[JaimeThompson]

>But that message was a rally-the-troops kind of thing

I disagree. Statements like this "“We face genuine risk of bankruptcy if we cannot achieve a Starship flight rate of at least once every two weeks next year” sent of a holiday demonstrate a level on strangeness that really worries people launching very expensive space hardware.

It is hard to understand what he will say / do next and the gulf between what he says and what he does seems to be growing over the past year.

[andi999]

Yes. A CEO should always be worried about bankruptcy and do everything to avoid it, but never talk about it, except if they want to file for it soon. Even if the company is shortlz before going bankrupt, it woule just drive the value down, and prevent it from getting the needed capital.

[dotnet00]

He said that it was unlikely, but not impossible, pointing to risks like a large global economic crisis that drives away investor money before Starlink becomes self-sustaining (which requires Starship to be successful too).

I think you're seriously exaggerating the "gulf between what he says and does". He's always been the type to be extremely focused on the smallest of risks.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/30/elon-musk-warning-not-first-...

[JaimeThompson]

>I think you're seriously exaggerating the "gulf between what he says and does".

His statements regarding subsidies being wrong / government interference in the market as contrasted to how actively Tesla searches for and applies for subsidies.

I personally have an issue with those who think that burning the bridge that helped them get where they are so others can't use it is the correct thing to do.

If he was always focused on the smallest of risks he would not have smoked a joint on camera while working to launch national security payloads for the NRO and DoD. It was just a very short sighted thing for him to do.