Elon Musk — whose ventures include SpaceX and Tesla — pursued entry for Starlink's satellite internet service into the Indian market on the basis that greater competition would benefit everyday users, while also contending that certain providers held what he described as a de facto monopoly. Tech founder Aaron Burnett appeared to align with that view, pointing to data he said showed mobile networks commanding a disproportionate share of internet access in India, which he took as reason to question whether the country's connectivity market was as varied and affordable as some had claimed.
That claim of affordability and strong connectivity, Burnett indicated, holds only when the service in question is accessed through a mobile device.
Responding directly to a post by Burnett on Sunday, Musk pushed back against what he described as internally contradictory online commentary, arguing that supporters of Ambani's position could not simultaneously contend that Starlink would be unable to match the low prices of what he characterised as Ambani's de facto monopoly in India while also maintaining that Starlink would pose too strong a competitive threat.
Musk dismissed the counterarguments as "absurd hypocrisy and hyperbole," then put forward the position in a written statement that open market competition would expand the range of choices available to everyday Indian consumers — an outcome he characterised as beneficial across the board — while noting that Ambani's profit margins would face some compression, though not at a level that would put the business at risk. A separate post attributed to Musk on October 9 addressed Reliance's chairman in an ironic register, extending what read as a tongue-in-cheek apology for having overlooked Ambani's prominence in India.
In that earlier message, Musk described Ambani's business practices as monopolistic exploitation targeting the Indian public, and called on him to open the market to Starlink as a competitor.
Musk put forward the position that large portions of India remain without dependable internet access, and that satellite-based broadband services such as Starlink hold the potential to fill that void. Two benefits formed the core of his remarks — that children in poorly served communities would gain access to learning, and that small enterprises would find pathways into international trade.
At the heart of the widening dispute lies a question India has yet to resolve: how spectrum for satellite communication services ought to be divided up and assigned. Established Indian telecom operators have pushed for spectrum to be distributed through an auction process, while satellite providers such as Starlink have pressed for administrative assignment instead.
When questions of favouritism and market dominance arose, Union Telecom Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia put forward the government's position, noting that no single player is permitted to hold a monopoly across any sector in India. Licences covering multiple operators — among them Jio, OneWeb, and Starlink — have been issued under a framework that Scindia described as neutral toward any particular technology.
