While Starlink Mobile’s existing global 2 GHz mid-band spectrum will provide high-bandwidth capacity, the new spectrum will enable its signal to pass through obstacles. ​Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.
Sign up here.
Low-band frequencies are ​prized for their ability to travel longer distances and penetrate ⁠dense structures such as walls and tree cover, addressing a major ​technical hurdle previously faced by satellite-based mobile networks.
By pairing nationwide low-band airwaves ​with high-frequency space capacity, SpaceX is positioning Starlink Mobile to bypass conventional cell towers entirely and challenge the wireless oligopoly on both broad coverage and in-building reliability.
The deal ​also raises the stakes for legacy carriers, transforming satellite direct-to-device connectivity ​from a supplementary safety feature for remote dead zones into a full-scale commercial rival ‌capable ⁠of unseating terrestrial cellular networks.
The transaction, which involves acquiring 100% of private-equity firm Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz spectrum portfolio, remains subject ​to regulatory approval ​by the Federal ⁠Communications Commission. Grain had acquired the airwaves from T-Mobile earlier this year.
Crucially, most existing, unmodified mobile handsets already ​support the 800 MHz frequency band, eliminating the ​need for ⁠consumers to purchase proprietary satellite phones.
The Federal Communications Commission also approved Starlink Mobile’s Gen2 constellation application this week, authorizing SpaceX to launch 15,000 satellites ⁠that are ​optimized for 2 GHz spectrum globally.
The new ​orbital fleet will operate in very low Earth orbit, delivering expanded bandwidth and low-latency connections ​to standard handsets.
Adds details, background throughout
Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar

Information in Investor’s Business Daily is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as an offer, recommendation, solicitation, or rating to buy or sell securities. The information has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we make no guarantee as to its accuracy, timeliness, or suitability, including with respect to information that appears in closed captioning. Historical investment performances are no indication or guarantee of future success or performance. Authors/presenters may own the stocks they discuss. We make no representations or warranties regarding the advisability of investing in any particular securities or utilizing any specific investment strategies. Information is subject to change without notice. For information on use of our services, please see our Terms of Use.
*Real-time prices by Nasdaq Last Sale. Real-time quote and/or trade prices are not sourced from all markets. Ownership data provided by LSEG and Estimate data provided by FactSet.
IBD, IBD Digital, IBD Live, IBD Weekly, Investor’s Business Daily, Leaderboard, MarketDiem, MarketSurge and other marks are trademarks owned by Investor’s Business Daily, LLC.
©2026 Investor’s Business Daily, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

One of the regulations that make vehicles in the US different from those in Europe or Japan is our headlight rules. They’re laid out in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), and changing them is—or used to be—a lengthy, laborious process, which is a major reason automotive lighting technology has lagged in the US. But the current administration says it’s time for “bolstering driver safety, slashing red tape, and embracing new technologies,” so it’s going to start a negotiated rulemaking process to rewrite the regulations to suit 2026.
“Today’s standards do not allow automakers to deploy the latest safety-improving lighting technologies, so we are bringing key experts and stakeholders together to modernize our standards and address potential causes of glare,” the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Jonathan Morrison said. “This collaborative approach will allow us to update outdated regulations, foster innovation, and keep everyone on our roads safer.”
While it is fair to be skeptical of the government’s efforts to streamline bureaucracy, it is also fair to say US headlight regulations really could use an update.
When Ars started covering cars, automakers like Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, and Volvo were trying to import adaptive headlight technology. At the time, the FMVSS only allowed for “dumb” high- and low-beams, nothing else. Meanwhile, lighting technology evolved, adopting first lasers and then LEDs with addressable pixels that can block out those that would otherwise illuminate oncoming cars.
In 2013, in response to Toyota’s petition, NHTSA said it would start the rulemaking process. It took another five years before a rule was published for consideration; in the interim, the NHTSA was considering adopting Europe’s rules before deciding that if a car with adaptive beam lights “does not have a long preview of another vehicle, such as in an intersection scenario or when two vehicles are oncoming on a curved road, ADB does not have enough time to react to adapt its beam pattern.”
One key difference is how vehicles are regulated. In Europe, cars are homologated for type approval; manufacturers submit examples to authorities for testing to ensure they conform to the rules, and then the authorities approve the car for sale. In the US, OEMs tell NHTSA their cars comply with the FMVSS, or face sanctions if that turns out to be false later. At the time, NHTSA felt that Europe’s glare tests were too subjective for a self-certification regime and decided instead to write its own.
In 2022, that final rule was ready. Since then, cars with active beam matrix LED headlights have gone on sale in the US; Audi’s big new SUVs are a good example, although they are limited in functionality compared with the same technology fitted to European-spec cars.
Among NHTSA’s goals for an updated FMVSS 108 are harmonizing US standards with their global counterparts, updating the rules for technologies like LEDs, ambient light sensors, automatic high beams, and replaceable light sources, improving test procedures for lenses and optics, understanding how to better aim headlights, and making sure that none of this blinds anyone else on the road with glare.

Tech stocks dropped on Thursday after a news report that OpenAI’s annualized revenue is about $20 billion less than previously reported.
OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, recently told investors that its annualized revenue was nearing $50 billion, according to the Financial Times. That’s lower than the $70 billion figure previously reported by media, including the FT, based on information from investors.
The discrepancy could rattle investors already questioning whether demand for AI will be strong enough to help companies like OpenAI and Anthropic turn a profit and justify the industry’s enormous spending on the AI buildout.
The Nasdaq Composite sank 1.25%, its worst day since mid-August. The S&P 500 fell 0.5%, weighed down by a drop in the tech sector. The indexes had opened lower but declines accelerated after the FT report published midday.
A source familiar with the documents said the $70 billion figure did not come from OpenAI and likely came from a desire by firms to compare OpenAI’s numbers with Anthropic’s, which includes gross revenue from cloud providers. OpenAI’s is based on net revenue.
OpenAI declined to comment.
There was selling across semiconductor chipmakers, cloud providers and other tech companies involved in the AI buildout. Nvidia (NVDA) fell 2.9%, Intel (INTC) fell 5.3% and Oracle (ORCL) fell 5.5%.
The outlook for many tech stocks is based on investors’ conviction that demand for AI will continue to grow. If there are wrinkles in that story, like OpenAI earning less revenue than expected, that could send ripples throughout the supply chain for the AI buildout, said Ross Mayfield, investment strategist at Baird.
“There are going to be tremors throughout all of the related sub-industries,” Mayfield said.
The stakes are higher now because the stock market in recent weeks has been buoyed by gains in tech and AI stocks, while other sectors have struggled under the pressure of rising bond yields.
“This has become a much narrower market that’s dependent on the AI names to keep it afloat,” Mayfield said. “Certainly, this is going to hit that complex in a big way.”
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced in September that the company would postpone its initial public offering until at least next year, citing concerns about AI safety.

The twin actions mark the broadest strike yet against skilled-worker ‌immigration programs — potentially cutting off a common path to permanent residency for foreign tech workers — while putting some of the country’s top research universities on notice.
Sign up here.
“There has been no company in the United States, unfortunately, that has abused the system more than Microsoft,” Vice President JD Vance said. He said the company laid off 6,000 American workers last year while benefiting from 6,300 H-1B temporary worker visas and nearly 3,000 green cards.
The announcement about the permanent labor ​certification process — PERM — came hours before Trump was due to give Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Under PERM, required for most employment-based green cards, ​employers must show that hiring a foreign worker will not harm US workers’ wages or job opportunities.
Microsoft is the largest filer of PERM applications, ⁠according to data from the US labor department.
The company said in a statement that about 80% of the H-1B applications it filed in the last fiscal year were to extend or change ​the status of current employees, not to hire new workers. In July, the company said it would cut 4,800 jobs, or about 2.1% of its global workforce.
He said these companies had since 2009 sought almost three million foreign workers, and had received over 230,000 H-1B visa approvals and over 100,000 permanent labor certifications.
Amazon.com was the largest employer of approved H-1B beneficiaries in fiscal 2026, followed by Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys, Apple and ​Microsoft, according to US immigration data.
Vance said the suspensions would last “as long as it needs to,” adding that the administration wants the companies to change how they hire. He said some companies ​post ineffective job ads, then cite a lack of applicants to justify hiring lower-paid foreign workers.
Microsoft said in its statement that it pays its H-1B employees the same as any other employees doing comparable work.
“The ‌immediate financial impact ⁠on major technology companies may be relatively limited at this moment, but the longer-term implications for innovation and competitiveness could be much more significant,” said Ken Mahoney, CEO of Mahoney Asset Management.
Adobe, Cognizant, Infosys, HCL Technologies, Wipro and Capgemini did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Tata Consultancy Services declined to comment.
Nasscom, India’s IT industry body, said Indian tech companies in the US had significantly reduced their reliance on H-1B visas, and relatively few of their workers sought green cards through the PERM process.
CRACKDOWN WIDENS
The suspensions are the latest in a series of steps against skilled-worker programs. ​In September last year, the Labor Department launched ​an enforcement drive called “Project Firewall” as a ⁠White House proclamation imposed a one-time $100,000 fee on new H-1B petitions for workers hired from abroad.
During President Donald Trump’s second term, companies have faced growing pressure to keep jobs and production in the United States rather than move them overseas.
The action comes despite closer ties between the administration ​and tech leaders, who are lobbying for lighter AI regulation.
UNIVERSITIES UNDER SCRUTINY
Vance also said nine universities, including Harvard, Yale and Stanford, would be ​investigated for what the ⁠administration called the misuse of exchange-visitor visas to undercut American wages.
The nine schools also include Brown and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Labor Inspector General Anthony D’Esposito said subpoenas had already been served.
D’Esposito said investigators would examine whether foreign influence, improper financial relationships or visa abuse were compromising federally funded research.
“It could have an enormous economic impact on the whole US economy,” said Sarah Spreitzer, a vice president at ⁠the American ​Council on Education, which represents college and university presidents. International students historically spent $40 billion a year while in the ​US, she said.
The probe deepens the administration’s long-running fight with Harvard over foreign students. Last year, the Department of Homeland Security subpoenaed the university over alleged misconduct by international students and its compliance with immigration law. Harvard called that subpoena “unfounded ​retribution” but said it would comply as far as the law requires.
Adds details, background and analyst quotes throughout
Reporting by Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff, Doina Chiacu in Washington and Prathik Jayaprakash in Bengaluru; Editing by Mark Porter, Sayantani Ghosh and Sanjeev Miglani