4 ms·
Everyone gets this wrong, cost is not price. SpaceX themselves launch Starlinks at about $1,200/kg but they charge customers closer to $12,000/kg. Do the math.
by asadotzler 2y ago
Everyone gets this wrong, cost is not price. SpaceX themselves launch Starlinks at about $1,200/kg but they charge customers closer to $12,000/kg. Do the math. Costs coming down are increases in SpaceX profits, not decreases in customer prices.
- 55555 2y agoOver the extremely long term in competitive industries, prices asymptote at ~costs. So it's still a generally useful measure, and in ~all cases, it's at least a directional indicator.
- tempfile 2y agoWhy would the extremely long term be a useful measure, when we have no way to know how long that will take to happen, and no way to know what will happen in the meantime to disrupt it?
- IshKebab 2y agoSure but currently this is not a competitive industry because nobody else can do this.
- TMWNN 2y agoBesides what 55555 said, in the near term SpaceX has indeed passed at least some of the cost savings onto customers. NASA administrator Bill Nelson quoted a member of the Joint Chiefs as telling him that SpaceX had saved the US government $40 billion for just launching military payloads. <https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/06/05/did-spacex-really-save-taxpayers-40-billion/ https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/06/05/did-spacex-really-...> On the civilian side, SpaceX saved NASA $2 billion for just one payload, Europa Clipper <https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/10/a-year-from-launch-the-europa-clipper-spacecraft-nears-finish-line/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/10/a-year-from-launch-the...>, so who knows how many billions more from other launches.
- cryptonector 2y agoSounds like those savings exceed the subsidies that some love to point out SpaceX has gotten from the government.
- season2episode3 2y agoIf only the military budget went down by 40b in response to these new cost savings.