Spekulatius Posted June 3, 2020 Posted June 3, 2020 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/06/01/spacexs-success-is-one-small-step-man-one-giant-leap-capitalism/ "The cost to NASA for launching a man into space on the space shuttle orbiter was $170 million per seat, compared with just $60 million to $67 million on the Dragon capsule. The cost for the space shuttle to send a kilogram of cargo into to space was $54,500; with the Falcon rocket, the cost is just $2,720 — a decrease of 95 percent. And while the space shuttle cost $27.4 billion to develop, the Crew Dragon was designed and built for just $1.7 billion " Well, the Russians were ripping the US and the rest of the world off, because they had no competition. The design of the Space shuttle was from the early 70’s, and the idea was that a ) partly) reusable spaceship would make space cheaper. That really never worked out, because the space shuttle was complex and the end, it cost about ~500M to launch. I guess it is a case of and project management , where every little of the many steps make sense and the end result doesn’t. The US should have pulled the plug on this in the 80’s after the first shuttle blew up,Knut I guess it was just from an institutional POV just easier to save face and soldier on. The real savings are when you look at what Russia was charging the US to ferry astronauts to the ISS. It was something like $80M per astronaut so $160M per launch with US astronauts. As an American I had heard/read very little about SpaceX's primary competitor Arianespace but the price war between the two is fascinating and it will be interesting to see what Arianespace comes up with. Just the ability for US companies to launch from the Cape as opposed to French Guiana has to translate into significant savings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competition In competitive bids during 2013 and early 2014, SpaceX was winning many launch customers that formerly "would have been all-but-certain clients of Europe's Arianespace launch consortium, with prices that are $60 million or less."
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 https://www.wsj.com/articles/nasa-investigating-former-officials-contacts-with-boeing-on-lunar-contracts-11591538265 NASA Investigating Former Official’s Contacts With Boeing on Lunar Contracts The probe, according to these people, focuses on communications Boeing officials had with the head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s human-exploration office, Doug Loverro, before he resigned in May. The inspector general’s staff, these people said, is looking into an allegation that Mr. Loverro improperly provided guidance that could have offered the Chicago aerospace giant unusual insight into aspects of the competition. ... Boeing unsuccessfully competed earlier this year against space-exploration rivals including SpaceX and Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin Federation LLC for the contracts to build the landers needed to ship astronauts to the moon. The contracts eventually are expected to total billions of dollars. One wonders how many cockroaches exist in the kitchen of cozy defense/gov't contractor relations: DoD/NASA/etc with companies like Boeing, Lockheed, etc. And remember: SpaceX got a grant of $3.1Bn from NASA to develop a crew capsule. Boeing got $4.8Bn. Spacex had its first successful test almost a year and a half ago, and just 1 week ago ferried two live astronauts safely to the ISS. Boeing had a test fail 6 mo ago due to basic software mistake (clock programmed incorrectly)--I'm sure not the only flaw. Since then, nothing. That’s taxpayer money. And Elon is the one who is no genius and a fraud, right boys? Elon is an inefficient/wasteful capital allocator in your minds? Enjoy regularly flushing those taxpayer funds down the Boeing toilet.
rb Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 https://www.wsj.com/articles/nasa-investigating-former-officials-contacts-with-boeing-on-lunar-contracts-11591538265 NASA Investigating Former Official’s Contacts With Boeing on Lunar Contracts The probe, according to these people, focuses on communications Boeing officials had with the head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s human-exploration office, Doug Loverro, before he resigned in May. The inspector general’s staff, these people said, is looking into an allegation that Mr. Loverro improperly provided guidance that could have offered the Chicago aerospace giant unusual insight into aspects of the competition. ... Boeing unsuccessfully competed earlier this year against space-exploration rivals including SpaceX and Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin Federation LLC for the contracts to build the landers needed to ship astronauts to the moon. The contracts eventually are expected to total billions of dollars. One wonders how many cockroaches exist in the cozy kitchen of defense/old contractor relations with gov't contracts to companies like Boeing, Lockheed, etc. And remember: SpaceX got a grant of $3.1Bn from NASA to develop a crew capsule. Boeing got $4.8Bn. Spacex had its first successful test almost a year and a half ago, and just 1 week ago ferried two live astronauts safely to the ISS. Boeing had a test fail 6 mo ago due to basic software mistake (clock programmed incorrectly)--I'm sure not the only flaw. Since then, nothing. That’s taxpayer money. And Elon is the one who is no genius and a fraud, right boys? Elon is an inefficient/wasteful capital allocator in your minds? Enjoy regularly flushing those taxpayer funds down the Boeing toilet. The bias just lows from your post. You're sure the clock wasn't the only flaw? Any evidence? Do you have a security clearance by any chance? Whew is the brilliance of capital allocation? Boeing gets juice from the gov't and space x gets juice from the private sector. Is there a comparison on capital allocation and efficiency of companies or are we just gonna talk about the bullshit where we bleed our hearts about the tax payer?
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 The bias just lows from your post. You're sure the clock wasn't the only flaw? Any evidence? Do you have a security clearance by any chance? Whew is the brilliance of capital allocation? Boeing gets juice from the gov't and space x gets juice from the private sector. Is there a comparison on capital allocation and efficiency of companies or are we just gonna talk about the bullshit where we bleed our hearts about the tax payer? Yeah. The 737 Max is my evidence. As they say--more than just one cockroach in the kitchen. When they gonna fly the Max again? How much capital has Boeing soaked up in its space launch program vs SpaceX? Better look closely buddy. You can start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System Hint: cost per launch: $500M to $2B; Project cost: over $18 Billion (so far) Some really amusing stuff in here: In May 2019, NASA's Office of Audits reported that the SLS Block 1's marginal cost per launch is to be at least $876 million.[90] By comparison, a Saturn V launch cost roughly $1.23 billion in 2016 dollars.[91][92] A letter from the White House to the Senate Appropriations Committee revealed that the SLS's cost per launch is estimated at "over $2 billion" after development.[93] NASA did not deny this cost and an agency spokesperson stated it "is working to bring down the cost of a single SLS launch in a given year as the agency continues negotiations with Boeing on the long-term production contract and efforts to finalize contracts and costs for other elements of the rocket".[94] I must surely be biased here!
Xerxes Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 SpaceX management = owner, founder, stakeholder and manager all rolled into one Boeing management = manager-on-contract-on-punch-card
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 SpaceX management = owner, founder, stakeholder and manager all rolled into one Boeing management = manager-on-contract-on-punch-card We are the biased ones, clearly because the SpaceX founder says some crazy things on Twitter and must be a fraud. Need a real CEO. Where Muilenburg at?
rb Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 The bias just lows from your post. You're sure the clock wasn't the only flaw? Any evidence? Do you have a security clearance by any chance? Whew is the brilliance of capital allocation? Boeing gets juice from the gov't and space x gets juice from the private sector. Is there a comparison on capital allocation and efficiency of companies or are we just gonna talk about the bullshit where we bleed our hearts about the tax payer? Yeah. The 737 Max is my evidence. As they say--more than just one cockroach in the kitchen. When they gonna fly the Max again? How much capital has Boeing soaked up in its space launch program vs SpaceX? Better look closely buddy. You can start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System Hint: cost per launch: $500M to $2B; Project cost: over $18 Billion (so far) The thing is you don't know how much capital has been burned. That's the point of space x being private. 737 max is a problem and companies sometimes have problems. But Boeing has been profitable for a long time. When is the last time that Space X or a musk affiliate company has been profitable?
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 The bias just lows from your post. You're sure the clock wasn't the only flaw? Any evidence? Do you have a security clearance by any chance? Whew is the brilliance of capital allocation? Boeing gets juice from the gov't and space x gets juice from the private sector. Is there a comparison on capital allocation and efficiency of companies or are we just gonna talk about the bullshit where we bleed our hearts about the tax payer? Yeah. The 737 Max is my evidence. As they say--more than just one cockroach in the kitchen. When they gonna fly the Max again? How much capital has Boeing soaked up in its space launch program vs SpaceX? Better look closely buddy. You can start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System Hint: cost per launch: $500M to $2B; Project cost: over $18 Billion (so far) The thing is you don't know how much capital has been burned. That's the point of space x being private. 737 max is a problem and companies sometimes have problems. But Boeing has been profitable for a long time. When is the last time that Space X or a musk affiliate company has been profitable? I'm not sure I'm the one with the bias, Sir.
rb Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 Problems tend to happen with new aircraft problems. For example the Dreamliners had a tendency to catch on fire (fire is very bad on an aircraft). DC-10s had an explosive decompression problem. Both were fixed and both became highly successful platforms. There are other examples I could mention. There usually are some problems with new aircraft platforms just like there are with new cars. They usually get worked out. But if you want to talk about capital allocation there must be a profit. As in a return on capital. Otherwise the equation does not work. Boeing has plenty of years on delivering on that. How many years does space x have?
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 More great dollars spent on yet-to-be-launched vehicles (this one from Lockheed and some Airbus too): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-23/lockheed-wins-4-6-billion-nasa-contract-for-orion-spacecraft For fiscal years 2006 through 2020, the Orion expended funding totaling $18,764 million in nominal dollars. This is equivalent to $21,477 million adjusting to 2020 dollars using the NASA New Start Inflation Indices.[46] For fiscal year 2021, $1.401 billions[47] were requested for the Orion program. 2006! Lol, SpaceX was started with part of Elon's Paypal winnings ($Millions, not $Billions) not to long before that... Being a defense/NASA contractor is one of those wide moat, sit on your ass and produce nothing, high margin businesses...or was until that pesky SpaceX came along and started ruining it with the low cost/launch model... Compare all these $billions with the $36B or so SpaceX was valued at earlier this year (amount of cumulative capital raised is much smaller than this) and you ought to get the picture...
rb Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 The question is posed is not social benefit - how much money has the society saved per launch. The question you posed was on capital allocation. That is how much money has Space X made per dollar invested for its investors?
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 The question is posed is not social benefit - how much money has the society saved per launch. The question you posed was on capital allocation. That is how much money has Space X made per dollar invested for its investors? Yeah, same arguments have been used about Bezos' ventures. You should pursue the strategy you are proposing here: invest while looking in the rear view mirror (Boeing) instead of through the windshield. P.S., based on private valuations for SpaceX and public valuations for Tesla, do you really want me to answer the question "much money has Elon made per dollar invested for its investors"? Yeah, I get it, you are fixated on trailing GAAP earnings or some other profit measure. I don't think that's the right way to look at these--especially not SpaceX at this stage, but good luck.
rb Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 What does that even mean? Is it that a company's history of reliable profitably does not matter in investing?
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 What does that even mean? Is it that a company's history of reliable profitably does not matter in investing? If you seriously think comparing SpaceX's history (18 years) with that of Boeing's (104 years) is an Apples to Apples comparison, be my guest. I get it, you are fixated on trailing GAAP earnings or some other profit measure. I don't think that's the right way to look at these--especially not SpaceX at this stage, but good luck.
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 What is an appropriate time period? ::) Good luck.
Xerxes Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 Problems tend to happen with new aircraft problems. For example the Dreamliners had a tendency to catch on fire (fire is very bad on an aircraft). DC-10s had an explosive decompression problem. Both were fixed and both became highly successful platforms. There are other examples I could mention. There usually are some problems with new aircraft platforms just like there are with new cars. They usually get worked out. But if you want to talk about capital allocation there must be a profit. As in a return on capital. Otherwise the equation does not work. Boeing has plenty of years on delivering on that. How many years does space x have? Just a comment on product ... Dreamliner was and is a revolutionary product. Sure, it had snags but Boeing of the past made a bold bet on it. That is the Boeing we want back. B.737 MAX was rush-to-market attempt to get on the fast lane, when Boeing management (taken over by ex-GE bean counters) realized that American Airlines was about to switch to soon-to-be-developed A.320 NEO, with its much closer EIS. Boeing forgo their original clean sheet attempt to revamp the narrow body and went with a derivative (i.e. MAX) … much like the NEO, it was re-engine with added winglets, better avionics etc. which itself was a reaction to Bombardier's C-Series … but that is another story. However, B.737 structure was more constrained than A.320 in terms what they could with it, that means more s/w patches (I.e. MCAS) etc. etc. unfortunately it seemed that there was no major push on Boeing part to have pilot training for the key changes. Boeing was looking for seamless pilots transitioning from an older 737 to 737 MAX .. than doing the right thing. The rest is history ...
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 8, 2020 Posted June 8, 2020 Outcome-based contracting with multiple competitors is vastly better than cost-plus (especially if sole-sourced), as the former rewards results & latter rewards waste. Outcome contracting should be applied broadly within government. The difference in results will be incredible. It’s in contractor’s interests to pursue cost plus contracts and unfortunately a reality in DoD and NASA. Elon has long been outspoken against this. Of course Boeing and Lockheed don’t mind cost plus... You can also read about Munger’s thoughts on cost plus contracts here: https://seekingalpha.com/amp/instablog/234439-whitney-tilson/5407617-charlie-mungers-2020-daily-journal-annual-meeting-liveblog
Guest jalebijim Posted June 9, 2020 Posted June 9, 2020 The question is posed is not social benefit - how much money has the society saved per launch. The question you posed was on capital allocation. That is how much money has Space X made per dollar invested for its investors? Yeah, same arguments have been used about Bezos' ventures. You should pursue the strategy you are proposing here: invest while looking in the rear view mirror (Boeing) instead of through the windshield. P.S., based on private valuations for SpaceX and public valuations for Tesla, do you really want me to answer the question "much money has Elon made per dollar invested for its investors"? Yeah, I get it, you are fixated on trailing GAAP earnings or some other profit measure. I don't think that's the right way to look at these--especially not SpaceX at this stage, but good luck.
Dalal.Holdings Posted June 9, 2020 Posted June 9, 2020 The question is posed is not social benefit - how much money has the society saved per launch. The question you posed was on capital allocation. That is how much money has Space X made per dollar invested for its investors? Yeah, same arguments have been used about Bezos' ventures. You should pursue the strategy you are proposing here: invest while looking in the rear view mirror (Boeing) instead of through the windshield. P.S., based on private valuations for SpaceX and public valuations for Tesla, do you really want me to answer the question "much money has Elon made per dollar invested for its investors"? Yeah, I get it, you are fixated on trailing GAAP earnings or some other profit measure. I don't think that's the right way to look at these--especially not SpaceX at this stage, but good luck. Exactly. Compare capital raised to what they’ve accomplished. How much would it have cost NASA/Boeing/Lockheed to achieve the same things? In a lot of cases these firms have taken the money and produced nothing of value other than non functional prototypes. SpaceX has produced lots of value however with tiny capital as an underdog against these behemoths. That’s good capital allocation in my book. I know, to basic value investors, capital allocation only applies to buybacks and mergers and immediate GAAP ROIs. People like Bezos and Musk pursue a different route and in the process achieve massive moats. Sorry, but it can work out very, very well for investors. Either adapt to this reality or not in this ZIRP world. Your choice.
Guest jalebijim Posted June 9, 2020 Posted June 9, 2020 The question is posed is not social benefit - how much money has the society saved per launch. The question you posed was on capital allocation. That is how much money has Space X made per dollar invested for its investors? Yeah, same arguments have been used about Bezos' ventures. You should pursue the strategy you are proposing here: invest while looking in the rear view mirror (Boeing) instead of through the windshield. P.S., based on private valuations for SpaceX and public valuations for Tesla, do you really want me to answer the question "much money has Elon made per dollar invested for its investors"? Yeah, I get it, you are fixated on trailing GAAP earnings or some other profit measure. I don't think that's the right way to look at these--especially not SpaceX at this stage, but good luck. Exactly. Compare capital raised to what they’ve accomplished. How much would it have cost NASA/Boeing/Lockheed to achieve the same things? In a lot of cases these firms have taken the money and produced nothing of value other than non functional prototypes. SpaceX has produced lots of value however with tiny capital as an underdog against these behemoths. That’s good capital allocation in my book. I know, to basic value investors, capital allocation only applies to buybacks and mergers and immediate GAAP ROIs. People like Bezos and Musk pursue a different route and in the process achieve massive moats. Sorry, but it can work out very, very well for investors. Either adapt to this reality or not in this ZIRP world. Your choice. Amen brother!
Dalal.Holdings Posted August 2, 2020 Posted August 2, 2020 Astronauts back on Earth. Remember, Elon launched this company and a little known electric car company with modest winnings from paypal on the order ~$100 million...According to some, this is a no big deal "insignificant" accomplishment, the first ever commercial manned mission to orbit + space station stay and back... Question is--if it's so easy, why couldn't Boeing do it? I've heard this guy's ventures compared to Madoff Investments, Enron, and Wirecard. I guess it's the most elaborate fraud of all time? LOL... Money quote: The astronauts’ safe return gives the National Aeronautics and Space Administration a proven commercial vehicle to transport personnel to and from the space station. Boeing Co. is developing a second spacecraft for NASA’s commercial crew program, the CST-100 Starliner, although the project has been beset by delays and a botched test flight last year with no astronauts aboard. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-02/nasa-astronauts-poised-to-re-enter-atmosphere-on-spacex-dragon
fareastwarriors Posted August 2, 2020 Posted August 2, 2020 Watched the stream all morning. Welcome back! Congrats to SpaceX and NASA!
fareastwarriors Posted November 16, 2020 Posted November 16, 2020 Another historic day for NASA and SpaceX !
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now