|
|
|
|
|
by Alupis
657 days ago
|
|
Right, so the point was all this handwaviness about how bloated Boeing's costs are in this space are just wild guesses at what SpaceX's might be. For all anyone actually knows, Elon is willing to lose a ton per launch just to gain mindshare, kill the competition, and become the only game in town. You know, the Amazon playbook. For all anyone knows, the Boeing quotes are reasonable and SpaceX's are unsustainable. Nobody actually knows... yet so many are willing to confidently assert SpaceX is obviously cheaper. > What is reasonably certain is that they likely will be profitable once they're not spending crazy amounts of money on development This is a space race. The day when SpaceX no longer needs to spend "crazy amounts of money on development" may never actually come. |
|
1. Being a viable sustainable business is a requirement for some of SpaceX's NASA and the Space Force's contracts. NASA & the Space Force have access to SpaceX's books and SpaceX has passed these audits.
2. SpaceX has very obviously been spending many billions to build Starlink and Starship and to pay >14,000 employess. SpaceX has not raised significant money for over 18 months, nor have previous raises been enough to cover their fairly obvious expenditures. That money is coming from somewhere, and process of elimination says "profits".