Bye bye Garmin

[jspradley]

Starlink (SpaceX) will eventually offer nationwide broadband via their mircosat network (already have some in orbit & functioning). You'll be able to use your phone with that network. That still won't replace my inReach mini (or similar) for a while; there is an extra factor of safety with a standalone device that I feel is necessary when solo (over 100 days so far this year, dozens of messages, weather updates, etc all without a single issue).

OP has a hard-on for Garmin because of a bad experience with a 66i, and takes every chance he can to talk poorly of them.

Starlink is going to be incredible once it's fully realized!

And wouldn't that be a hate-on?

 

[Beendare]

The next thread will be :

"Garmin acquires SatPaq"

Yep....Garmin is taking it in the shorts from the OnX and GAIA phone apps, just look at their financials. They have to do something to compete. Maybe buy OnX?

Their business model of buying a $250-$600 GPS unit has blown up.....and its no wonder, I think GAIA was $40 all in when I bought the app. This is typical in the tech cycle with new products destroying old tech.

....

 

[5MilesBack]

Yep....Garmin is taking it in the shorts from the OnX and GAIA phone apps, just look at their financials. They have to do something to compete.

Their stock is up 49% in the last year and has almost tripled since Oct 2015. Apparently they're still performing well enough for stock buyers.

 

[CorbLand]

Their stock is up 49% in the last year and has almost tripled since Oct 2015. Apparently they're still performing well enough for stock buyers.

I think a lot of people dont realize that Garmin isnt just making hand held units. They make a lot more than just the stuff you find in a store and I can assure you that they are making way more off their other ventures.

 

[5MilesBack]

There's no doubt about that.

 

[Rob5589]

No way would I rely strictly on a mobile phone. Too many glitches and issues. The mini is still the better choice, IMO.

 

[tdhanses]

Their stock is up 49% in the last year and has almost tripled since Oct 2015. Apparently they're still performing well enough for stock buyers.

Their money is in aviation not handheld gps units.

 

[poconnor6314]

This is pretty interesting but I dont think it will replace the garman anytime soon

 

[Bubblehide]

I am rather surprised about the misinformation posted here about Satpaq. The buy in is not 1700 and the satelights are closer to earth than the Iridium system. However, Satpaq only works in north America, the last I checked.

I dumped InReach due to their atrocious CS. I can not see going back. But I get the InReach lovers. However once they find themselves talking to InReach CS, many may change their minds.

 

[KurtR]

I am rather surprised about the misinformation posted here about Satpaq. The buy in is not 1700 and the satelights are closer to earth than the Iridium system. However, Satpaq only works in north America, the last I checked.

I dumped InReach due to their atrocious CS. I can not see going back. But I get the InReach lovers. However once they find themselves talking to InReach CS, many may change their minds.

I have talked to in reach cs a few times and they were great. Figured out my account fixed it up and good to go

 

[camping1601]

I have talked to in reach cs a few times and they were great. Figured out my account fixed it up and good to go

I've talked to them a few times and it was great.

 

[NEhunter]

I've talked to them a few times and it was great.

Same


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wyatt.Carter]

"Bye Bye Garmin" seems a little strong. I assume technology will get us to the point where we'll be able to access data on our phones as if we are in wifi but on Satellite. I think we are a ways out. I assume Garmin will get us there. Glad there is competition.

I think this is the way it's going as well, eventually we will be able to access all data as if we were on wifi no matter where.

 

[Titan_Bow]

I am rather surprised about the misinformation posted here about Satpaq. The buy in is not 1700 and the satelights are closer to earth than the Iridium system. However, Satpaq only works in north America, the last I checked.

I dumped InReach due to their atrocious CS. I can not see going back. But I get the InReach lovers. However once they find themselves talking to InReach CS, many may change their minds.

Misinformation? LOL. The whole point of SatPaq is that it’s using geostationary orbiting satellites, which are much higher than Low Earth Orbit Satellites like Iridium. From Satpaq’s own FAQ page, they say their satellites are in geostationary orbit at 23,000 miles altitude. For reference, Iridium’s constellation is 483 miles. SatPaq is marketing this as an advantage, who knows, only time will tell, but you’d think if it were better and cost effective, the big players would be headed down this road as well?
Iridium has been around for a long time however, and it’s been proven by a lot of industry uses other than handheld consumer electronics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CorbLand]

Misinformation? LOL. The whole point of SatPaq is that it’s using geostationary orbiting satellites, which are much higher than Low Earth Orbit Satellites like Iridium. From Satpaq’s own FAQ page, they say their satellites are in geostationary orbit at 23,000 miles altitude. For reference, Iridium’s constellation is 483 miles. SatPaq is marketing this as an advantage, who knows, only time will tell, but you’d think if it were better and cost effective, the big players would be headed down this road as well?
Iridium has been around for a long time however, and it’s been proven by a lot of industry uses other than handheld consumer electronics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To piggy back off this, its was also never stated that it was 1700 bucks to get started. It was said that its 1700 bucks to get started if you want the cheapest per text option. So if that is what you want, then you do have to outlay 1700 bucks to get started.

 

[Bubblehide]

Okay, you got me on the distance. Obviously I recalled incorrectly. But the 1700 to get started, from when I checked, was totally bogus.

 

[CorbLand]

Okay, you got me on the distance. Obviously I recalled incorrectly. But the 1700 to get started, from when I checked, was totally bogus.

Please show me where that is completely bogus. If you want the cheapest per text option its 10,000 texts for 1700, now 1750. You buy these packages up front. So I pay 1750, get 10,000 texts credited. Thus, if you want the cheapest per text option, you have to outlay 1750 up front.

 

[Bubblehide]

Please show me where that is completely bogus. If you want the cheapest per text option its 10,000 texts for 1700, now 1750. You buy these packages up front. So I pay 1750, get 10,000 texts credited. Thus, if you want the cheapest per text option, you have to outlay 1750 up front.

Below is my email to Satpaq with a link they provided. Unfortunately the link has long since time-out. But back when I checked the initial cost was very similar but slightly lower than initial cost of InReach (unit and message pack). The advantage to Satpaq at that time was that texts did not expire as long as you purchased at least the minimum each year, providing major savings over time.

RE: Service plans {26103313}

Wed, Feb 5, 2020 6:34 pm
SatPaq Support Team ([email protected])To:you Details
--reply above this line--
Thank you for contacting SatPaq Customer Support. We will research your issue, and an agent will get back to you by the end of the next business day.

If you have already received a similar message, you are receiving this message because we have given your new question a new ticket number.

Please reply to this message if you find you have additional information you want to add to your request.

I have looked at your site with interest. However, your site mentions a cost of message range. Obviously you have message packages, but your site fails to show them. As such, the consumer (me) is unable to compare the value of your product to your competitors. Frankly, this lacking information leaves me with the feeling that Satpaq is trying to sucker people into pruchasing the product before understanding the full operating cost. Although I am still interesting in the product, this is a huge turnoff. Furthermore, as I discuss competitor products on several social media boards, I find myself unable to discuss or promote Satpaq due to the lacking message package prices. Granted, I realize that Satpaq is limited to it's coverage area due to not being on the Iridium satellite network. However, it obviously will fill the needs of those in North America. In short, I believe not advertising your message package rates on your site is causing a significant loss to the Satpaq company; as for me, without knowing the message package rates, Satpaq is off my list of choices.



https://ictwic.jitbit.com/helpdesk/...://ictwic.jitbit.com/helpdesk/Ticket/26103313

 

[CorbLand]

Below is my email to Satpaq with a link they provided. Unfortunately the link has long since time-out. But back when I checked the initial cost was very similar but slightly lower than initial cost of InReach (unit and message pack). The advantage to Satpaq at that time was that texts did not expire as long as you purchased at least the minimum each year, providing major savings over time.

RE: Service plans {26103313}

Wed, Feb 5, 2020 6:34 pm
SatPaq Support Team ([email protected])To:you Details
--reply above this line--
Thank you for contacting SatPaq Customer Support. We will research your issue, and an agent will get back to you by the end of the next business day.

If you have already received a similar message, you are receiving this message because we have given your new question a new ticket number.

Please reply to this message if you find you have additional information you want to add to your request.

I have looked at your site with interest. However, your site mentions a cost of message range. Obviously you have message packages, but your site fails to show them. As such, the consumer (me) is unable to compare the value of your product to your competitors. Frankly, this lacking information leaves me with the feeling that Satpaq is trying to sucker people into pruchasing the product before understanding the full operating cost. Although I am still interesting in the product, this is a huge turnoff. Furthermore, as I discuss competitor products on several social media boards, I find myself unable to discuss or promote Satpaq due to the lacking message package prices. Granted, I realize that Satpaq is limited to it's coverage area due to not being on the Iridium satellite network. However, it obviously will fill the needs of those in North America. In short, I believe not advertising your message package rates on your site is causing a significant loss to the Satpaq company; as for me, without knowing the message package rates, Satpaq is off my list of choices.



https://ictwic.jitbit.com/helpdesk/User/[email protected]&[email protected]&userHash=9bd44752040adc946857362315bb3efa&ReturnUrl=https://ictwic.jitbit.com/helpdesk/Ticket/26103313

SatPaq

Two-way satellite messaging by Higher Ground

satpaq.com

The unit is $250.
150 messages is $55
1000 messages is $180
10000 messages is $1750

 

[Bubblehide]

SatPaq

Two-way satellite messaging by Higher Ground

satpaq.com

The unit is $250.
150 messages is $55
1000 messages is $180
10000 messages is $1750

Okay, so based on what you have posted it is $305.00 to initially get into a Satpaq to have it up and running; not $1750.00 as stated previously