If they try to do more than 400 users per satellite, the service throughout plummets.
Space X sells commercial falcon 9 launches for $ 67 million (to GTO opposed LEO) and this already includes a profit margin.
It still isn't obvious to me.
They announced 2 million users with fewer than 4k sats in orbit (presumably even fewer serving).
Let’s assume 2 mil by 4k for simple math, which yields 500 users per sat.
However, the vast majority of the sats are not where the bulk of their customer base is (US and Europe) at any given moment. That means that the 5% of sats over user dense areas at any given point in time are capable of carrying 100% of the current load.
Stated differently, they have sats capable of serving the US user density sitting over every other country in the latitude bands of those orbits just waiting for licensing. I.e. User count could 10x on the current constellation if the growth is outside of the existing markets.
This is complete nonsense.
That said I often wish there was an effective way to communicate whether one calls bullshit because of gut feeling or not convinced by the readily available evidence and/or priors, or whether one calls bullshit because they know more details and are just deflecting actual well known bullshit but for some reason preferred to omit the details (e.g. because they value terseness).
Terseness is beautiful, but not when it actually hinders communication
Of course, if a person is already poisoned by twitter discourse to the point where they substitute their own reality just to keep hating Musk, then all hope is lost...
What I'm saying OTOH is that I have no way to know whether you have some more insightful things to say about this since you just called bullshit without any further details. I hoped you had more details
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Military_capabilities