Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lessthanabelian t1_je0arw6 wrote

That's not much at all for launch provider start up.

3

seanflyon t1_je1aukj wrote

Rocket Lab got to orbit with less and SpaceX got to orbit with not too much more.

15

TheBaenAddict t1_je2aw0x wrote

It's actually a generous amount for a company at this stage. SpaceX spent 300M over 4.5 years to build the Falcon 9.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130328121051/http://www.spacex.com/usa.php

3

lessthanabelian t1_je2fdeq wrote

400M from NASA alone, not counting their other sources of funding.

−2

TheBaenAddict t1_je2gayj wrote

Categorically false. Read my source.

3

lessthanabelian t1_je2gqcd wrote

Elon isn't being completely honest or more likely is miscategorizing costs somewhere.

​

The NASA contract to develop F9 WAS 400M. That is a fact. The actual contract is more reputable than the words of a man known to exaggerate to absurd degree.

−3

seanflyon t1_je2m570 wrote

You should actually read that link. That $300 million figure is for Falcon vehicle 9 development. It does not include Dragon development, engine development, or building launch sites and factories.

You are thinking about the COTS contract that included developing Falcon 9, developing Dragon, and multiple launches.

4

lessthanabelian t1_je2mdr3 wrote

So, exactly what I said, miscategorizing costs.

​

Engine development is part of F9 vehicle development.

−1

seanflyon t1_je32vdb wrote

No, you just didn't quite read the comment you replied to.

I generally prefer to include engine development in vehicle development, but plenty of people disagree especially when the engine development happened before the development of a particular vehicle. Merlin was developed for Falcon 1, though there were continued improvements over time.

No one who read that source and understood the context would honestly say "Elon isn't being completely honest or more likely is miscategorizing costs somewhere". You were just confused.

5

_Warsheep_ t1_je4h09j wrote

That's just investor money. I'm not sure if it includes the support by ESA and DLR they have gotten so far. Also they apparently already have their first few flights fully booked and more customers interested.

We shouldn't compare this to those companies a few years ago riding the SPAC hype and raising 800mil Dollar with a cool PowerPoint presentation and no hardware and now threatened to be delisted.

Raising 155mil Euro in the current economy actually isn't too bad.

I'm more worried about their future business model. Launch alone doesn't make you much money. And especially for small launch there aren't that many launches to go around as people hoped and claimed a few years ago. Nobody is going to buy 30 small launches for their constellation when 1-2 big ones do the same. Even Rocketlab makes most of their money in producing satellite components. Launch is just an option you can book in that package. SpaceX has Starlink which will probably soon dwarf their revenue from launch and they also try selling their Starlink satellite bus and ion thrusters.

I think one of them will do fine, but i doubt we will have Orbex, Isar and RFA plus a few others i probably forgot around in 10 years time.

3