simcoder t1_ispds3y wrote
Reply to comment by Tomycj in The Solar System Isn’t Ready to Deal With Humanity’s Garbage by Maxcactus
>Elon has clearly stated that they'll use starlink revenue to fund spacex's objectives (which is enabling the colonization of mars).
I think maybe you need to check with Elon on that. Elon himself has stated that Starlink will be sold off when it gets profitable.
And even if they did pump all the profit from Starlink into Mars, it would still just be a drop in the bucket.
Where Elon has very intentionally confused his biggest fanbase on the Starlink Mars connection comes from a Shotwell quote:
Shotwell said: "The total addressable market for launch, with a conservative outlook on commercial human passengers, is probably about $6 billion," she said, "but the addressable market for global broadband is $1 trillion."
She added: "If you want to help fund long-term Mars development programs, you want to go into markets and sectors that are much bigger than the one you're in, especially if there's enough connective tissue between that giant market, and what you're doing now. That's how I recall it, but that's a good question for Elon."
Tomycj t1_ispxc4v wrote
Elon just said it would eventually become a public company, I don't think that implies he will lose all involvement in it.
> it would still just be a drop in the bucket.
No, it would be a HUGE boost to the Starship program. And as I said before, once that is working, the market might come in and help a lot with the rest. It's like building a railroad: its cost is small compared to the rest of the town, but that whole town might not have developed without it.
Shotwell's quote is in-line with what I've been telling you. I don't know why you make it look as if that were some sort of intentional misinformation or something.
simcoder t1_ispyox5 wrote
It does imply a whole new set of investors and board of directors to keep happy. People usually invest in things to make money. They can't make money if all of it is getting siphoned off to pay for a Mars colony.
If the Starlink profits really were destined to go to Mars, it would be much simpler to just keep it in house at SpaceX.
Shotwell's quote is supposed to confuse you. But note that even she is unaware of the specifics of how the Mars financing is going to work. Hence her "that's a good question for Elon".
And it's a question that Elon has ducked for almost a decade now.
Tomycj t1_isq2739 wrote
Elon simply said, paraphrasing, "I want to use starlink to help funding the colonization of mars, and that is at least part of the reason I started starlink". That's clear enough for me. I don't know the specifics but it is not something impossible to do, so I'm not that worried.
If you want to check if there's more info on how Elon's planning to do it, r/spacex is a good source, try asking there.
Anyways, with starlink help or not, fortunately the starship program seems to be well funded for now. After all its a revolutionary rocket, mars bound or not.
simcoder t1_isq39ha wrote
Most of the fanbase, regardless of sub, are convinced that somehow Starlink is going to pay for Mars. And Elon really hasn't laid out any specifics. The fact that he has been very, very specific about IPOing Starlink though should be a cautionary warning to anyone under the impression Starlink will pay for Mars.
And the launch market isn't really that big and doesn't really need a Starship (see Shotwell's comment). To some extent, Starlink is a make work project to give Starship something to do.
So, doubtful that's going to be a huge revenue source either.
Tomycj t1_isq5njr wrote
I suggested r/spacex precisely because they're very rigorous, so there's little "fanbase bias", if you're looking for serious and informed arguments.
>Starlink is a make work project to give Starship something to do.
Well, if that means getting involved in a trillion dollar business, it looks like a very good use for the starship.
Shotwell was talking about human travel. The non-human space market is much bigger. And she was talking about the present. In the future, with such a railway built and working, things might change a lot.
simcoder t1_isq7bgy wrote
I think the problem is that we really only have those couple quotes to go on and then everything else is just guesswork/fill in the blanks. Regardless of the sub you are in.
Regarding Starship revolutionizing space. The A380 was going to revolutionize air travel. But it turns out that bigger is not always better. Sometimes the flexibility you get from smaller is more important. I think that applies even more to space/LEO.
Tomycj t1_isq8c99 wrote
Starship is not only bigger, but cheaper. It's RTLS capabilities make it very flexible in some aspects aswell.
edit: well it isn't, it's intended to be. We have yet to see it, but so far the numbers make sense.
simcoder t1_isq8nib wrote
Well so was the A380 on a per passenger basis. But turns out there are a very limited number of routes with enough passengers to justify the sizing.
Pretty much the exact same can be said for space/LEO whether you're talking about cargo or pax.
Tomycj t1_isqcy69 wrote
No, the same can't be said about Starship because it is intended to be cheaper than the falcon 9, and we already know that the falcon 9 has enough "routes". It's as if that big plane could also fly the common routes for a cheaper price. That's why Starship is so revolutionary.
[deleted] t1_isqfwwe wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments