ASTS vs SpaceX drama regarding FCC regulations

There's a significant conflict unfolding between AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) and SpaceX over out-of-band emissions rules set by the FCC. Starlink, operated by SpaceX, wants to relax these specifications, claiming they are too difficult to meet. ASTS (Supported by ATT and Veriozon), however, insists on keeping the rules as they are, emphasizing that compliance is achievable with proper engineering.

ASTS has spent seven years developing a solution that fully complies with FCC regulations. They've met with the FCC Commissioner and confirmed their commitment to meeting all the rules—demonstrating that the standards are not only reasonable but also attainable.

SpaceX, on the other hand, is seeking a waiver instead of redesigning its system to comply with existing regulations. Granting such a waiver would undermine the extensive engineering efforts made by companies like ASTS that have invested time and resources to meet these standards. It raises the question: Why should the rules be bent for one company when others have successfully adhered to them?

Major industry players are backing ASTS's stance:

• Verizon has urged the FCC to maintain the current -120 dBW/m²/MHz limit on out-of-band power flux density. They argue that increasing it to -110.6 dBW/m²/MHz, as SpaceX requests, could cause interference with terrestrial services. Verizon also pointed out flaws in T-Mobile's support of SpaceX, noting that their throughput calculations don't apply to supplemental coverage services designed for edge areas rather than high-interference urban zones.

• AT&T presented a detailed analysis to the FCC showing that granting SpaceX's waiver could lead to an 18% degradation in network throughput and potential loss of coverage in some areas due to increased interference. They emphasized that the waiver would harm their primary mobile network, which goes against the purpose of supplemental coverage services meant to enhance, not degrade, existing networks.

  Even Omnispace joined the opposition, highlighting the flawed logic in SpaceX's reasoning. They stated, "Two wrongs do not make a right," arguing that allowing one company to break the rules because others might have done so sets a dangerous precedent.

  SpaceX recently received temporary approval for text services for 15 days starting October 4, operating on a non-interference basis. Early reports suggest that the service is underwhelming when required to comply strictly with the rules, which perhaps underscores why they are seeking a waiver.

  SpaceX's claim of a ASTS becoming a monopoly is a joke! The market for direct satellite-to-phone services is enormous, with an expected demand of $67 billion. There's plenty of room for multiple players, but it's crucial that all entrants respect the established rules to avoid interfering with existing services and networks.

  In my oppinion, ASTS has demonstrated that it's possible to develop a compliant and effective solution by adhering to regulations and investing in solid engineering over several years. If SpaceX wishes to participate in this lucrative market, they should commit to meeting the same standards rather than seeking exceptions. Granting their waiver would not only be unfair to companies like ASTS but could also negatively impact other networks and set a concerning precedent for regulatory compliance.

The Drama is long and complicated, I tried to summarize the most recent updates as much as possible…