SpaceX sent T-Mobile down 13%. But tower stocks went UP. Here’s the weird part.

T-Mobile fell 13.3% Friday, while AT&T dropped 9.8% and Verizon 8.8%, after SpaceX announced a new spectrum deal. Here’s what makes it interesting: spectrum helps Starlink compete in mobile, but it doesn’t instantly create a nationwide network. Indoor coverage, towers, and years of investment still matter. The deal also needs regulatory approval. Meanwhile, tower stocks like American Tower and Crown Castle rallied. Investors seem worried about a new wireless competitor while also betting it’ll need ground infrastructure. Is the telecom selloff pricing in a genuine long-term threat, or did the market get way ahead of what SpaceX can actually build? Source: Reuters, Oct. 9, 2026.

3 comments held Reddit says 0 on reddit ↗

u/WhatMattersHere 1 1 day ago

The tower rally makes sense as a possibility, but there's an interesting exposure on the other side of that trade..Crown Castle's 2025 filings show that T-Mobile, AT&T and Verizon accounted for roughly 89% of its site rental revenue. American Tower also gets about 85% of its U.S./Canada property revenue from those three carriers..So the same companies being repriced for potential subscriber losses are also the tower owners' dominant customers.If SpaceX leases substantial existing tower capacity, that's a genuine new source of demand. But if its entry eventually reduces the incumbents' network spending, some of that benefit could be offset. And a hybrid satellite/terrestrial network doesn't automatically tell us how much infrastructure SpaceX will lease rather than deploy differently.I'd separate three questions: how credible the subscriber threat is, how much terrestrial infrastructure SpaceX actually needs to rent, and whether the resulting new tenancy exceeds any reduction in incumbent carrier spending.The market can be right to worry about carriers and optimistic about towers simultaneously. But the tower rally isn't yet evidence that the net economics will favor tower owners.
u/WorryDesigner8152 OP 1 1 day ago

that’s actually a really good point. i was looking at the tower rally as a bet on new demand, but if the big carriers are already their biggest customers, SpaceX becoming a new tenant doesn’t automatically make towers the winners. the new business would have to outweigh whatever spending the carriers pull back. makes that rally a lot less straightforward.
u/capriciousbanjo21 1 1 day ago

You're framing it as three separate questions but they're all linked by timing. If SpaceX actually starts leasing tower space in a meaningful way, it'll show up in tower owner revenue years before it meaningfully hurts the carriers. So the market can price the tower upside now while still being unsure about the carrier downside, and both trades can coexist for a while without contradicting each other. The real risk is if the carriers start cutting their tower spend before SpaceX shows up as a paying tenant, which would leave tower owners in this awkward gap where they're losing old money faster than they're gaining new money.