> Now, SpaceX may be building a lot of profit into that $70m, but from the customer's POV it hardly matters. They're not in drastically different cost realms S

> Now, SpaceX may be building a lot of profit into that $70m, but from the customer's POV it hardly matters. They're not in drastically different cost realms SpaceX internal costs are < $20m a launch. There's a huge profit margin. SpaceX prices have risen because they have effectively no competition in the medium-> heavy launch market, not because they are more expensive to launch than they used to be. It's a huge gulf. > Now, for commercial it's a different story, though really Arianespace and its predecessors have never been _hugely_ competitive there; even before SpaceX their market was mostly stuff that couldn't go on Russian rockets. This is also not true. Arianespace dominated the commercial market prior to SpaceX. They were doing half a dozen GTO missions a year. Yes it's not dozens and dozens but prior to the dropping of launch costs, expensive GEO satellites launched into GTO was the market. I'm sorry but this "maybe reusability isn't worth it" is the exact line that ULA and Arianespace have bandied around for a decade and they have lost their entire lunch to a company that can undercut them and still make a healthy profit margin.