Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 158 posts

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#81

Post by tsotha »

cryptoz wrote: post #18
yeldarb wrote: post #8

When's the IPO?

SpaceX will IPO when their Mars Colonial Transporter is making regular trips between Earth and Mars. Elon thinks that taking the company public before then would result in a potential derailment of Mars colonization plans. Having MCT making regular Earth-Mars trips before going public will ensure that quarterly-return-investors won't try to interfere with sending millions of people to go live on Mars. Citation: https…

I think we can all read that as "not in my lifetime", though I may just be a pessimist.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#82

Post by TeMPOraL »

NeutronBoy wrote: post #55
josephjrobison wrote: post #17

I love how the writer phrased Google's incentive for investing as "Google has a practical goal in linking up with SpaceX. It wants to beam the Internet to hard-to-reach regions of the planet so it can take in more advertising revenue." While... "'Space-based applications, like imaging satellites, can help people more easily access important information, so we’re excited to support SpaceX’s growth,' Google spokesman A…

You don't think making money is one of the goals behind Tesla or SpaceX? Even if you have some other intrinsic motive, you gotta pay your employees with money, and you gotta get that money form somewhere.

Well, of course. That's why Elon said that Tesla and SpaceX need to be profitable; it's just not the primary goal.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#83

Post by TeMPOraL »

aroman wrote: post #80
spiritplumber wrote: post #75

I have to wonder, if Elon Musk is alive on earth today, what's the use of me? He's done pretty much everything I wanted to do in life, only a little less efficiently, and much faster. What's the point?

I often ask myself these same questions.

I too ask myself this sometimes.

Here's my shot at answers:

- he can't fix the entire world by himself, there are a lot of things you can do to make a difference;

- edw519 would probably point out that he's not making the thing he makes by the power of his own hands, he leverages the global economy to achieve his goals; if you do anything that's even remotely useful, you're helping him and everyone else;

- somebody needs to buy those Teslas ;).

(not that they sound very convincing, I'm not sure if I ever believe them myself)

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#84

Post by bgvopg »

spiritplumber wrote: post #75

I have to wonder, if Elon Musk is alive on earth today, what's the use of me? He's done pretty much everything I wanted to do in life, only a little less efficiently, and much faster. What's the point?

You are making a logical fallacy of sorts. He wasn't destined for this role, he just happened, by skill and luck, to make it out of the 7 Billion people who didn't. If he was alone he wouldn't succeed.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#85

Post by TeMPOraL »

josephjrobison wrote: post #17

I love how the writer phrased Google's incentive for investing as "Google has a practical goal in linking up with SpaceX. It wants to beam the Internet to hard-to-reach regions of the planet so it can take in more advertising revenue." While... "'Space-based applications, like imaging satellites, can help people more easily access important information, so we’re excited to support SpaceX’s growth,' Google spokesman A…

I get the feeling that this "Google is doing X only because of ad revenue" meme is starting to get into Illuminati territory. I find it as believable as that thing a group of anti-vaxxers told me yesterday, that 'Bill Gates is really trying to depopulate the world using vaccines to sterilize people', as evidenced by 10 second quote from his 2010 TED talk, taken out of context.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#86

Post by lazaroclapp »

justin66 wrote: post #10
Animats wrote: post #5

If SpaceX can fly out their 2015 manifest, that will be impressive. This is the year the Falcon Heavy is supposed to launch. Their first manned flight has apparently been postponed; it's been "2-3 years" away for 2 years now.[1] I notice they've stopped putting dates on their manifest for future flights.[2][3] SpaceX is doing a great job, but they're behind their own schedule. They're two flights behind on ISS resupp…

> Their first manned flight has apparently been postponed; it's been "2-3 years" away for 2 years now. That's not entirely on them. With manned spaceflight, they're on NASA time.

Can SpaceX, at least from a technology and legal standpoint, launch a manned flight without NASA involvement? If so, is it that it just makes no commercial sense? Or is the idea that the flight is far more likely to succeed with NASA's expertise?

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#87

Post by rwallace »

spiritplumber wrote: post #75

I have to wonder, if Elon Musk is alive on earth today, what's the use of me? He's done pretty much everything I wanted to do in life, only a little less efficiently, and much faster. What's the point?

Comparative advantage. Even if he is strictly better than you at everything you do, there is only one of him, and he can only do one thing at a time.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#88

Post by tsotha »

freehunter wrote: post #53
sandworm wrote: post #35

I have trouble trusting business statements from companies in the space industry. They play in a world of secrets, classified technologies and continuous background checks. At every launch, over in the corner, sits a uniformed member of the US military and a switch. That switch is to destroy the rocket should it run off course. SpaceX might be profitable today. It might be very profitable tomorrow. But because of the…

Well the reason for that is because they're given exclusive access to basically launch a missile from US airspace. With a mere change of payload, that rocket can be used to deliver a nuclear warhead. So yeah, it's pretty prudent to have background checks, massive amounts of oversight, and many kill switches. An even if you have all the best intentions, it doesn't take that much to accidentally crash into the ISS and…

>Look at all the maneuvers SpaceX had to do to prove they were capable of docking with the ISS.

They haven't even proven that yet. This version of Dragon can't dock - they just get within arm's reach (heh) of the station so they can be dragged in.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#89

Post by toomuchtodo »

Someone1234 wrote: post #76
aschampion wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shipping rockets is enormously risky and expensive.

I agree with it being expensive. I don't see how it would be risky, you wouldn't fuel the rockets before you shipped them, that would be bonkers.

Rockets have the structural integrity of a pop can.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#90

Post by lazaroclapp »

jdpage wrote: post #69
edgyswingset wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... unless they're interested in taking in a loss for each vehicle or only selling to the richest people in the world.

The business model for the self-driving car is a computer-scheduled, dynamically-provisioned taxi service cheap enough that nobody needs to own a car in the city. Because self-driving cars don't need to park (they can just move on to the next assignment or deprovision), if they catch on then in-city parking decks can be redeveloped into business space or park space.

You forget transportation of goods. Pretty much all over-land cargo in the U.S. and most of that elsewhere (less so, because trains) could be transported by self-driving cars/drones. Not sure if that is larger or smaller than transportation of people at this point, but it's still an astronomically huge market.
Post reply on HN