3 ms·

> why would an entrepreneur want to set up shop on Mars? ? New environment, new markets, new needs = lots of new and potentially huge opportunities. I'm asking

by ipince 10y ago

> why would an entrepreneur want to set up shop on Mars? ? New environment, new markets, new needs = lots of new and potentially huge opportunities. I'm asking myself the complete opposite question.

eropple 10y ago
We know what's on Mars and there isn't much there that isn't better sourced here, unless you want to use what you source on Mars itself. And there won't be a significant consumption base there for literally centuries, if ever. I'm in favor of human off-world activities, but I think it's a joke to make some kind of free-market argument. We should do it because we should do it, not because of invisible hands.
- EJTH 10y ago
  Consider the free-market thing a small plus in the grand scheme of things. I don't think anyone dreams of going to Mars solely for the business opportunity... Not yet.
ars 10y ago
There's nothing there. Did you setup shop on Antarctica? No? That's because there's nothing there. Same with Mars. Go for the knowledge, but as far as ordinary human things are concerned there is no reason to go. Until you can make an economic case for settling the poles you won't be able to make one for Mars - and the poles are LOT easier to live on BTW. We have a base on the poles for the same reason we'll have one on Mars.
- krisroadruck 10y ago
  You can't set up shop in Antarctica because its forbidden by the antarctic treaty, which is backed by 32 Nations. If you think people wouldn't be conducting business there if given the option, you've somehow managed to overlook every other corner of the world where its not prohibited. Mining businesses. Tourism/adventure companies. Setting up stores, bars, and other entertainment venues to supply tourists and miners with things to do and stuff to buy. These are just a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would be happening in Antarctica if it weren't patently illegal.
  - tdaltonc 10y ago
    > Tourism/adventure companies That is legal in Antartica. It's just really expensive and there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-desert-antarctica-s-jaw-dropping-luxury-hotel http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-dese... I don't think you need to make martian mining illegal to discourage the industry. At $500 a lb, no raw materials will be coming to earth from Mars and time soon.
    - anexprogrammer 10y ago
      > there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. Where do you get that? Tourism is back near pre-bust 40,000, mostly American, a year. The expensive hotel is fully booked 2 of its 4 weeks. With near 40 treaty countries almost no binding changes are agreed, and regular plans to limit numbers remain just that. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-numbers-rise-053737703.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-... (2013)
  - planteen 10y ago
    Two countries close to Antarctica, Chile and Argentina, are not signatories to the Antarctic Treaty and have territorial claims. Both of these countries already have a decent amount of natural resource extraction (especially Chile), so one would reason that if it is worth mining, they would be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory One could also look at the interior of Greenland, which is Danish territory. No serious development of any kind occurs there - it's all along the coasts.
    - anexprogrammer 10y ago
      Er, Chile and Argentina are original Treaty (1959) signatories, and dispute at least some of Britain and France's claims, and vice versa. The treaty sets aside territorial claims whilst it's in force. All the claims for all countries are still there, just neutered.
- foobarian 10y ago
  I think setting up a self sustaining colony in Sahara would be more impressive due to a lack of water. (Which is still more water than is present in Martian soil).
- sqeaky 10y ago
  If you are correct that there is nothing on mars, then perhaps the cheaper to ascend gravity well of the moon will be worth something. What can be 3d printed on the moon (from plans made on earth) and lifted to a useful place above LEO?
alonmower 10y ago
Lower gravity sports leagues?

by ipince 10y ago

> why would an entrepreneur want to set up shop on Mars? ? New environment, new markets, new needs = lots of new and potentially huge opportunities. I'm asking myself the complete opposite question.

eropple 10y ago

We know what's on Mars and there isn't much there that isn't better sourced here, unless you want to use what you source on Mars itself. And there won't be a significant consumption base there for literally centuries, if ever. I'm in favor of human off-world activities, but I think it's a joke to make some kind of free-market argument. We should do it because we should do it, not because of invisible hands.

EJTH 10y ago
Consider the free-market thing a small plus in the grand scheme of things. I don't think anyone dreams of going to Mars solely for the business opportunity... Not yet.

ars 10y ago

There's nothing there. Did you setup shop on Antarctica? No? That's because there's nothing there. Same with Mars. Go for the knowledge, but as far as ordinary human things are concerned there is no reason to go. Until you can make an economic case for settling the poles you won't be able to make one for Mars - and the poles are LOT easier to live on BTW. We have a base on the poles for the same reason we'll have one on Mars.

krisroadruck 10y ago
You can't set up shop in Antarctica because its forbidden by the antarctic treaty, which is backed by 32 Nations. If you think people wouldn't be conducting business there if given the option, you've somehow managed to overlook every other corner of the world where its not prohibited. Mining businesses. Tourism/adventure companies. Setting up stores, bars, and other entertainment venues to supply tourists and miners with things to do and stuff to buy. These are just a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would be happening in Antarctica if it weren't patently illegal.
- tdaltonc 10y ago
  > Tourism/adventure companies That is legal in Antartica. It's just really expensive and there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-desert-antarctica-s-jaw-dropping-luxury-hotel http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-dese... I don't think you need to make martian mining illegal to discourage the industry. At $500 a lb, no raw materials will be coming to earth from Mars and time soon.
  - anexprogrammer 10y ago
    > there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. Where do you get that? Tourism is back near pre-bust 40,000, mostly American, a year. The expensive hotel is fully booked 2 of its 4 weeks. With near 40 treaty countries almost no binding changes are agreed, and regular plans to limit numbers remain just that. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-numbers-rise-053737703.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-... (2013)
- planteen 10y ago
  Two countries close to Antarctica, Chile and Argentina, are not signatories to the Antarctic Treaty and have territorial claims. Both of these countries already have a decent amount of natural resource extraction (especially Chile), so one would reason that if it is worth mining, they would be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory One could also look at the interior of Greenland, which is Danish territory. No serious development of any kind occurs there - it's all along the coasts.
  - anexprogrammer 10y ago
    Er, Chile and Argentina are original Treaty (1959) signatories, and dispute at least some of Britain and France's claims, and vice versa. The treaty sets aside territorial claims whilst it's in force. All the claims for all countries are still there, just neutered.
foobarian 10y ago
I think setting up a self sustaining colony in Sahara would be more impressive due to a lack of water. (Which is still more water than is present in Martian soil).
sqeaky 10y ago
If you are correct that there is nothing on mars, then perhaps the cheaper to ascend gravity well of the moon will be worth something. What can be 3d printed on the moon (from plans made on earth) and lifted to a useful place above LEO?

alonmower 10y ago

Lower gravity sports leagues?