Defiantclient

Great update. The shorts have no idea what they're messing with.

bi-monthly short position in $ASTS. Current position is 45M shares, down from 46.7M shares earlier in June 2025.

The bi-monthly short position for $ASTS has been published. As of the end of June the shorts covered ~1.7M shares. Given the run up in price this is not very much. These official numbers are very different from the Markit daily numbers.

AST continues to secure its technical moat with these patents 🔥

$ASTS @AST_SpaceMobile @AbelAvellan 🚨 Another day another US patent: 🚨 "Dynamic Triangulation Of Active User Equipment Location Via Satellite Radio Access Technology (RAT)" US 12,352,877 B1 Inventors: Yu & Fawzi Date published: 2025-07-08

A new @ast-science.com $ASTS patent was reported today by user Theodorus. Replacing GPS signals for positioning using Satellite RAN is likely to be a very good thing for high quality positioning data. It may also reduce power consumption in cellphones which is always a nice feature.

Great news! This sets up AST and Vodafone as a D2D monopoly in Europe in both commercial and government sides of the industry.

Vodafone and AST SpaceMobile Choose Luxembourg as Joint Venture Headquarters to Drive European-Wide Space-Based Mobile Broadband Coverage
www.vodafone.com/news/technol...

Great to see AST secure another major milestone! 🙏

AST SpaceMobile & Fairwinds Technologies Demonstrate World’s First Tactical NTN Connectivity Over Standard Mobile Devices
www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...

Did you get hacked or just mysteriously lost access? Seems like a handful of users are experiencing issues in the last few days, including myself :/

Trump’s aides will call Elon. Not even Trump himself. 😂

Nice representation today during the hearing as well with both AT&T and Verizon in attendance 👌

AST SpaceMobile ramping up launches ahead of beta service this year AST SpaceMobile plans to launch satellites for its direct-to-smartphone broadband constellation every one to two months starting in July, aiming to begin beta services for AT&T and Verizon in the United States before the end of the year.

AST SpaceMobile ramping up launches ahead of beta service this year

AST SpaceMobile plans to launch satellites for its direct-to-smartphone broadband constellation every one to two months starting in July, aiming to begin beta services for AT&T and Verizon in the United States before the end of…

Episode 5: AST SpaceMobile Tech Talk with CatSe, AST Vs Starlink, Technical Use Cases, Golden Dome & More. $ASTS AST Space Odyssey · Episode

$ASTS 101 and Dual Use Cases with the Legend CatSE 🔥: open.spotify.com/episode/1AaI...

Thanks for sharing!

It is worth noting that even with the OOBE waiver, SpaceX D2D service is barely picking the low hanging fruit that is text messaging. Shows the weakness of their design and the MNO's are not fooled. Among many other reasons, that is why $ASTS @ast-science.com is the partner of choice for so many.

Welcome to the start of the end of your career. Your comments about AST are consistently wrong and will continue to be proven wrong. In a ~year from now I expect your online presence to vanish from shame and embarrassment as the SpaceMob puts a giant magnifying glass over your shitty track record.

Thanks for staying on top of these updates!!

Would make sense. AST birds are the largest communications arrays in history. 🔥

On the other side of the coin is AST SpaceMobile whose satellite architecture is transparent “bent pipe” with gNodeB base stations on the ground, fully owned and operated by local mobile network operators. Essentially AST is only bouncing data like a mirror and doesn’t see any of it. Data is safe.

Your concerns about Starlink Direct-To-Cell/Device are valid.

Starlink satellite architecture is such that the eNodeB base stations are on the satellites in orbit. They have full control of the data being processed through.

Essentially T-Mobile users are roaming onto Starlink’s network.

Thanks for staying on top of these!

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Space Bureau and Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Seek Comment on Filings of SpaceX and T-Mobile Requesting to Establish Supplemental Coverage from Space Application for Authority for Modification of the SpaceX NGSO Satellite System to Add a Direct to Cellular System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) GN Docket No. 23-135; ICFS File Nos. SAT- MOD-20230207-00021, SAT-AMD-20240322- 00061 Call Sign S3069 ECHOSTAR CORPORATION’S APPLICATION FOR REVIEW EchoStar Corporation (“EchoStar”) respectfully seeks Commission review of the Space Bureau’s decision to grant SpaceX’s waiver of the aggregate out-of-band interference limits for supplemental coverage from space (“SCS”).1 Instead of finding that harmful interference would be unlikely at the higher power levels proposed by SpaceX, the Bureau failed to make any decision about the likelihood of harmful interference, granted the waiver, and put the burden on EchoStar to protect itself. That decision was not reasoned, because the Bureau failed to show that the Commission’s concerns underlying Section 25.202(k)(1) had changed, been eliminated, or rendered unlikely. It was also erroneous because the plain text of the Communications Act vests the Commission with the responsibility to “prevent interference” before it happens.2 Addressing interference after it already happens does not meet that mark.

2 burden to the Commission, not EchoStar. Given all this, the waiver grant could not have plausibly served the public interest. The Commission should reverse the Bureau. QUESTION PRESENTED In March 2024, the Commission adopted the SCS Order, which, among other things, set an aggregate out-of-band of band interference limit for supplemental coverage from space services.3 The Commission described that limit as “necessary” to protect wireless operators from harmful interference, and proponents of weaker limits provided “no evidence” supporting their claims.4 Despite that, less than a year later, the Space Bureau adopted the Waiver Order, waiving this limit for SpaceX without deciding that harmful interference would be unlikely.5 Did this decision improperly conflict with the SCS Order, Section 303(f) of the Communications Act, and the good cause standard for waivers in Section 1.3 of the Commission’s rules?6 BACKGROUND The SCS Order crafted a regulatory framework for SCS service, including licensing and service rules to prevent harmful interference. One of those rules is Section 25.202(k)(1), setting the aggregate out-of-band interference limit for the service at -120 dBW/m2/MHz.7 The

8 agency by the statute.”35 The Communications Act tasks the Commission with making “such regulations not inconsistent with law as it may deem necessary to prevent interference between stations[.]”36 The Commission’s SCS Order did that for SCS by adopting the aggregate out-of- band interference limit in Section 25.202(k)(1) that was “necessary” to protect adjacent-band wireless networks from harmful interference.37 Despite the Commission’s prior finding that out-of-band interference concerns warrant a rule limiting aggregate emissions, the Bureau waived Section 25.202(k)(1) as requested by SpaceX.38 In doing so, the Bureau failed to determine that the harmful interference concerns described in the SCS Order that led to the adoption of Section 25.202(k)(1) had been eliminated. Instead, all the Bureau said was that “SpaceX has provided engineering analyses in support of its claim that harmful interference in adjacent bands is unlikely” and that “T-Mobile, an adjacent band terrestrial operator . . . presents its own technical analyses in which it concludes that the waiver poses a low likelihood of harmful interference.”39 That is as far as it went. The Bureau never endorsed the conclusions of either analysis, nor did it reject the technical claims of AT&T, Verizon, and EchoStar raised in the records for both the SCS Order and the Waiver Order. AT&T demonstrated that it would suffer a devastating 18% reduction in throughput.40 But the Waiver Order allowed SpaceX to operate at higher power levels regardless. This failure to rule

9 out harmful interference conflicts with the SCS Order’s technical reasons for adopting Section 25.202(k)(1). The Bureau tried to cover this hole in its decisionmaking by conditioning SpaceX’s authorization on a requirement to not cause harmful interference and to address any complaints of harmful interference from adjacent band users.41 But this condition contravenes the Communications Act’s mandate to make rules that “prevent interference between stations[.]”42 As the Supreme Court has held, the word “prevent” means “to render (an intended, possible, or likely action or event) impractical or impossible by anticipatory action.”43 In other words, “prevent” means to stop something before it happens. Accordingly, the Commission’s statutory responsibility is to make rules that stop harmful interference at its inception, just like Section 25.202(k)(1) is supposed to do. But unlike an aggregate power limit, the condition in the Waiver Order allows SpaceX and T-Mobile to interfere with adjacent band users like EchoStar up until EchoStar detects and reports the interference. Because this non-anticipatory measure only kicks in after EchoStar suffers from harmful interference, it does not satisfy the prevention required by the plain text of the Communications Act. In any event, the Bureau knows that it is immensely difficult for carriers to detect a particular source of interference. In reality, the condition forces EchoStar to take up this burden just to keep its basic rights as a licensee. Yet Congress placed the burden to prevent harmful interference on the Commission and those causing it, not the victim operators.44

Nice to see Echostar push back on the FCC's "arbitrary and capricious" decision to grant the SpaceX request for a waiver of the OOBE limit. $ASTS 🥊
www.fcc.gov/ecfs/documen...

1/ Ever wonder how a 199 square meter satellite 🛰️ could connect YOUR phone 📱 from space? @AST_SpaceMobile 's BlueBird is making 5G direct to device a reality—and $ASTS stock might just skyrocket 🚀 with it. Check this out! 👀

2/ Millions of Americans can’t get a cellular signal 📶 in the vast rural landscape. @AST_SpaceMobile ’s game-changing D2D network is hitting AT&T and Verizon’s dead zones by early 2026. Is $ASTS the hidden gem 💎 investors are sleeping on? See for yourself! 👇

3/ 3.0 BILLION people could soon be connected in the most remote locations on earth 🌎. @AST_SpaceMobile 's global connectivity is starting 🌐—and $ASTS could be your ticket 🎟️ to the next big thing in telecommunications. Don’t miss this! 🔥

Sharing some AMAZING $ASTS Infographics from @paul44250784.bsky.social! 🫡Please review and share with others!

There is very little the rural carriers can do to survive in the long run. They are just hoping to extend their subsidies and maximize the amount they can get. $ASTS can provide coverage at a much lower price and they are worried the national carriers will bypass them.

If Blue Origin can pull this off, we should be able to expect a launch with AST by year end… 🤞

Sp🅰️ceMob: the unofficial $ASTS anti-FUD department

$ASTS: @ast-science.com confirms to the FCC that "documentation demonstrating FirstNet's consent is forthcoming and will be uploaded into the ELS as an exhibit".

Will this be a definitive agreement? Or is it just word salad for a consent letter? Stay tuned!

apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.h...

Another key point for everyone to know is that so far, Cohere has been testing successfully with Bell and Vodafone, both of which are AST's strategic investors and partners!

Interview: Ray Dolan, Cohere Technologies The CEO & Chairman of Cohere Technologies is interviewed by Justin Springham at MWC25.

Someone shared this video link with me. I LOVE it. Lots of great details here. $ASTS. Watch it.
www.mobileworldlive.com/old_latest-s...

If not for Trump’s tariff bullshit, we’d be testing ATHs.