Innovation

"Is it Snowing in Space?!" “Is it snowing in space?!” Asks a disgruntled Bill Murray in the film Groundhog Day when he is told that he cannot call out from the snowbound town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. If there is a remake, Bill might not have to worry: signal dead zones may soon be a thing of the past due to recent advancements in satellite technology. Whereas the old picture of satellite communications was a scientist in the wilderness with a big clunky antenna, these days the technological payload is all in space. Recent advancements such as Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites, advanced beamforming, and the use of mobile spectrum bands means that any phone supporting 4G LTE can potentially receive satellite data directly. This integration of satellite and terrestrial networks is set to reshape the mobile industry, creating both opportunities and challenges for traditional mobile network operators (MNOs) and mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs). In this article we give an overview of the technological advancements, the major players in the market, and then consider the effects this will have on traditional wholesale mobile market structures; concluding with the emerging opportunities for new revenue and growth. The Evolution of Satellite Connectivity Historically, satellite communications operated independently from terrestrial networks, serving specialised markets with limited scalability and high entry barriers. However, recent advancements, particularly in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite technology, have dramatically altered this scenario. The most well-known example is obviously SpaceX, which has played a pivotal role in democratising space: reducing barriers to entry and making satellite connectivity more scalable, performant, and accessible. SpaceX and other companies have found innovative ways to dramatically reduce costs. Since Sputnik 1 in 1957, launching payloads into space has been prohibitively expensive, with costs exceeding $100,000 per kilogram in the 1960s and averaging $16,000/kg for heavy payloads from 1970 to 2010. SpaceX’s innovations have brought these costs down through reusable rockets, vertical integration, economies of scale, and advancements in materials and manufacturing processes: leading to price points as low as $100 per kilogram in recent years. However, cost is just one of the barriers. The real gambit has been provided by Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites, which typically orbit at altitudes ranging from approximately 160 to 2,000 km and offer low-latency, high-speed connectivity — making them ideal for real-time applications and direct-to-device communications. The latest generation of technologies now enable LTE mobile phones to connect directly to satellites without specialised hardware, marking a significant milestone in mobile communications. The Major Satellite-to-Cell Players While SpaceX's Starlink has garnered the most attention, several other major companies are actively developing satellite-to-cell technologies and forming strategic partnerships with terrestrial mobile operators. As of April 2024, Starlink had established 15 partnerships with mobile carriers globally — including T-Mobile in the US. T-Mobile has structured its beta program to begin with text messaging capabilities, gradually expanding to include picture messages, data connectivity, and eventually voice calls. As of February 2025, it is reported that 7,086 Starlink satellites are in orbit, with 7,052 being operational. AST SpaceMobile has emerged as a significant innovator, achieving a historic milestone in April 2023 with the first-ever two-way voice call directly with an unmodified smartphone, via their BlueWalker 3 satellite. AST SpaceMobile launched its first five commercial satellites, the BlueBird 1-5 mission, on September 12, 2024, aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. Lynk Global represents another significant player. In a recent expense report, it revealed that each satellite costs around $400,000 to build and up to $815,000 to launch into space. They hope to have up to 1000 satellites (for full continuous broadband coverage) in orbit by 2025 and 32 mobile network operator (MNO) partnerships by the end of 2025. The company has successfully demonstrated text messaging capabilities from satellites to standard cellular devices and continues to expand its constellation and service offerings. Huawei has partnered with China Telecom to demonstrate satellite-to-phone messaging capabilities, while Apple has worked with Globalstar to implement emergency satellite messaging features in recent iPhone models. Implications for Traditional Wholesale Mobile Market Structures Traditionally, the wholesale mobile market has been structured around MNOs, MVNOs, and wholesale aggregators. Revenue streams have typically included MVNO wholesale pricing, and IoT and machine-to-machine (M2M) solutions. However, the rise of satellite-to-cell technology poses potential threats to this established model. Disintermediation of MNOs and MVNOs Satellite-to-cell connectivity introduces the potential for disintermediation, where control traditionally held by MNOs could become fragmented across multiple parties in the value chain. As satellite providers increasingly offer direct-to-device services, traditional operators risk losing their central role in network management and customer relationships. Pricing Pressure on Wholesale Markets The increased availability and competition from satellite connectivity providers could exert downward pressure on wholesale pricing. As satellite services become more affordable and accessible, traditional wholesale providers may face challenges in maintaining their pricing structures and profitability. Competitive Pressure in IoT and Enterprise Applications Satellite connectivity is particularly well-suited for IoT and enterprise applications, especially in remote or challenging environments. As satellite-to-cell technology matures, traditional wholesale providers may face intensified competition in these segments, necessitating strategic adjustments to remain competitive. Emerging Opportunities in Satellite-to-Cell Connectivity Despite these challenges, the integration of satellite connectivity into mobile networks also presents substantial opportunities for innovation and growth. Forward-thinking operators can leverage satellite-to-cell technology to develop new business models and revenue streams. Hybrid Terrestrial-Satellite Subscription Models Providing Ubiquitous Connectivity Operators can offer hybrid subscription plans that seamlessly integrate terrestrial and satellite connectivity. Such models provide customers with uninterrupted coverage, enhancing user experience and creating differentiated service offerings. Wholesale Satellite Resale for MVNOs Satellite-to-cell technology opens new avenues for MVNOs to expand their service portfolios. By reselling satellite connectivity, MVNOs can offer enhanced coverage and reliability, particularly in underserved or remote regions, thereby attracting new customer segments. IoT and Enterprise-Focused Applications Satellite connectivity is a natural fit for IoT and enterprise applications, such as remote monitoring, asset tracking, and industrial automation. Mobile operators can forge strategic partnerships with satellite providers to deliver specialised solutions for these markets, tapping into new revenue opportunities. Emergency-Only and Disaster Recovery Plans Satellite-to-cell technology can play a crucial role in emergency and disaster recovery scenarios, providing a reliable backup to terrestrial networks when they are unavailable or overwhelmed. Operators can develop emergency-only plans that leverage satellite connectivity to ensure critical communications during crises. Conclusion Satellite-to-cell technology represents a convergence of space and terrestrial communications systems that promises to fundamentally alter global connectivity markets and players. The dramatic reduction in launch costs by a factor of 20 has enabled the deployment of massive satellite constellations that were previously economically unfeasible. The competitive landscape continues to evolve rapidly, with SpaceX, AST SpaceMobile, and Lynk, and traditional telecommunications companies all pursuing various technological approaches and business models. Commercial text messaging services are already becoming available through beta programs, with video calling capabilities demonstrated and voice calls progressing toward wider availability. The integration of 5G standards with satellite networks continues to advance through collaborative industry initiatives, with projections of a $50 billion market by 2032. As this technology continues to mature throughout 2025 and beyond, it promises to eliminate mobile dead zones and create new application possibilities that were previously unimaginable. The future of mobile communications is undoubtably hybrid: blending terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks into seamless connectivity solutions that follow users wherever they go. This has wide reaching implications for connectivity in remote and isolated regions, and offers perhaps the fastest and most cost-efficient route to bridging the digital divide. It will also transform how we respond in disaster zones and hazardous areas — increasing the ability to protect and save lives with faster and safer humanitarian and emergency services.

What Problem do Too Many SaaS Providers Have in Common? Many SaaS security providers have a history of treating important safety and security features as something to upsell. This raises the important question of whether a software vendor has a moral responsibility for the secure operation of their solution. In this article, we explore the implications of treating important security and safety features as an upsell, using Boeing as a test case of where this can go wrong. The Case of Boeing and the Aviation Industry The case against Boeing is emblematic of a more systemic issue across the aviation industry, and many other industries. The public became aware of this issue under tragic circumstances when the Lion Air and Ethiopian Air Boeing 737 Max airliners crashed in 2018 and 2019 respectively. According to the widely quoted New York Times article , the crash could have been avoided if the pilots had access to two safety features that were sold by Boeing as optional extras. According to the incident reports, at the root of the incident were the angle-of-attack sensors. These mechanical sensors operate in a similar fashion to a weathervane to measure whether the aircraft’s nose is pointing above or below the direction of airflow. Being mechanical, they may be prone to malfunction, perhaps jamming after having been installed incorrectly — as was believed to be the case for the Lion Air aircraft . The system that led to the aircraft’s demise, which identifies the risk of the aircraft stalling, only listened to one of the sensors. A difference in the signal being sent by the two sensors was not recognised by the anti-stall system; and the instruments that would have alerted the pilots to the conflicting signals were upsell items. This wasn’t a fancy, nice-to-have bell or whistle that makes the flight more comfortable, efficient, or profitable. It is an underlying safety feature of the aircraft. If there was no safety requirement for the redundancy of two sensors, it is difficult to see why there would ever be more than one. Boeing has now addressed the issue, and the anti-stall system listens to both sensors, responding safely in the event of conflicting signals. It should also be noted that the investigation identified pilot error and deficiencies in the training that contributed to the disasters (and this will be relevant to our points regarding many SaaS product decisions as well). The SaaS Parallels Cloud-delivered Software as a Service (SaaS) has revolutionised the tech industry, and catalysed a phenomenal level of innovation and growth. It has enabled new software capabilities to be brought to market faster than ever before, and facilitated the ability to reach a scale with costs defrayed across multiple customers that would have been unimaginable 30 years ago. However, the benefits of being able to access a service from anywhere, at any time, by anyone also presents significant risks. The ‘anyone’ can be a malicious party operating outside of the reach of law enforcement or extradition. As a result, there are clear commercial responsibilities placed on SaaS providers to secure their infrastructure from attack, and those that do not are unlikely to last long in the marketplace. But just like the aviation industry, there are different flavours of security, and different perceptions of what is considered essential. Taking due care and applying due diligence to ensure that the platform itself is adequately secured from a direct attack is clearly the vendor’s responsibility – but what about those elements of security that relate to risk owned by their customers? One key element of customer risk relates to the security of a user’s password. It is their responsibility to make sure they choose a long and random string drawn from upper case, lower case, numerical, and special characters (if allowed). It is also their responsibility to ensure that they do not ever use the same password for multiple applications or services. But, we know that compromised credentials is a common failure mode. Just because it is the user’s responsibility to mitigate this risk, this doesn’t mean that system developers do not also have some mutual responsibility to make it easier for the user to exercise that responsibility; controls have been developed specifically for that purpose. The most obvious ones are Multi Factor Authentication (MFA, or 2FA), and Single Sign On (SSO). With MFA, we improve the security of the credentials by also verifying that the user is in possession of their trusted device before we trust them at sign in. With SSO, we minimise the number of credentials and accounts to manage by federating with a single corporate account; we can then concentrate our effort to secure that corporate account rather than spreading our resources thinly. Both are relatively easily implemented these days, particularly in the case of SSO where the OAuth protocols are widely offered by Identity Providers. Once implemented, both are essentially free to operate, particularly if MFA uses an Authenticator app rather than SMS text messages. SaaS providers recognise that this security is important, and they will frequently implement MFA and SSO controls into their applications to meet that customer demand. But, too frequently, we see them only offered as part of the more expensive subscription options. This element of security is not enhancing the vendor’s core proposition; it is not making their offering more functional, better looking, or more efficient for their users. It is just making it more secure, and therefore to treat it as an item to upsell comes across as price-gouging rather than the responsible application of good security practice. It is almost as though these vendors have run out of innovative bells and whistles that their clients would value in their core product, so they have had to resort to undermining the security of their cheaper options in order to encourage their customers to pay for their more expensive ones. It is equivalent to a bank only using the CSC code on a card to secure transactions for customers who pay for their premium banking services, because, after all, it is the customer’s responsibility to protect their card details. Conclusion What we have described here is not universal, and probably is not even representative of the majority of SaaS providers. But, when you are reviewing a new service, we urge you to take a closer look at what security your provider is charging extra for. If low cost, high value security controls are being upsold, then you may want to consider what other security good practices are not being considered essential. For more information about our cyber security consulting services and Secure by Design principles in action, please contact Tom Burton, Partner for Cyber Security, using the form below.

Peter Drucker wrote in his book The Practice of Management (1954) that ‘it is the customer who determines what a business is’. This sentiment still firmly holds true today, as consumers increasingly expect personalised shopping experiences from aspirational businesses that desire to have a positive impact on the community, country, or world in some way. Across this series of articles, Daniel Fitzsimmons explores the role of customer-centricity as a mechanism to support the delivery of superior customer experience and business profitability. In the first two articles in this Customer Centricity series, Daniel has established the foundations of what makes a truly customer-centric organisation, and how a business can be tailored towards ensured customer satisfaction. In the final article in the series, he takes this further to discuss how technological innovation can amplify these goals. Digital Transformation – Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Technology is typically the most common interaction point for customers engaging with products, and is especially critical to the service industry. The banking industry has pioneered the digitalisation of services (Dube and Helkkula, 2015), with digital payment services and blockchain solutions. In a fiercely competitive environment, the creation of superior value requires increased insight into how customers experience value (Medberg and Heinonen, 2014). Value can be typically defined as the ‘consumers’ overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given’ (Zeithma, 1988). This concept can be extended to a value definition in the following forms: Total Monetary Value – The amount a customer is prepared to pay for a product Perceived Use Value – Defined by a customer’s perception (utility) Exchange Value – Realised when the product is sold Value can be enhanced through digital capabilities, marking technology solutions, and digital marketing strategies to support user acceptance. Securing User Acceptance One compelling approach to understanding how users may engage with a new technology is the TAM model. The TAM model suggests that Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of USE (PEOU), define how a user will interact with a new product or service, i.e. if the product usefulness and ease of use can be communication, barriers to adoption can be mitigated. When developing new customer solutions, mobilisation of the TAM model is the engagement of consumers in product development, and inclusion of then construct of ‘user intent’ to inform product ideation. Venkatesh et al. formulated the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). This model was found to outperform other models (Adjusted R square of 69 percent), and is worthy of further investigation in terms of its ability to predict user acceptance of new technology solutions. Experimentation Technology should function as an enabling mechanism to support experimentation in the creation of products and services, and increased alignment with prospective customers. Experimentation, which from an engineering perspective represents ‘continuous improvement’, allows businesses to see what does and doesn’t resonate with target personas, iterating towards a value proposition that will drive superior customer engagement and subsequently an increased % of the customer wallet. Booking.com runs more than 1,000 tests simultaneously to fine tune its offering specific to a user profile, behaviours, and characteristics. Experimentation and the subsequent data generated provides a meaningful base from which to make decisions, thereby negating ‘strong opinions or the HiPPO mentality, which is often pervasive in organisations. For experimentation to be successful, leadership needs to create a culture of curiosity in the business, supported by organisational design and the psychological safety to try and fail. Digital continuity provides an exciting opportunity to enhance the customer voice in product development. Real time data availability provides instant insight into consumer preference, which can be used to support product development and increasingly personalised product offers. Through the experimentation cycle, digital prototypes can be rolled out quickly to support the product innovation cycle. For experimentation to be successful, customer requirements should be integrated into business operations to create an industry-aligned value proposition (Ohmae, 1988). Conclusion Throughout this three-part series, I have demonstrated the importance of customer-centricity as a critical way to ensure success. In this article specifically, I have covered how to leverage technology – a power that is already prevalent and constantly evolving – to best support this venture. Building upon the TAM model, technology can be used to facilitate enhanced customer satisfaction, consequently spurring innovation and growth.