Indeed. If Starlink merely breaks even, it'll massively increase the demand for launch services which allows them to justify the development of large, fully reu

Indeed. If Starlink merely breaks even, it'll massively increase the demand for launch services which allows them to justify the development of large, fully reusable rockets like Starship. From SpaceX's perspective, besides the straight up revenue they provide, the main point of megaconstellations like Starlink is fodder for reusable rockets. ...and having multiple megaconstellations competing thus isn't necessarily a bad thing even from SpaceX's perspective. More mass to launch to orbit. ...that's one thing about reusable rockets that is key to understand. There's no fundamental physics that says reusable rockets can't be done. Shuttle proved upper stages can be reused and SpaceX showed first stages can be reused. The main question is demand: reusable rockets make sense IFF there's more than sufficient demand to pay back the R&D and the keep the factory busy. To over-simplify things a bit: Rocket factories for even expendable rockets seem to struggle to be affordable unless you're building at least 10 airframes per year, so if you want to get 10-100 reuses out of your rocket, you'd best be launching at least 100-1000 times per year...