3 ms·
Who is paying for all this? Starlink revenue? I don't think so. To 100x what they've done over the last ten years and also fund it with money they're not being
by bastawhiz 6mo ago
Who is paying for all this? Starlink revenue? I don't think so. To 100x what they've done over the last ten years and also fund it with money they're not being paid by others is implausible. They've got money, but they don't have THAT much money. They'd need to significantly juice up the whole rest of their business to not just be substantially more profitable, but also launch far more payloads. Does that much demand (for SpaceX) to get stuff into space even exist?
- HDBaseT 6mo agoSatellites for surveillance purposes. Budget is infinite.
- bastawhiz 6mo agoMore than they're launching now? It's not like a surveillance payload costs dramatically more to launch than a non-surveillance payload. Even the US doesn't have that many satellites to launch.
- jurgenburgen 6mo agoAnd Europe isn’t going to buy surveillance from a company that will pull the plug if we end up in a shooting war with Russia.
- ben_w 6mo ago> Budget is infinite. A fantastic way to break your economy. Even the extra half trillion/year Trump wants to spend on the military is increasing investor concern about buying US treasury bills.
- hackernudes 6mo agoisn't the IPO a way to get tons of money?
- ben_w 6mo agoI've seen it suggested that the IPO they're targeting (plus the similarly-timed ones from OpenAI and Anthropic) may be so high as to break the financial system. Investors need to have a trillion dollars available to invest if the stuff being added to the market is going to be worth a trillion dollars. (Phrased that way because while I hear they're targeting 1.5T valuation that doesn't mean they'll be selling 1.5T of shares).
- bastawhiz 5mo agoNot a million satellites of money