Starlink, the satellite internet service owned by Elon Musk’s SpaceX, has suspended its decision to increase monthly internet subscriptions for Nigerian users.
In a message to subscribers on Thursday, Nigeria’s third-largest internet service provider explained that the price increase would be put on hold while it addresses regulatory concerns.
The company, with 24 million internet users, assured customers who had already been charged the increased rate that they would receive a credit.
It also reminded users of the option to cancel their subscriptions if needed.
Last month, we increased the monthly service price for Starlink in Nigeria to account for inflation, helping us maintain operations and continue delivering reliable service.
“Today, we are temporarily suspending this price increase as we navigate regulatory challenges. We remain committed to providing high-speed internet in Nigeria, but we need regulatory support to make the improvements necessary for a better customer experience.
“Without these approvals, our ability to continue delivering service is at risk,” the company noted.
The company raised its monthly subscription by 97 per cent three weeks ago, from N38,000 to N75,000, prompting complaints from customers about the steep cost.
Starlink had also raised the price of its installation kit for new users to N590,000 from N440,000 a 34 per cent increase.
The Nigerian Communications Commission had withdrawn its statement regarding Starlink’s operations, according to a brief message addressed to media outlets.
The NCC acknowledged that the statement was released in error, urging editors and journalists to retract any related publications.
“Kindly note that this press statement on Starlink was issued in error. It is hereby WITHDRAWN. If already published, kindly BRING DOWN,” the message, signed by the NCC’s Manager of Media Relations, Kunle Azeez, stated.
The mobile operators, under the aegis of the Association of Licensed Telecommunication Companies of Nigeria, through its Chairman, Gbenga Adebayo, also condemned the decision, citing “regulatory affront.”