How will Musk impact the RAN market?
4 companies named across 9 categories, one of 15 articles referencing Starlink. Previous coverage: Celona introduces Celona Orion to unify wireless networks under one fabric (Aug 2026).
Companies mentioned
Best suited for
- Seniority
- Analyst
- Job function
- Network / Network Architect
- Buyer role
- Architect / Technical Evaluator
- Decision stage
- How to start
- Adoption curve
- Late Majority
- Technology maturity
- Market Correction
- Industry
- Telecommunication Services / Diversified Telecommunication Services / Integrated Telecommunication Services
Our classification, not the publisher's statement. Best suited for, not only for.
A new Dell’Oro Group blog examines how SpaceX’s satellite efforts could expand into terrestrial infrastructure and affect the RAN market, while arguing the end state is hybrid terrestrial and non-terrestrial networking.
SpaceX’s connectivity market goals
The blog cites SpaceX estimates that the addressable connectivity market opportunity is about $1.6 trillion, including $870 billion for Starlink Broadband and $740 billion for Starlink Mobile. It also notes SpaceX management said in a 2Q earnings call that it plans terrestrial infrastructure to complement its non-terrestrial network.
The author says SpaceX may use “large numbers of femto cells/small base stations” deployed alongside Starlink terminals and frames the goal as gaining more of traditional carrier revenue, including $0.6 trillion in the US mentioned by Starlink.
Rationale for mobile and CSP entry
The blog argues that SpaceX’s move into mobile connectivity follows a pattern of vertical integration when a dependency becomes strategically important. It points to how rockets enabled Starlink, and how Starlink extended communications globally, with “D2D” described as extending reach to smartphones.
From a connectivity perspective, the author says satellites address geographic limits of terrestrial RAN by providing coverage regardless of where people or machines are located. The blog also frames the relevance of this capability in a future with more AI agents and physical AI, where traffic distribution could differ from today’s smartphone-centric patterns.
Challenges for a hybrid terrestrial and NTN approach
The author groups obstacles into “physics, assets, and ecosystem,” stating that satellites solve coverage but not the same capacity density problem as terrestrial networks. It describes terrestrial RAN capacity as relying on smaller cells and spectrum reuse, while satellite beams cover larger areas that make reuse more difficult.
The blog also cites link-budget constraints, noting SpaceX can increase antenna size and power on satellites but cannot change smartphone constraints like antenna, transmit power, or battery limits. It further says deploying terrestrial infrastructure would require RF planning, indoor coverage, handovers, and interference management, along with regulatory and economic constraints.
On the ecosystem side, the blog says incumbent operators already have spectrum, sites, fiber, customers, devices, distribution, roaming relationships, regulatory infrastructure, and operational experience needed for mobile service at scale. It adds that mobile connectivity requires authentication, mobility support, voice and emergency services, device certification, billing, customer support, and roaming, and that regulation could affect operation in some countries.
Expected impact on RAN and traffic shares
The blog says it maintains a view that NTNs are complements to terrestrial RAN and that the future is hybrid. It distinguishes an “addressable D2D smartphone opportunity” from an “addressable mobile traffic share,” with a base case that D2D scales rapidly for smartphones outside China.
The author states that mobile traffic (human plus machine) is forecast to grow at a 17% CAGR over the next five years, with human-driven traffic still dominating per Ericsson’s Mobility Report. It then provides a mid-point scenario that terrestrial RAN carries “more than 98% of the overall global mobile traffic by 2030.”
The blog lists swing factors including how much physical AI/machine traffic grows in outdoor settings and the reach of Starlink’s terrestrial ambitions, while reiterating that physics favors terrestrial RAN for capacity density and NTN for geographic coverage.
Additional scenario framing
The author says alternative outcomes could occur if physical AI accelerates faster than expected or if traffic patterns become more conducive to satellite connectivity. It also states that if physical AI develops more slowly, the terrestrial and NTN traffic split could differ.
The blog concludes that the key question is not whether SpaceX can replace MNOs or terrestrial RAN, but “how far they can go with their existing assets and how much further they want to go – where is the sweet spot.”
This Analyst Signals brief reflects a neutral, fact-based summary of the original research note.
Blog post, originally published by Stefan Pongratz (Dell'Oro Group) at delloro.com.