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…
Aggressive scheduling is a tactic. Because no matter what the schedule, human nature dictates that things are likely to slip.
I agree with you completely until > Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there. Sure there is. Many people commute in their cars for 1-2 hours per day, when it is illegal for them to look at ads on their smartphone. If Google makes this legal, it's another 10%ish increase in the waking hours that people may be clicking on their ads. I think that Google's ambitions are a lot higher than this, of course. Self-dr…
I don't believe ad revenue in self-driving cars will be meaningful. I don't think google will force people to watch ads after they pay for being driven.Maybe only as a discount ,but most will prefer not to, the same way that today, there aren't any attractive options to watch ads for pay.
I hope you realize that Google's "ad" revenues aren't only from people seeing ads. They also use the tracking information of how you use products.
Agreed, it's a bit silly to assume that all Google cares about is ad revenue. Plus, improving internet accessibility and making more revenue aren't mutually exclusive. Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there.
I agree with you completely until > Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there. Sure there is. Many people commute in their cars for 1-2 hours per day, when it is illegal for them to look at ads on their smartphone. If Google makes this legal, it's another 10%ish increase in the waking hours that people may be clicking on their ads. I think that Google's ambitions are a lot higher than this, of course. Self-dr…
The business model in a self-driving car is THE SELF-DRIVING CAR...
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…
Agreed, it's a bit silly to assume that all Google cares about is ad revenue. Plus, improving internet accessibility and making more revenue aren't mutually exclusive. Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there.
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…
Well, they're offering an economic benefit (cheaper) to those who want it, with the U.S. government (and I imagine primarily military) with interest in seeing this succeed and anything that allows rapid deployment of whatever (slightly terrifying) into space.
That is to assume that those customers care about economic benefit. Frankly, if cost were their only concern, the US military would have abandoned ULA and gone with SpaceX long ago. I'm reminded of the first calls (90s->2002, not the later programs) for bids to replace the KC-135. There were only two real contenders, Airbus and Boeing. Airbus's first reaction was essentially: "why even bother."
When you're launching a $2B satellite, saving $60mm on the launch is not a slam-dunk. The Air Force had a series of launch failures that made them extremely conservative. Sure, I think they ought to be moving faster with SpaceX, but you should give them credit for having some serious concerns.
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…
Agreed, it's a bit silly to assume that all Google cares about is ad revenue. Plus, improving internet accessibility and making more revenue aren't mutually exclusive. Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there.
Google loses thousands of eyeballs every year to traffic accidents that could be all but eliminated with automation.
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…
Agreed, it's a bit silly to assume that all Google cares about is ad revenue. Plus, improving internet accessibility and making more revenue aren't mutually exclusive. Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there.
> Why do self driving cars? Def no ad revenue there.
True, this is what the field of accounting theory is all about: how do you best represent the finances of a company? The best way to do so depends heavily on the type of company you're talking about and who wants to know the information, but many companies choose to keep multiple sets of books--one that follows the IRS's rules (this one is required), one that follows the SEC's rules (required if they are a publicly t…
> In any one month... Pretty much everything you mention in this paragraph is covered by accounting rules a student would learn in year 1. Cash flow isn't profitability. Spending on assets is capitalized, and they depreciate according to rules, not what you "may want" to do. Yes, there is always some leeway to play fast and loose with accounting, and companies are always trying "adjust" earnings to suit to their busi…
Sure, but to take depreciation as an example, the rules do not necessarily match reality. Sometimes an asset's practical life is longer than the rules allow, sometimes it is less. These factors do not just depend on the asset, itself, they depend on how the asset is used. If a company goes under, the resale value of the asset may be worth more or less than its carrying value depending on outside economic conditions, technology changes, or what have you. Even the most earnest accountant can get things very wrong.