pretty common.

This seems one that you can argue either way.

SpaceX did not have a “dominant launch market position” a couple of years ago, Arianespace and Roscosmos had a huge chunk of market.

Now Kuiper has gone Arianespace and ULA, however an Amazon shareholder has sued them fornot using SpaceX as its cheaper. Now Amazon and OneWeb seem to be trying to launch a legal investigation on SpaceX for trying to bundle bandwidth access with its launches.

I can see why a company could use this level of service provision and cost to then dominate a non launch business. But on the other hand the one thing that has always hampered expansion of the launch industry is the lack of things to launch so by creating its own market, the huge constellation they have also subsidised their falling launch costs.

I think its one the best approach is a “little from column A and a little from column B”, SpaceX seem entitled to benefit from creating the huge market for themselves to drive down launch costs, but competitors should not be forced into anti competitive deals.