Every other company in the space is opposed to this move, because Starlink's unilateral reconfiguration would interfere with nearly every other company's operations. Part of the FCC's mandate is to prevent that from occurring, and SpaceX absolutely deserves to be slapped down for its anticompetitive behavior.
>Musk had fired at least seven members of the program's senior management team at the Redmond, Washington, office, the culmination of disagreements over the pace at which the team was developing and testing its Starlink satellites, according to the two SpaceX employees with direct knowledge of the situation.
https://www.businessinsider.com/r-musk-shakes-up-spacex-in-r...
Speed and latency measured with the Starlink beta/GA are unparalleled at the moment, yet to see if they worsen with an increase of userbase.
Look at the timeline:
Jan 2015 -- announce plans
Jan 2017 -- Starlink trademarked
Feb 2018 - test flight of two satellites
May 2019 - Launch 60 of the v0.9 model
June 2019 - fire 7 people
Oct 2019 - this article
Nov 2019 - Launch 60 of the v1.0 model
7 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched
29 Jan 2020 - 60 satellites launched
17 Feb 2020 - 60 satellites launched
18 Mar 2020 - 60 satellites launched
22 Apr 2020 - 60 satellites launched
04 Jun 2020 - 60 satellites launched
etc.
To me, it seems more plausible that they were taking a solid-not-polished design that's been mostly worked through for a few years, doing some team re-org and removing people who aren't working out, and then finished tweaking the design and got ready for scaling to higher production over the next few months than it does they were scraping by on the skin of their teeth for almost four years and suddenly managed to catch up on everything (and have it work!) in those same last few months.
It's absolutely possible I'm wrong, but if the Starklink team truly managed a timeline of 6 months from "vaporware" to functionally the world's first mega-constellation, I'd be absolutely floored.
"Amazon representatives have had "30 meetings to oppose SpaceX" but "no meetings to authorize its own system""
... those 30 meetings fit into the timeline? :)
The article was published on Oct 31, 2018 (not 2019).