There will definitely eventually be cheaper options. But not for a while and likely not in America. The satellites are unused over Africa etc, and they can't pay $100 per month. But until the manufacturing cost of the dishes comes down, a cheaper option is unlikely.

I don't agree with that. the likelihood of them reducing the cost of the antenna to what it needs to be in Africa is close to 0. even legacy satellite providers, with terminals that are 1/5 the cost cannot do it. and those aren't phased array

The legacy providers can't provide slower internet for less money because their slowest package is already unusable.

their fastest package is 100Mbps, which is the same as starlink for most people. I'm not sure where you're getting your information.

Did I say anything about their fastest package?

so, when you compare to cable do you also say 25-50Mbps speeds? because that's the minimum cable speed I'm my area. But 1Gb is the max. since when has comparing minimum speeds ever been a valid comparison?

When you're talking about a cheaper service.

and so is their fastest package

That's exactly my point. they are the exact same speeds, which is not what OP said.