MNOs' D2D Joint Venture Versus Exclusive Satellite Operator Partnership: Can They Coexist?

In September 2026, it is reported that Europe’s major Mobile Network Operators (MNOs)—Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Vodafone, and Telefónica—are planning to work together to secure satellite airwaves that the European Union (EU) has reserved for local operators, in an effort to bolster sovereignty and build a unified counterweight against the dominating SpaceX’s Starlink in the Direct-to-Device (D2D) sector. The EU has indicated it will reserve a third of the 2 GHz Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) spectrum allocation for European operators (EU-established, EU-controlled entities). In contrast, another third of the spectrum will be reserved for the Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite (IRIS²) European satellite network. The last remaining portion will be open to both EU and non-EU operators to compete. The current spectrum licenses are due to expire in 2027.

This move follows a similar trend in the United States just a few months earlier. In May 2026, major U.S. telcos—T-Mobile, Verizon, and AT&T—announced a Joint Venture (JV) to pool their scarce spectrum resources for D2D connectivity. The carriers aim to avoid exclusive vendor lock-ins and open up access to multiple space operators.

In the United States, T-Mobile already has an exclusive contract with Starlink, while Verizon and AT&T have commercial agreements with AST SpaceMobile to provide D2D services. Similarly, European MNOs, Vodafone, Orange, and Telefónica collaborate with AST SpaceMobile through a European JV—Satellite Connect Europe—while Deutsche Telekom partners with Starlink. If each of these individual MNOs has dedicated contracts in place, why are the European telcos forming a broader MNO JV?  

• Reduce Reliance on a Single Operator + Spectrum Protectionism: Rather than relying on individual contracts with specific Satellite Network Operators (SNOs), the JV will allow European carriers to pool and share spectrum resources. This shared pool can then be allocated toward eligible European operators, giving the MNOs more flexibility and options. Furthermore, having access to multiple providers protects the carriers from operational delays. For example, AST SpaceMobile does not yet have a live commercial D2D service and faces launch bottlenecks; a shared JV gives telcos alternative partners to rely on if a vendor falls behind. Beyond operational flexibility, the JV is driven by spectrum nationalization: securing spectrum assets to safeguard European market entry, maintain local regulatory jurisdiction, and establish commercial leverage over foreign and domestic Direct-to-Consumer (D2C) providers. It also gives MNOs an edge in bargaining power for commercial roaming agreements with foreign SNOs.
• Protecting Sovereignty and Countering Global Dominance: Under the proposed EU framework for the 2 GHz spectrum, one-third will be reserved for the IRIS² sovereign satellite constellation, another third reserved exclusively for European-owned commercial operators, and the last third is open to all commercial operators. Eligible European-owned commercial operators—such as Eutelsat OneWeb, Hispasat, SES, OHB Systems, and the new MNO JV—have more chances to bid for two-thirds of the spectrum bands. Meanwhile, non-EU players like Starlink, AST SpaceMobile, Amazon Leo, Iridium, and Globalstar are restricted to competing within the final open third. This creates more opportunities for European operators to gain access to valuable spectrum assets. On the global stage, the EU SatCom space lags behind U.S. commercial players in launch and manufacturing scale and capabilities, and the state-backed funding scale of the Chinese market. By leveraging regulatory gatekeeping and preferential spectrum allocation, the EU can preserve domestic space market share and avoid being outscaled.
• Shifting Strategic Leverage via Spectrum Ownership: In isolated contracts like Starlink & T-Mobile or Verizon & AST SpaceMobile, the MNOs function as a channel partner of the satellite service. The bargaining power hinges on spectrum control. If Starlink or AST SpaceMobile use their dedicated MSS spectrum and raise wholesale rates after the contract ends, they retain significant leverage over individual MNOs. By contrast, when SNOs rely on terrestrial mobile spectrum, the telco holds bargaining power. By forming the unified JV, the telcos ensure spectrum ownership remains within the MNO layer and regain collective buyer power.
• Domestic Industry Friction: However, this move by the European telco JV to bid for MSS spectrum might not resonate with European SNOs. It may trigger an internal stalemate with European SNOs, which oppose paying terrestrial carriers wholesale fees for dedicated space spectrum. If an SNO boycott happens, it could stall D2D services deployment because the MNOs require satellite infrastructure and technologies. If that happens, it could expose telcos to license forfeiture if they fail to meet mandated EU deployment timelines. Conversely, if European SNOs bid for the spectrum successfully, they cannot deploy mass-market D2D services at scale at this stage without MNO core networks that function as distribution channels. Ultimately, spectrum ownership remains a key bargaining chip in wholesale agreements.

In the case of the U.S. MNOs forming a JV, the same case can be said for protecting the carriers’ interests. Carriers could face long-term risks once a satellite provider establishes massive orbital capacity and attempts to bypass MNOs entirely by offering D2C services.

As the satellite services market evolves and matures, the question is no longer whether MNOs can offer these D2D services to outpace their telco rivals, but how they can safeguard core MNO interests in a changing ecosystem where SNOs are rapidly advancing their satellite technologies. While individual MNO-SNO contracts and JVs can coexist, there are some potential friction points to navigate to ensure each stakeholder can maximize the scaling of their businesses while preserving competitive differentiation with their competitors within the entire ecosystem:

• For MNOs: MNOs must define strict boundaries between what is overseen collectively with partner MNOs through the JV (e.g., spectrum harmonization, standards) and what remains exclusive via individual contracts (e.g., consumer packages, roaming data bundles). They should also avoid over-reliance on a single satellite partner’s constellation architecture and ensure they have backup options.
• For SNOs: SNOs should design their satellite constellations and technology to seamlessly integrate with multi-operator joint platforms by embracing open standards (e.g., The 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) standards). Trying to stay exclusive with a single MNO or device partner will eventually cause them to fall behind, especially as more JVs and alliances form.
• For Regulators: Regulatory bodies (e.g., the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Office of Communications (Ofcom), and European national regulators) must ensure that spectrum-sharing approvals and D2D frameworks accommodate both JVs and individual carrier licenses without creating bottlenecks. Ultimately, this is to ensure that end users, such as consumers and enterprises, have quality access to these services.