A look into the finances of SpaceX • Hacker News Board

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#391

Post by jhgb » Sun, Aug 20, 2023, 1:36 PM UTC

reso wrote: post #329

nordsieck wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Price is not a good metric here you can subsidize your pricing to hell if you have budget. 1. As far as I know, no one has presented any evidence that SpaceX sells Falcon 9/H launches for less than cost. ArianeSpace used to really talk up this point, but even they've mostly given up. 2. I'm not really sure why it matters. If SpaceX can sell for less than cost at their current volume, well... good for the tax payers…

You're correct, we don't have evidence that SpaceX is pricing below cost, because we have no idea what Falcon 9 launches actually cost, because SpaceX refuses to tell us.

We know that SpaceX told us that the incremental cost for a Falcon 9 launch is around $28M. So clearly they're not priced below cost.

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#392

Post by wlonkly » Sun, Aug 20, 2023, 2:05 PM UTC

shawnlower2 wrote: post #390

penjelly wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thanks, thats what i get for asking bing instead of looking myself

Next time just skip Bing and post the wrong answer. You'll get corrected with exactly what you're looking for. I think this was an xkcd.

(Ward) Cunningham's Law. You might be thinking of the classic "Someone is wrong on the internet!" xkcd.

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#393

Post by objektif » Mon, Aug 21, 2023, 9:34 PM UTC

nordsieck wrote: post #277

objektif wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price is not a good metric here you can subsidize your pricing to hell if you have budget. Elon loves to do this btw.

> Price is not a good metric here you can subsidize your pricing to hell if you have budget. 1. As far as I know, no one has presented any evidence that SpaceX sells Falcon 9/H launches for less than cost. ArianeSpace used to really talk up this point, but even they've mostly given up. 2. I'm not really sure why it matters. If SpaceX can sell for less than cost at their current volume, well... good for the tax payers…

What margins are you talking about? You think selling model 3 is a high margin business.

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#394

Post by alemanek » Mon, Aug 21, 2023, 10:00 PM UTC

boxed wrote: post #339

flaminHotSpeedo wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"clearly" is doing so much heavy lifting for you it puts both starship and sls to shame... If you have evidence to support that takeaway I'd love to see it. I don't have evidence one way or the other, though I have seen unconfirmed scuttlebutt that SpaceX is successful _despite_ Musk, in no small part due to actively distracting and babysitting him to prevent him from meddling

It's funny how both Tesla and SpaceX are successful despite Musk. Or rather, it's funny how some anti-Musk people can still claim that. Yes Musk is a-hole. He has totally bungled Twitter, and he has made the entire world hate him. But let's give credit where credit is due. He has started not one but TWO "impossible" companies.

Three actually if you count PayPal. Everyone forgets he was a member of the “PayPal Mafia”

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#395

Post by inemesitaffia » Tue, Aug 22, 2023, 7:21 AM UTC

georgeg23 wrote: post #374

inemesitaffia wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk ran out of money, got more from Thiel before getting that 1 billion. Some of us lived through this and remember the contract award for Falcon 9

Actually Griffin's COTS government contract was awarded in 2005 (with half money up front), three years before Thiel first invested.

I'll have to check that

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#396

Post by georgeg23 » Thu, Aug 24, 2023, 5:57 PM UTC

inemesitaffia wrote: post #395

georgeg23 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually Griffin's COTS government contract was awarded in 2005 (with half money up front), three years before Thiel first invested.

I'll have to check that

And... ?

Re: A look into the finances of SpaceX

#397

Post by htss2013 » Sat, Aug 26, 2023, 12:43 AM UTC

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #160

htss2013 wrote: post #140

Isn't it amazing that you can become the richest person in the world by building companies that lose money? By lose money I mean all money ever put into the company versus profits made. The idea of creating a profitless company that somehow makes you personally rich used to be thought of as a fluke. Yes it's possible but it shouldn't happen and aside from extreme luck it won't. Something has changed. Losing money and…

Wait until you learn about the biotech industry, they often go public with no revenue. I don't think there is anything wrong with this though, markets are pricing future growth, which may or may not materialize.

I actually think this makes sense. It's basically outsourced R&D for pharma companies via acquisition of companies once they get at or near approval of a new drug.

This is why I don't take seriously any stats about pharma R&D spending. They don't consider acquisitions to be R&D even though it often effecively is.