4 ms·
> If you're relying on your competitor to enable your business model then you're not competing with them. Brave relies on Google. DuckDuckGo relies on other se
by manuelabeledo 3y ago
> If you're relying on your competitor to enable your business model then you're not competing with them.
Brave relies on Google. DuckDuckGo relies on other search engines, etc. And they are in the same market.
Orbital launch systems and satellites are not in the same market. SpaceX would do themselves a disservice if they weren't willing to launch anything other than their own satellites.
- thedangler 3y agoBecause they can take the profits from the launch towards launching more Starlinks.... I see this as an absolute win.
- g-b-r 3y agoIt would be interesting if some of these launches happened to have an accident xD
- g-b-r 3y agoI'm not sure I understand the downvotes, I guess it's easy to misinterpret the comment; I meant that it wouldn't be completely out of the realm of possibility if Musk sabotaged some on purpose (and I wouldn't be happy about it).
- manuelabeledo 3y agoI don't know anything about orbital launch economics, but it wouldn't be ludicrous to say that SpaceX and satellite operators cannot eat the rising costs of launch insurance, if SpaceX was deemed too unreliable. In other words, it wouldn't be a good move for SpaceX to "sabotage" their own launches, because it will raise costs and undermine trust in the near future.
- g-b-r 3y agoYou're right it might well be true. Although Musk doesn't really always act rationally :p
- mlindner 3y agoI mean that's plenty worthy of downvotes. You're alleging someone would commit illegal action that would send them to prison for basically nothing.
- g-b-r 3y agoIt was meant more as a joke, but it's indeed probably inappropriate here.