3 ms·
I guess they could do that, after paying fair market value for the company. Edit to add: plus, the big beautiful bill is deeply cutting nasa funding. I'm not s
by amanaplanacanal 1y ago
I guess they could do that, after paying fair market value for the company.
Edit to add: plus, the big beautiful bill is deeply cutting nasa funding. I'm not seeing the current administration being that interested in space related activities.
- toomuchtodo 1y agoWhat’s the enterprise value after terminating US government contracts and with Starship currently unproven for cargo and man rated flight?
- bdangubic 1y ago[flagged]
- rogerrogerr 1y agoThis isn’t the gotcha you want it to be - SpaceX isn’t valuable because it has the contracts, it’s valuable because it’s the only US player that _can_ service the contracts. That demand isn’t going away just because the Feds dislike Musk for a while. All the same stuff has to go in all the same orbits, and ultimately SX is the only company that can do it at a reasonable cost.
- toomuchtodo 1y agoIt’s not a gotcha. The Defense Production Act requires paying market value. Market value is subjective. The US government isn’t going to use share sale to determine market value if they attempt to nationalize. They don’t even adhere to the law and separation of powers today. Why would they provide a favorable valuation? They can set the value at something they feel will barely stand up under judicial review.
- wmf 1y agoHLS is pretty small compared to Starlink/Starshield, Commercial Cargo/Crew, satellite launches, etc.
- croes 1y agoCouldn’t they just claim it’s for national security?
- amanaplanacanal 1y ago5th amendment: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
- croes 1y agoThey didn’t value Habeas Corpus why should they value this?
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoYou've got a point :)