> Which means SpaceX reaches the program break-even point earlier I mostly agree, but it's entirely possible that they just spread the cost out more, which wou

> Which means SpaceX reaches the program break-even point earlier I mostly agree, but it's entirely possible that they just spread the cost out more, which would reduce the cost of individual launches. As far as production goes - my recollection is that SpaceX does a lot of in-house stuff, so they've got vertical integration going for them. Perhaps more importantly, they build their own engines, and lots of them (10 per rocket, as I believe MVac is similar enough to the first stage engines to use essentially the same production). That's a pretty big advantage over buying RD-180s like ULA. Also, doesn't SpaceX use essentially 'off-the-shelf' electrical components, and just use more if needed for redundancy? 'Space-grade' hardware isn't cheap, so if they really are avoiding that entirely, that could be a big win. Whatever the case, unfortunately for us, they're a private company - so this is all semi-educated guesswork. They definitely seem to be doing well, so clearly something somewhere is keeping those costs down.