HomeNewstelecomSatellite-based direct-to-cell service unlikely to disrupt Indian telcos' business: Analysts

Satellite-based direct-to-cell service unlikely to disrupt Indian telcos' business: Analysts

Analysts argue that the technology is still in its infancy and heavily depends on telcos to access their 4G spectrum for smartphone connectivity.

January 16, 2025 / 09:47 IST
Story continues below Advertisement
Telecom
Satellite internet companies also typically impose data caps, while Jio and Bharti offer unlimited data in their home broadband plans

Satellite-based direct-to-cell services, offered by players like Starlink, are unlikely to disrupt the mobile broadband business of Indian telecom giants Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel in the near future. Analysts argue that the technology is still in its infancy and heavily depends on telcos to access their 4G spectrum for smartphone connectivity.

In a note, JM Financial highlighted that direct-to-cell technology currently delivers “inferior performance” compared to traditional wireless networks, limiting its ability to impact Indian telcos’ wireless business. Wireless services account for 80-90% of the valuations of Bharti and Jio. Additionally, satellite players would require partnerships with telecom operators to authenticate users via SIM cards, adding another layer of reliance on established telcos.

Story continues below Advertisement

The brokerage added that while satellite internet performance has improved due to advancements in low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites, its high costs—7 to 18 times more expensive than Indian telcos’ home broadband plans—combined with slower speeds and data caps, significantly reduce its competitive threat. The home broadband segment constitutes only 6-10% of Indian telcos’ projected FY30 EBITDA and valuation.

“Indian telcos’ home broadband plans start at $5–7 per month, with higher-end plans costing up to $47 per month, offering speeds of up to 1 Gbps and access to all OTT apps, among other benefits. In comparison, satellite internet pricing, excluding one-time hardware costs, is 7–18 times more expensive,” the note stated.