>>10967905SpaceX will still have competitors. Blue Origin might be a serious contender once New Glenn starts flying. ULA will always have a chance due to US government preference. National payloads of other countries will not fly on SpaceX rockets due to security concerns.
There's also the fact that BFR and Starlink are somewhat of a gamble. The reason why most commercial rockets don't really have payload capacities above 20 metric tons to LEO is that there aren't any commercial payloads with that mass. BFR may be a technical masterpiece but could fail on the open market because very few customers have the need for 100t to LEO. There have been multiple attempts at LEO commsat constellations before Starlink, and they all had serious problems gaining money. IIRC Iridium was the most "successful" of the bunch and it went bankrupt before marginal profits started coming in. One of these two failing would seriously hurt SpaceX. Both failing would be catastrophic.
There's also the fact that SpaceX is very vertically integrated. This is an advantage now as it allows SpaceX to cut costs dramatically. However, as other competitors invest in reusability and make their own equivalents to the Falcon 9 (ex: Blue Origin's New Glenn), SpaceX may find it harder to adapt to these new competitors as it is forced to make significant changes to it's supply chain to remain competitive (ex: methalox is superior to reuse than kerolox, but the Falcon 9 was made before this revelation was widespread, so SpaceX's competitors can take advantage of this idea right away while SpaceX is forced to try to adjust it's more rigid system).
Also, competitors of SpaceX is a good thing as it prevents them from gaining a monopoly on launches, and thus encourages them to keep the quality of their products high.
