Bold claim: in a Starlink-dominated world, power moves behind the scenes rely on political and strategic choices just as much as on technical performance. That’s the core idea behind why Amazon Leo and AST SpaceMobile matter today. Roger Entner of Recon Analytics lays out the dynamic landscape as of December 2025, where numbers reveal capabilities but decisions—made by regulators, carriers, and government agencies—shape who wins in the long run.
Starlink’s scale stands apart. With roughly one million surveyed in Recon Analytics’ Telecom Pulse, Starlink leads in rural customer satisfaction against both terrestrial and legacy satellite providers like HughesNet and ViaSat. Yet applaud-worthy performance doesn’t erase the reality that HughesNet is liquidating its business, and ViaSat is pivoting. Rural DSL users remain, but the field is rapidly shifting toward skyborne connectivity. The era of the traditional GEO battlefield is winding down, and the remaining struggles are moving into a different arena: who gets to survive under policy, regulation, and sector-wide hedging, rather than who merely ships more satellites.
The real story isn’t about Starlink defeating “zombies.” It’s about the deliberate, politically engineered survival of competing models. The market is bifurcating into two realities: SpaceX’s operational momentum and the strategic lifelines built for Amazon Leo and AST SpaceMobile. These players matter not because they’re currently beating Starlink on key metrics, but because the U.S. government and major wireless carriers have deemed Musk’s ecosystem strategically unacceptable to be dominant, inviting a managed market where regulatory preference and corporate hedging sustain rivals that free market forces would otherwise extinguish.
The insurgent carrier approach: a “not-Musk” wager
Public attention focused on T-Mobile’s collaboration with a notable innovator, but the deeper, more consequential moves happened in 2024 within AT&T and Verizon. Their long-term commitments to AST SpaceMobile weren’t about choosing the best available technology; they were steps toward strategic independence. In 2024 AST lagged operationally, with only a handful of satellites compared to Starlink’s thousands. Carriers saw the gap, acknowledged AST’s delays, and nonetheless chose a path that preserves their autonomy.
AT&T’s binding agreement with AST through 2030 embodies a strategy to safeguard network sovereignty. The concern wasn’t just performance. It was the risk that embracing Starlink would accelerate Elon Musk’s progression toward becoming a full service provider, potentially turning carriers into resellers within a Musk-controlled ecosystem. By supporting AST, AT&T accepts short-term pains to avert a future where a Starlink monopoly could erode their role.
Verizon adopted a parallel logic with a cautious twist. Its $100 million investment in AST was a strategic premium—not because AST currently outperforms Starlink, but to maintain a non-SpaceX option that disciplines the market. In effect, AST becomes a compliance cost for wireless players, a hedge that ensures SpaceX cannot entrench monopoly pricing unchallenged.
This “Not-Musk” imperative explains why AST’s investment thesis remains solid even after SpaceX announces full data and voice capabilities for Starlink in early 2026. The comparison isn’t simply about technology. It’s about preserving backstop options: the carriers’ fear that relying on a single, politically volatile billionaire for critical infrastructure represents a fiduciary risk.
Amazon Leo: a regulatory-borne lifeline
If carriers safeguard AST with capital, regulators prop up Amazon Leo through policy. Amazon’s growth story isn’t traditional growth; it’s a binary game of regulatory relief. By late 2025, Amazon had launched 153 satellites, a sizable deficit relative to the FCC’s looming target of 1,618 by July 2026. Closing that gap purely through launches is impractical, making regulatory relief essential.
A key driver is BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) awards, which cover 211,194 locations across 33 states. These awards give Amazon a government-backed stake in success. State broadband offices, eager to demonstrate competition, accepted promises on paper even when actual network reality lagged behind SpaceX. That creates a political incentive to keep Amazon Leo alive, lest BEAD-backed projects falter and federal infrastructure goals falter as well.
Amazon Leo’s BEAD strategy is notable for its aggressive pricing: average bids around $560 per location, which undercuts Starlink and creates a revenue floor estimated around $177 million annually, independent of consumer uptake. Regulators are inclined to grant regulatory accommodations to avoid entrenching a SpaceX monopoly, using waivers to maintain a veneer of neutrality while ensuring public infrastructure progress. Given shifting political winds, especially a 2025 climate where regulatory favoritism toward SpaceX cooled, it’s plausible that Amazon Leo’s reliefs will endure as a means of preventing strategic captivity.
The political backdrop: 2025’s accelerant
Carrier decisions in 2024 converged with a volatile 2025 political climate. The formal Trump–Musk alliance dissolved in mid-2025 amid fiscal policy clashes, with a pragmatic, albeit fragile, reconciliation later that year. The era of automatic regulatory preference for SpaceX has waned, replaced by a pragmatic, neutral stance that nevertheless recognizes the value of diversification.
Defense implications also matter. The Pentagon’s “Golden Dome” directive encourages diversification away from exclusive SpaceX reliance, embedding a second-source logic in procurement. This isn’t just about avoiding disruption; it creates a protected market for Amazon Leo and AST SpaceMobile, reinforcing a broader strategic balance.
Market realities: four segments, one shared destiny
The satellite Internet field has fractured into four distinct competitive segments. Starlink remains dominant in consumer LEO broadband, boasting a high Net Promoter Score. Yet government and carrier dynamics push for competition, creating a floor for Amazon Leo and AST SpaceMobile and a ceiling on Starlink’s monopoly power.
Starlink’s technical supremacy and user satisfaction provide a formidable shield against regulatory erosion. However, BEAD commitments from Amazon Leo—over 211,000 locations—offer a survival path even if consumer waivers falter. AST SpaceMobile’s carrier contracts with AT&T and Verizon help maintain a credible “Plan B” for the industry, ensuring resilience even if SpaceX’s dominance continues to grow.
The broader takeaway for investors and executives
The narrative around legacy providers’ failure is not a sign of imminent collapse; it’s a sign that the old players are being outpaced by strategic, government-backed hedges designed to preserve competition. AT&T and Verizon appear to have chosen a path that preserves independence—even if the near-term trade-offs are less attractive on pure performance metrics. Their reasoning: paying for a slower, less capable option is worth avoiding a future where SpaceX controls critical infrastructure.
If you’d like to dive deeper into how satellite and broadband markets intertwine, you can explore Recon Analytics’ latest satellite report for 2025.
About Recon Analytics
Recon Analytics provides near-real-time market intelligence for telecom and AI sectors via its Pulse platform, helping clients understand and react to industry shifts faster than ever before.
About the Author
Roger Entner is the founder and principal at Recon Analytics. He advises telecom, media, and technology companies on strategy, policy, and competitive dynamics, drawing on decades of experience in market research, policy commentary, and industry leadership. His work has informed U.S. wireless policy discussions and shaped how executives think about customer value, spectrum, and infrastructure strategy.
